I don't have one specific debate in mind, but here's how it seems some debates – whether on the Internets or just by the water cooler – actually do run. See if you don't agree:
Rationalist: What's the evidence for this God of yours?
Creationist: Evidence is not the criteria for everything. Some things are beyond what you call "evidence". There are other ways in which we know God. (Carry on about faith / revelation / "personal relationship" / etc.)
R: But that rationale just as easily supports belief in Leprechauns as it does belief in God.
C: No, belief in God is entirely more reasonable. There's evidence for the existence of God.
R: Evidence? But you just said...
C: So, why do you hate Christmas music and stained glass?
... and on it goes. (A fictional debate, but a very real depiction of what I call the "cricket on a hotplate" method of irrationalist debate: keep hopping from one position to another as soon as things get hot.)
Reply
Get updates
Render unto Caesar
Godspeak
I have gained this by philosophy: that I do without being commanded what others do only from fear of the law.
I don't have one specific debate in mind, but here's how it seems some debates – whether on the Internets or just by the water cooler – actually do run. See if you don't agree:
Rationalist: What's the evidence for this God of yours?
Creationist: Evidence is not the criteria for everything. Some things are beyond what you call "evidence". There are other ways in which we know God. (Carry on about faith / revelation / "personal relationship" / etc.)
R: But that rationale just as easily supports belief in Leprechauns as it does belief in God.
C: No, belief in God is entirely more reasonable. There's evidence for the existence of God.
R: Evidence? But you just said...
C: So, why do you hate Christmas music and stained glass?
... and on it goes. (A fictional debate, but a very real depiction of what I call the "cricket on a hotplate" method of irrationalist debate: keep hopping from one position to another as soon as things get hot.)