William Lane Craig's silly comments on animal pain further debunked

This brand new video exposes in some detail the absurdity of William Lane Craig's ongoing attempt to defend his silly, unscientific views regarding animal pain (his view is that animals other than higher primates are unaware they have it - which is a great comfort to animal lovers like himself).

This video responds to Craig's response to the original video exposing the sheer ridiculousness of the argument he used against me in our debate:


Video is not by me, btw.

Here is my earlier post on this subject.


sam said…
At 1:25-- “Even if an animal has higher-order access to 1st-order pain, it would lack any moral disvalue if the animal didn’t find the state undesirable. Such a mental state might bear some similarity to the conscious experience of persons with a damaged or absent PF cortex.”

Is this why Craig defends yhwh’s orders to slaughter infants (1SA 15:3-8, PS 137:9) & unborn babies (HO 9:11-16) & rip up ‘women with child’ (HO 13:14-16)? Because inflicting pain on those with underdeveloped or absent PFCs “lacks any moral disvalue”?

According to Craig, atheists secretly know that his xian god exists, & we willfully reject it out of emotion, not intellect. It is one of his many statements of sophistry that poisons any good-faith effort to give the benefit of the doubt to one's interlocutor.

And yet, I can't help but feel the same way about Craig the more I read painstakingly detailed rebuttals to his disingenuousness, like this video. He is simply not an honest man.
Simone Martini said…
This comment has been removed by the author.
Simone Martini said…
Unfortunately Craig has not stopped using this argument. He recently re-proposed it(with insignificant changes) in a recent lecture of his on Creation and Evolution.