- Time
- Post link
I'm sure I mustn't be the only one around here who watches these things, so for those of you who do so, care to share your favourite debates (with a Youtube link if available) and debaters, with some reasons for liking and disliking them?
I like Richard Dawkins a lot as a debater, as he seems to have a fairly good grasp of most religious concepts that other atheists seem to have trouble with. He can be quite condescending at times, however, which is a point against him, but other times he is quite polite and far less condescending.
Christopher Hitchens was not as great as many say he was, in my humble opinion. He had a good sense of humour, but his habit to repeat the same old things over and over makes him tiring to listen to after a while (I don't mean within debates). He also tended to have terrible arguments against the existence of God, and a poor ability to refute arguments for God's existence. Christopher chased a lot of red herrings around and made many ad hominem attacks (not against those he debated, but against members of Christianity, as their behaviour apparently largely discredits the religion) He did make a lot of good points though. I think he was quite arrogant and judgmental, but he was a great guy notmuchtheless. ;)
Sam Harris is a quite articulate debater, but he also chases red herrings around all over the place. I haven't seen many of his debates, so I can't say much more about him or tell if the red herring thing is universal to his argumentation.
William Lane Craig is a decent debater on the other side, but from what I've seen of him, his arguments and rebuttals aren't great. I think his reputation is better than it ought to be, but maybe I've just seen the wrong side of him.
Dinesh D'Souza is a decent debater with some good arguments. Some arguments he makes aren't that great though, so he isn't one of my favourites.
John Lennox is one of my favourite debaters on the Christian side with one major flaw: his argument that the existence of morals depends on the existence of God. That in itself could be a viable argument, IMO, but he uses it poorly and can't seem to see the other side. I enjoy listening to him though, and since he seems to have a personal relationship with God as well as an intellectual one, so much the better.
John Carroll is another atheist debater I really enjoy. He has very good arguments and isn't arrogant and condescending like so many others. He's also interesting to listen to, as he has a sense of humour and is quite articulate.
There are others, but their names escape my memory and I don't have much time to write more at the moment.
