Has anyone stumped him?
Who hasn't stumped him, dude.
The powerful Sam Harris stumped him multiple times.
Then again who hasn't Sam Harris stumped?
>inb4 people misreading the Chomsky interchange who think Chomsky won and didn't completely embarrass himself
>>7883526
“But we are, in many respects, just such a ‘well-intentioned giant.’ And it is rather astonishing that intelligent people, like Chomsky and Roy, fail to see this.” – Sam Harris
USA = Well-intentioned giant?
Someone doesn’t know how power structures work and operate in social systems, now, do they? There are no good or bad guys in the world, kiddies. It’s about economic stability and power. Sam Harris is a fool to believe in the whole good guy/bad guy spiel.
>>7883588
>another islam loving strawmaner
>>7883526
>The powerful Sam Harris stumped him multiple times.
When?
That time in 2011 when Harris couldn't respond to any of his points adequately?
>>7883512
Oy vey worship the kike on a stick
>>7883512
Shelly Kagan In the debate about morality
>>7884617
It was even pretty shitty from Kagan's side.
>>7883512
I suppose if you're already Christian you might find his arguments compelling. From my point of view, everyone I've seen him debate has stumped him.
Oral debate is not a good way to work something as complicated as the sort of things invariably brought up in any sort of Atheism vs. Non-Atheist debate.
It's just theatrical nonsense
>>7884648
Not OP, but I am a Christian. I perceive that he handles the debate format and the logic of various arguments well, that is rigorously, which often seems rigid.
I think he argues well, but for the most part his opponents apply more sumptuous language and connect to broader concerns more often.
Now, I prefer a "trimmed-down" consideration of the issue at hand, leaving out consequences or practical concerns, but if you don't prefer that method it can seem really dry, rigid and limited.
>>7884676
I watched his classes on philosophy, they were pretty decent.
>>7884680
Lecture is always useful when the lecturer is good...why is this even a reply to that post?
>>7884684
Idk
>>7883512
Serious answer: Sean Carroll. Craig is an amazong debater and hammers most opponents into dust with ironclad logic, but in his debate woth Carroll he stepped out of his domain, attempting to debate a physicist on physics, and lost badly.
