Cosmological Arguments

Redshirt · Post by **Redshirt** » Fri Aug 07, 2009 6:08 pm

[quote=""Lady Mondegreen""]In response to Admin: My atheism is based on the incompatability between the traditional properties attributed to God and what we now know about the scale and complexity of the Universe. I do not find it plausible that the creator of billions of galaxies and untold trillions of stars cares one jot about whether or not one member of one species on one planet orbiting one of those stars conforms or fails to conform to a set of norms decided by other members of that species.

And sorry Tanya, I will try to be more observant in future.[/quote]

LM, are you basically a deist?

Redshirt · Post by **Redshirt** » Mon Aug 10, 2009 6:22 pm

Just to speed things up some more, I think it might be best to keep this a one-on-one formal discussion. One of the reasons I'm wary about multiparticipant discussions is that it increases the chances of delay. The more people that are involved, the more likely things will get stalled.

Tanya and pfc, would you like to go ahead and set up formal discussion parameters?

Bane · Post by **Bane** » Tue Aug 11, 2009 12:05 am

Sure....in the morning. I need to go to bed.

Redshirt · Post by **Redshirt** » Tue Aug 11, 2009 6:24 pm

Here's what we got so far:

(1) Topic

The Thomistic and Kalam cosmological arguments.

(2) Participants, positions and sequence

punkforchrist will represent the theist position and will go first. Tanya, will represent the atheist position.

(3) Scope

This exclusive engagement will take the form of a formal discussion. Each participant will use philosophical arguments to evaluate the Thomistic and Kalam cosmological argument according to their respective worldviews.

(4) Length in rounds
(5) Maximum statement length
(6) Maximum duration between statements
(7) Start date
(8) Additional criteria (optional)

Bane · Post by **Bane** » Tue Aug 11, 2009 8:46 pm

I think each round should have 10 posts each (explain position, 8 rebuttals, closing statements). Maximum duration between statements? 2 days, I think, is reasonable.

Redshirt · Post by **Redshirt** » Thu Aug 13, 2009 1:59 am

[quote=""Tanya""]I think each round should have 10 posts each (explain position, 8 rebuttals, closing statements). Maximum duration between statements? 2 days, I think, is reasonable.[/quote]

2 days is quite short. A longer duration would be best for statements of a considerable length.

pfc, are you still in?

Lady Mondegreen · Post by **Lady Mondegreen** » Thu Aug 13, 2009 10:56 am

When are we going to start?

Bane · Post by **Bane** » Thu Aug 13, 2009 3:08 pm

Well....yeah....a week's fine, too

I don't really mind.

Redshirt · Post by **Redshirt** » Thu Aug 13, 2009 6:27 pm

[quote=""Lady Mondegreen""]When are we going to start?[/quote]

As I mentioned here, I really think it's best now that we keep this to a one-on-one formal discussion between pfc and Tanya (assuming that pfc is still interested). You can still comment on the formal discussion after I set up a peanut gallery thread. And when it's done, you can challenge pfc to another formal dicussion if you wish.

punkforchrist · Post by **punkforchrist** » Fri Aug 14, 2009 5:28 pm

I'm cool with one week between responses. I'm usually not accustomed to more than four rounds. Does five work for you, Tanya?

LM, I'll be happy to engage in a conversation with you on the KCA once this exchange is finished.

Redshirt · Post by **Redshirt** » Fri Aug 14, 2009 6:17 pm

[quote=""punkforchrist""]I'm cool with one week between responses. I'm usually not accustomed to more than four rounds. Does five work for you, Tanya?

LM, I'll be happy to engage in a conversation with you on the KCA once this exchange is finished.

[/quote]

You can explore both the Kalam and Thomistic arguments in your exchange with Tanya if you wish.

What statement length limits would you prefer?

Bane · Post by **Bane** » Fri Aug 14, 2009 7:02 pm

Yes, five rounds works for me

ETA:
As for statement length limits....I'm not that fussed. I can try to address 20-page posts if I really have to

Redshirt · Post by **Redshirt** » Fri Aug 14, 2009 7:14 pm

[quote=""Tanya""]Yes, five rounds works for me

ETA:
As for statement length limits....I'm not that fussed. I can try to address 20-page posts if I really have to

[/quote]

5000 words would be the maximum, if you want it that high. That's equivalent to about a 25 page double spaced college term paper.

punkforchrist · Post by **punkforchrist** » Fri Aug 14, 2009 7:44 pm

2,000-word opening statements suffices for me. After that, 1,000 words is probably enough for the remaining rounds.

Tanya, I realize as a Humean you may want to raise some tangential issues, which is fine with me. Let me know if you need a higher word-count.

punkforchrist · Post by **punkforchrist** » Fri Aug 14, 2009 7:45 pm

Oh, and I think I'll keep myself focused on the TCA for the sake of greater focus. I'll be appealing to both the PSR and W-PSR.

Redshirt · Post by **Redshirt** » Fri Aug 14, 2009 9:10 pm

What is PSR and W-PSR?

Any start date you have in mind? Or are you both ready to start as soon as we finalize the parameters?

punkforchrist · Post by **punkforchrist** » Fri Aug 14, 2009 10:54 pm

Principle of Sufficient Reason and the Weak version of the PSR, respectively. Gale and Pruss apply the W-PSR to the Leibnizian argument here: http://www9.georgetown.edu/faculty/ap85 ... Cosmo.html

I can start as soon as we're finished with the parameters.

Redshirt · Post by **Redshirt** » Sat Aug 15, 2009 12:37 am

Here's a summary of all the parameters. We just need both of you to confirm everything below and then I'll set up the formal discussion thread.

(1) Topic

The Thomistic cosmological argument.

(2) Participants, positions and sequence

punkforchrist will represent the theist position and will go first. Tanya, will represent the atheist position.

(3) Scope

This exclusive engagement will take the form of a formal discussion. Each participant will use philosophical arguments to evaluate the Thomistic cosmological argument according to their respective worldviews. There will be significant focus on the Principle of Sufficient Reason (PSR) and the "weak" version of PSR, but the scope will allow for some tangential issues to be addressed.

(4) Length in rounds

5 rounds.

(5) Maximum statement length

Round 1: 2000 words
Rounds 2-5: 1000 words

(6) Maximum duration between statements

1 week

(7) Start date

Immediately (opening statement is due one week from when the EE thread is started)

(8) Additional criteria (optional)

Standard format.

punkforchrist · Post by **punkforchrist** » Sat Aug 15, 2009 3:05 am

I approve.

Bane · Post by **Bane** » Sat Aug 15, 2009 10:02 am

I, too, approve.

Redshirt · Post by **Redshirt** » Sat Aug 15, 2009 2:21 pm

Looks like we're ready to go. I'll set up the EE thread and peanut gallery now.