In Case You Missed It …
February 28, 2012
… the recent Oxford ‘debate’ between Professor Richard Dawkins and Archbishop Dr. Rowan Williams on the topic, “Human Beings & Ultimate Origin.” Edifying, entertaining, challenging, and above all CIVIL! The philosopher Sir Anthony Kenny moderates. (Hat tip: Fr. James Martin, SJ)
Like this:
9 Comments
Comments are closed.
Thank you. Do you know if there is a shorter version, highlighting the best arguments?
The ‘arguments’ are developed in the course of a thoughtful, hour-long dialogue. Is that really too much time to invest?
No, certainly not. But I’ve watched a number of full debates already and read many books on the subject. A lot of these debates consist of rehashing of some of the same arguments.
What I have found occurs when both sides are respectful and play by the rules is a complete tie between them, where it seems that both sides are still able to bring something positive back for their base, but in reality nothing was proved or disproved on either side.
Zzzzzz…..none of the panache of Russell-Copleston. Though it was a bit of a snooze, at least the Archbishop highlighted the typical incomprehension that greets most Christians when asked if they can “prove” religious doctrines– like the existence of the soul in this case — with reason alone. His quick answer is NO. The hubris to believe otherwise belongs to one religious tradition on the planet, guess who?
I like Williams’ tactic when Dawkins isn’t making much sense (notably, from my point of view, around the anthropic principle bit): just let him keep talking. Most of us would do well to take up such an approach with our less desirable interlocutors.
Kenny wins this exchange, hands down.
Sam
He is very good. You folks should fly him over to moderate the upcoming presidential debates.
It seems to me that Dawkins gives away the farm at 1:20 where he openly admits that he does not use the word “God” to mean remotely the same thing as what Williams, and with him the whole Christian tradition, mean by the same word. If Dawkins wants to rail against the idea that he has of God, we can all join him in it, but that leaves rather untouched the question of the existence of the Christian God.
I thought Kenny was on to something in his question about metaphysics. Dawkins, as far as I can judge, can’t admit of anything “other” than what exists in the universe. He sees God as “cluttering” the universe as an unnecessary postulate; the Archbishop disagreed, but didn’t follow up as strongly as I’d have liked to see.