The Debate Between William Lane Craig And Christopher Hitchens

On April 4, 2009 at Biola University, there was a debate regarding the existence of God between William Lane Craig and Christopher Hitchens. This debate was very interesting because both philosophers felt strongly about their opinion. William Lane Craig was first to speak and discussed his side of the debate very clearly. Craig stated that he believed in religion and philosophy. He also made it lucid that he believes that there are no good arguments that atheism is true, but there are a myriad of arguments that prove that theism is true. Craig uses a plethora of strategies to prove his conclusion. He discusses different arguments including cosmological argument and teleological argument as evidence to prove that theism is real. Another strategy that Craig used was asking questions towards his audience and to Hitchens in order to build his ethos and to make the audience think more about what side they choose to be on. Along with asking questions to the audience, Craig uses several references from other
philosophers including Derek Parfit and Roger Penrose. On the other hand, Christopher Hitchens argues that God is not real.
It is clear that Hitchens believes in existentialism because he states that we are evolved into the people we are today and that everything can be changed if we want it to be changed. Hitchens proves his point by discussing all of his research regarding evolution. He leans more towards evolution rather than religion, which helps him prove his point that God is not real. One of the strategies that Hitchens used was asking his opponent questions that would be hard to answer, in order to show that atheism has more arguments that it’s true. Another approach that Hitchens used was finding an in depth answer to his opponent’s questions towards him. He talks about how religion has phenomenal claims that need to have incredible evidence, but he questions Craig on why the evidence isn’t as great as the claim. Hitchens also uses counterarguments and real life references in order to prove his
point. The side of the debate that affected me the most was Christopher Hitchen’s side. Although I am a practicing Catholic, Hitchens arguments were much more convincing. He used several different strategies to prove what he believes in. Hitchens used thorough research, excellent comebacks towards his opponents, and many sources which included science and philosophy. A few logical errors were evident in William Lane Craig’s arguments. I believe that his arguments were based more on the fact that he was Christian, rather than using other forms of reference like what Hitchens did. Another error that I had noticed was that on some occasions Craig would contradict himself, which allowed Hitchens to catch it.