Well, apologetics time, but… but… Whatever.
I’ve been watching (Well, listening. The video isn’t very interesting…) D’Souza/Loftus on the premise: “Does the Christian God exist?” – It’s 130 minutes long, so a bit of a time input, but interesting.
The Participants
Dinesh D’Souza, Author of What’s so great about Christianity?, is a Roman Catholic Researcher at the University of Standford, who (obviously) is for the proposition.
John Loftus, Author of Why I became an Atheist, who runs the blog Debunking Christianity.
The debate
Loftus opened, with a Society-based claim: “If I were born in a Muslim country et cetera…” – Followed by a nice little accusation of “Brainwashing” – which was quite amusing. He then goes on to cite differences between religions as a basis that all are wrong. He goes on to use a poorly worded and argued social construction argument (Side point: Why can NO-ONE argue Social Construction properly? Seriously?). Furthermore, ECREE – No. Just No.
D’Souza‘s (Side Note: His accent is awesome!) opening calls Loftus out on his, and I quote, “Digressive whining”. I literally laughed. He also took a pop at the Society-based argument (By calling out his Genetic Fallacy). He called out ECREE! Good for him. I don’t like the way he has (and seems to have throughout) an “evidence is unobtainable” point of view. It might just be my interpretation of what he says (He might mean, for example, that the Evidence Loftus is requesting is unreasonable or that total proof is impossible). He makes a good Cosmological Argument though: I do prefer William Lane Craig‘s presentation though. Still. He invokes a fine tuning argument, which I’m not fond of.
I really like his attitude a bit further on: “…I’m not even going to refer to the bible, because that only works when discussing with fellow Christians, I am going to rely on secular reason alone” – A good way to start. Unfortunately, he follows it up with a pretty bad argument about a “higher level of existance (perfection)” – not bad assuming the initial point, but.. question begging galore. It was not convincing at all.
On a better note, He debunks Loftus’ ECREE using the example of Socrates and his existence. (Namely, there’s less evidence of Socrates than Jesus, et cetera – a reasonable rebuttal of a terrible argument).
Loftus’ rebuttal talks about inaccuracies in passing down historical accounts (Ignoring Oral Tradition back in the day, which is kind of weak), and also makes a swing at 100% God/100% Man thing… …and a miss. Nice strawman. He then denies the singularity at the start of the universe, quoting some backrate philosopher (Guys, infinite regress). Appeals to Ridicule on the trinity (Eww). He also says that Science contradicts religion, which is false false false false false. He also keeps, irritatingly, saying stuff about evidence while ignoring arguments. Seriously. What the…?
D’Souzas’ rebuttal starts with the phrase: “I kind of feel like I’m at a rodeo. There’s a point here, and a point there. But a lot of bull in between.” – I literally laughed outloud. He first targets the brainwashing argument by a form of Argumentum ad Populum… although, I think it’s accurate in this case (Not that the argument was anything but rhetoric in the first place) and also applies a nice little analogy, taking another shot at ECREE. He then calls out Loftus on his statement that scientists all agree that there is no singularity – One of the strongest rebuttals made.
The cross-examining is not particually interesting. And… the Q&A is painful.
I’d write more, and may edit in at a later time.
My Conclusion
Loftus did terribly. Seriously terribly. D’Souza isn’t the best theist speaker I’ve seen, but is still quite good. The debate was definetly conclusive in favour of D’Souza. He had some pretty solid arguments, but some had some flaws that’d need to be addressed. Why do we not have any good debaters/intellectuals on the side of non-theism who are active? It’s frustrating.
So.. Have a listen if you like. It’s 2 hours long.. so it’s a pretty big time investment, but worth it in my opinion. Some very good points are made.
I listened to the whole thing, which wasn’t a total loss because, as you say, the video is boring so I managed to do other chores while listening. John Loftus didn’t seem prepared to make any real pointls; all of his “arguments” seemed to boil down to ridicule and incredulity. On his own blog, Loftus said that Dinesh D’Souza dismissed his opening statement, but that he now realizes that he never defended it. I really wish he had defended it, a real debate might have broken out instead of this mishmash of contempt and emotionalism. D’Souza won this one easily.