Skip to main content

Myself talking with Peter Atkins, Richard Swinburne, Ard Louis (and Richard Dawkins)

Here is a fairly long video of a discussion between myself, Richard Swinburne (philosopher), Peter Atkins (chemist), Ard Louis (physicist), and also Richard Dawkins (who was in the audience) at one point. The theme was Life, The Universe and Everything - The Quest for Truth.

My main contribution is at 39 mins 30sec.

(nb. Dawkins is at 1hr 18 min 20 sec [he has a pop at Swinburne and me] and my response to Dawkins at 1hr 24 min 30 sec).

I posted on this before, shortly after the recording. Go here.

This included quite a good discussion on the nature and value of philosophy, I thought.


Comments

Anonymous said…
Very dodgy misrepresentation by Atkins on Swinburne!
October 17, 2012 at 8:09 PM
André Assi Barreto said…
Atkins is so philosophically naive. It`s shame. That`s why he lost his first debate with Craig and gone bad in the second.
October 18, 2012 at 12:06 PM
Thomas Larsen said…
"Dawkins is at 1hr 18 min 20 sec [he has a pop at Swinburne and me]"

Ha!
October 19, 2012 at 1:45 AM
Paul P. Mealing said…
It was good to see a panel with such disparate views. I found myself agreeing and disagreeing with all of them at some point. The sound's not the best. I found the discussion you had with Ard Louis particularly difficult to follow towards the end. But overall, I thought it was very thought-provoking.

Regards, Paul.
October 20, 2012 at 1:41 AM
Thessik Irontail said…
Excellent debate, I think its rather clear that Atkin's position is naive at best.

We need more online videos of Stephen Law engaging in various topics, I always learn so much from them and yet there are so few.
October 25, 2012 at 7:05 PM
Ross Templeman said…
Regarding important examples of philosophical thinking; would the topic of how to interpret the notion of probability not perhaps be a more convincing example to use against people like Atkins and Dawkins?

Regards
October 27, 2012 at 5:03 PM
Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

EVIDENCE, MIRACLES AND THE EXISTENCE OF JESUS

(Published in Faith and Philosophy 2011. Volume 28, Issue 2, April 2011. Stephen Law. Pages 129-151) EVIDENCE, MIRACLES AND THE EXISTENCE OF JESUS Stephen Law Abstract The vast majority of Biblical historians believe there is evidence sufficient to place Jesus’ existence beyond reasonable doubt. Many believe the New Testament documents alone suffice firmly to establish Jesus as an actual, historical figure. I question these views. In particular, I argue (i) that the three most popular criteria by which various non-miraculous New Testament claims made about Jesus are supposedly corroborated are not sufficient, either singly or jointly, to place his existence beyond reasonable doubt, and (ii) that a prima facie plausible principle concerning how evidence should be assessed – a principle I call the contamination principle – entails that, given the large proportion of uncorroborated miracle claims made about Jesus in the New Testament documents, we should, in the absence of indepen...
159 comments
Read more

The Evil God Challenge and the "classical" theist's response

On another blog, FideCogitActio, some theists of a "classical" stripe (that's to say, like Brian Davies, Edward Feser) are criticisng the Evil God Challenge (or I suppose, trying to show how it can be met, or sidestepped). The main post includes this: In book I, chapter 39 , Aquinas argues that “there cannot be evil in God” (in Deo non potest esse malum). Atheists like Law must face the fact that, if the words are to retain any sense, “God” simply cannot be “evil”. As my comments in the thread at Feser’s blog aimed to show, despite how much he mocks “the privation theory of evil,” Law himself cannot escape its logic: his entire argument requires that the world ought to appear less evil if it is to be taken as evidence of a good God. Even though he spurns the idea that evil is a privation of good, his account of an evil world is parasitic on a good ideal; this is no surprise, though, since all evil is parasitic on good ( SCG I, 11 ). Based on the conclusions of se...
446 comments
Read more

Sye show continues

I was sent a link to this , for those interested in the never ending saga of Sye TenBruggencate and his "proof" of the existence of God. Hit "sinner ministries' proof of the existence of god" link below or on side bar for 30+ earlier posts on this topic that I wrote during an extended interchange with him last summer (check the literally many hundreds of comments attached to these posts if you really want to get into how Sye thinks and argues). Sye's amazing intial "proof" is available here . PS. For those interested, my own "presuppositional" proof, parodying Sye's proof by his principle "the impossibility of the contrary" (which turns out to be the key to Sye's proof) is: My claim: Sye's mind is addled and his thinking unreliable because he was hit on the head by a rock. Prove this is false, Sye. Try to, and I will say - "But your "proof" presupposes your mind is not addled and you can recognise a pr...
250 comments
Read more