A cosmological argument again...

Angra Mainyu · Post by **Angra Mainyu** » Sat Dec 26, 2009 12:28 am

I'm starting a new thread because the other hasn't had any activity for months, so I don't think I could assume that that invitation is still open (plus, I'm not sure how the distinction between "discussion" and "debate" would be).

So, I'd like to propose a debate on the Kalam Cosmological Argument - preferably W. L. Craig's version, but I'm willing to debate another version instead, or as well.

I was thinking my opponent would go first and present the argument in the formulation of her or his choosing, I would go second, etc., but I have no problem going first as well.

Also, I'd prefer an informal debate, so that we can go on until one or the two parties decide to end the debate, instead of being limited to a specific number of rounds (in practice, formal debates tend to continue in the PG, so it's more or less the same but keeping the debate one on one), but I'm willing to debate formally as well.

Alternatively, if a theist prefers to discuss and not debate, I'm not sure what the differences would be, but I'm willing to discuss

what those differences are, and, if possible, then have a discussion rather than a debate (though in any case, my interlocutor should keep in mind I believe the argument fails to establish theism, or even deism).

Any theists interested?

ETA:

To the mods: Could anyone fix the title, please?

It should read "A cosmological argument again..."

Thanks.

Jobar · Post by **Jobar** » Sat Dec 26, 2009 1:24 am

I hope you get a taker on this. I used to mod the Existence of God(s) forum at II years ago, and such discussions have always been an interest of mine. My own preferred answer to the cosmological argument in all its forms has long been my favorite .gif-
:Winace:

Angra Mainyu · Post by **Angra Mainyu** » Sat Dec 26, 2009 2:49 am

Essentially, that would be the simple answer, I agree.

However, the arguments usually use "universe" in some restricted way - for instance, saying it began with the Big Bang, so it has a beginning, and then claim it has a cause in some sense of "cause", etc.-, so maybe I'd have to be meticulous when arguing against it: maybe I would try to clarify the theistic claim, terminology, etc., and then show where the problems lie.

But let's see if I get any takers.

P.S: Thanks for fixing the thread title.

munnki · Post by **munnki** » Sat Dec 26, 2009 10:56 am

I'm not a theist but it might be interesting to take up the position.

Angra Mainyu · Post by **Angra Mainyu** » Sat Dec 26, 2009 7:23 pm

Hi,

Thank you, but I prefer to debate/discuss with someone who believes the argument is sound (it takes quite some time time, and if my opponent doesn't believe the argument is sound, if I then post a link to this debate elsewhere, theists will likely just dismiss it as "a debate between non-theists who don't accept the argument and are biased", or something like that), preferably a theist but I'm willing to debate/discuss with with a deist too.

So, if you're a deist, I would accept.

munnki · Post by **munnki** » Sat Dec 26, 2009 7:28 pm

Lawdy... that's cool but you may not find too many theists in here... the older members may point you t'wards some if there are, indeed, any...

Angra Mainyu · Post by **Angra Mainyu** » Sat Dec 26, 2009 7:36 pm

[quote=""munnki""]Lawdy... that's cool but you may not find too many theists in here... the older members may point you t'wards some if there are, indeed, any...[/quote]
I see; thanks for the info.

I thought there were just a few, but, well, I thought there were at least those few.

I posted a similar challenge in FRDB, but no takers yet, either.

So, anyway, no point in being inflexible

, so given the lack of theist or deist opponents, I think we could debate the argument if you like to defend it for the sake of the argument

, and if an informal debate/discussion is okay with you.

In that case, I'd like to leave this debate challenge/discussion offer open, in case a theist shows up and accepts, in which case I'd have two debates at a time, but being informal, I'm not limited to a strict timeline, so I can handle them more easily.

What do you say?

Redshirt · Post by **Redshirt** » Sun Dec 27, 2009 11:28 pm

There are some theists here who can take up your argument, if you're interested. Perhaps punkforchrist could get involved...

munnki · Post by **munnki** » Sun Dec 27, 2009 11:33 pm

hi... yes, I'd love to do this but I'm not sure I could commit the time... see if anybody else takes up the offer and I'll opt in later if nobody does...

Angra Mainyu · Post by **Angra Mainyu** » Mon Dec 28, 2009 2:17 am

[quote=""Redshirt""]There are some theists here who can take up your argument, if you're interested. Perhaps punkforchrist could get involved...[/quote]
Yes, I'm interested.

Thanks for the info.

(I knew punkforchrist wanted to discuss that a few months ago, but I don't know whether he'd still be interested; maybe some of the other theists is interested?).

Angra Mainyu · Post by **Angra Mainyu** » Mon Dec 28, 2009 2:28 am

[quote=""munnki""]hi... yes, I'd love to do this but I'm not sure I could commit the time... see if anybody else takes up the offer and I'll opt in later if nobody does...[/quote]
Okay, thanks.

Regarding time commitments, I have an idea (also, to make it easier for me

): how about we avoid them?

We can have an informal discussion, not set up time limits for the discussion (i.e., we discuss until one of us, or both, prefer not to continue), or for each post.

If limits are mandatory, we can set up something like, say, a maximum 2 months per post, maximum 2 years for the discussion (but we'll definitely end sooner!

), and no limit to the number of posts (or, say, 200 posts as the limit, if one is needed, to avoid restrictions).

That way, we can avoid time commitments and still have a one-on-one informal discussion (or debate; whatever, I'm not sure what the difference), and avoid time commitments - or, at least, have very relaxed ones.

That said, I understand it if you prefer to dedicate your limited time for on-line discussions to something other than defending an argument you don't buy

, so in that case let me know and I won't insist with other possibilities.

Jobar · Post by **Jobar** » Mon Dec 28, 2009 2:56 am

A.M., I'm a member at The Son's Cafe- a rather liberal believer's board, who cribbed their name from us.

I posted this-

The Cosmological Argument
Over at "our" SC, we have a member who wants to set up a debate or discussion on this subject with a theist who considers it sound. See http://www.secularcafe.org/showthread.p ... #post92550.

I feel sure that the venue- here, or there- would be open for discussion also. I do note that one of our admins, Redshirt, has considerable experience in moderating formal debates.

I'll check back on this thread in a few days, or feel free to join at the Secular Cafe and approach Angra Mainyu directly.

If you want to join their board and discuss it with any interested believers directly, that thread is at http://www.thesonscafe.com/viewtopic.php?f=15&t=514.

Angra Mainyu · Post by **Angra Mainyu** » Mon Dec 28, 2009 3:37 am

[quote=""Jobar""]A.M., I'm a member at The Son's Cafe- a rather liberal believer's board, who cribbed their name from us.

I posted this-

The Cosmological Argument
Over at "our" SC, we have a member who wants to set up a debate or discussion on this subject with a theist who considers it sound. See http://www.secularcafe.org/showthread.p ... #post92550.

I feel sure that the venue- here, or there- would be open for discussion also. I do note that one of our admins, Redshirt, has considerable experience in moderating formal debates.

I'll check back on this thread in a few days, or feel free to join at the Secular Cafe and approach Angra Mainyu directly.

If you want to join their board and discuss it with any interested believers directly, that thread is at http://www.thesonscafe.com/viewtopic.php?f=15&t=514.[/quote]
Thanks.

I'm also a member of Theologyweb, though I don't post there. But thanks for the link; if I don't get any takers here or at FRDB, I'll consider that option too.

Angra Mainyu · Post by **Angra Mainyu** » Wed Jan 06, 2010 11:11 pm

I already had the debate elsewhere, and I'm not planning to have another debate for the moment, so this debate proposal has expired.

Redshirt, I'd like to ask you to close the thread, please?

RBH · Post by **RBH** » Fri Jan 08, 2010 6:37 am

[quote=""Angra Mainyu""]I already had the debate elsewhere, and I'm not planning to have another debate for the moment, so this debate proposal has expired.

Redshirt, I'd like to ask you to close the thread, please?

[/quote]Can you give us a link to where you had it, please?

David B · Post by **David B** » Fri Jan 08, 2010 10:11 am

[quote=""RBH""]

Angra Mainyu;95167 wrote:I already had the debate elsewhere, and I'm not planning to have another debate for the moment, so this debate proposal has expired.

Redshirt, I'd like to ask you to close the thread, please?

Can you give us a link to where you had it, please?[/QUOTE]

http://www.freeratio.org/showthread.php?t=280749

David

RBH · Post by **RBH** » Sat Jan 09, 2010 5:36 am