Jul 12, 2012

CS Lewis' Dangerous Idea Radio FEEDBACK

We received a ton of feedback from this one show. Here is the link to the show
The Dangerous Idea of C.S. Lewis [01/30/11] FEEDBACK
Here is the feedback

• Philosopher Pimp 12:13 am
January 28, 2011

Doc Vic Keeps his Pimp hand strong in case he needs to deal with any suckas

• John W. Loftus 3:30 pm
January 28, 2011

Let’s say evolution is a fact and let’s go back in time to the point when human beings have not yet evolved. At that point in time could Reppert have argued based upon how animals hunt to kill to eat to stay alive that such behavior demands the same conclusion he makes in his argument? Could he still argue that pre-human animals could not conclude that by their behavior they would catch some prey?…that they have no basis for hunting to kill to eat to stay alive without transcendence? That such behavior requires a mind a soul a god?
I think not.

• J P 9:26 am
January 29, 2011

John W. Loftus,
I actually couldn’t continue focusing on what you wrote based off of your first sentence (although I did read it all). That’s quite a giant assumption. And all your argument entailed of was “Let’s say evolution is fact…”
Sure, maybe based off of uncritically held assumptions you could make some ideas work in that context, but ultimately it would just be a waste of time playing “pretend this is true.”
I could say “Let’s say evolution is false.”
This is for the sake of good, thoughtful conversation on the internet. Nothing personal!

• Lofta-bunk 1:03 pm
January 30, 2011

Be sure to Check out the Debunking John Loftus Blog.

• Finney 8:00 am
September 5, 2011

“animals hunt to kill to eat to stay alive that such behavior demands the same conclusion he makes in his argument”
It depends. If such animals can hunt without forming intentional states that are causally relevant to their behavior, then they don’t need to reason, and thus the argument from reason doesn’t apply to them. But that some animals don’t employ reasoning doesn’t mean that no animals do, and doesn’t invalidate the argument from reason.

At January 27, 2011 8:28 PM
Blue Devil Knight said...

I like the hip hop opening that makes me feel like it's cool to be Christian. :)
The distance between the interviewer and Ali G is disturbingly small....

At January 27, 2011 9:12 PM
Steven said...

I too was going to note about how "hip hop" the show's introduction, atmosphere, and announcers are. Not your style, from what I gathered from our limited personal interactions, Victor :-)

At January 28, 2011 12:21 AM
Anonymous said...

Doc Vic Keeps his Pimp hand strong in case he has to deal with any suckas :)

At January 28, 2011 7:33 AM
Blue Devil Knight said...

Gutsy move, though. Not easy to do such shows, I'm sure. I never have. Hard to get one's argument down to bumper sticker format. I think Colbert Report would be one of the toughest interviews imaginable.

At January 28, 2011 2:22 PM
Bilbo said...

Only had time to listen for a minute. Does Vic's voice "match" his picture?

At January 28, 2011 7:10 PM
John W. Loftus said...

I heard where you can't get away from me even in your interview.

That's funny.

I guess in the future when someone says something like "John Loftus's book 'The Christian Delusion'" they need your correction that it's an anthology, huh?

okay, I guess. Sheesh. Isn't that obvious? ;-)

At January 28, 2011 9:29 PM
Victor Reppert said...

John: England still will survive without you, even Keats will survive without you…”

At January 29, 2011 2:23 PM
normajean said...

Doc Reppert's game is definitely on point!

At January 30, 2011 3:45 PM
Blue Devil Knight said...

Loftus can't stay away. :)

At January 30, 2011 6:07 PM
Blue Devil Knight said...

i know what that's like incidentally....after the materialism wanes thread, I'm DONE with non-science and nonchess blogs until I finish writing my ms!!!!

At January 31, 2011 8:28 PM
John W. Loftus said...

BDK, you'd miss me if I stayed away and you know it.

At February 02, 2011 12:57 PM
Anthony Fleming said...

I enjoyed listening to it. I just wish I could have heard you talk more, Victor, rather than the host. I did buy your book for my Kindle a few weeks ago and love it. Since I re-read C.S. Lewis' Miracles last summer, I have been led on a new study of philosophy and have been especially interested in the AfR. I am now going back to school for philosophy. So thank you for the inspiration. It was great to have another more updated resource on the argument to meet the challenges of faith today. If you have any recommended readings for me I would appreciate it.

At February 02, 2011 7:10 PM
Edward T. Babinski said...

All interested in this topic should read Prior Prejudices and the Argument from Reason. I exchange comments with Vic there as well:


Consciousness may remain a "metaphysical problem" but the natural urge to sleep each night and spend a third of one's life unconscious means what?

Neuroscientists and cognitive scientists consider "problems" challenges and inducements to study and experimentation.

John Loftus repeated basic questions that dualists have had "problems" with for centuries in this blog entry:


And what about people with separated cerebral hemispheres, and the ways their hands and half-brains respond to different questions simultaneously? (And the way the speaking half of the brain fabricates excuses for why its other hand responded as it did, without knowing the actual question that that other side of the brain was busy answering.)

I liked the video I saw of one hand being unable to assemble a simple puzzle on the table, while the other hand did it with ease. Then when the split-brain patient was asked to use both hands at the same time to solve the puzzle, the hand that could do the puzzle the non-speaking part of the brain had to keep pushing away the other hand, frustrated with its incompetancy. Check youtube for videos on split-brain experiments. The non-speaking part of the brain cannot verbalize but it understands speech and can also point to reply to questions. One patient had the speech part on the opposite cerebral hemisphere, and another patient's non-speaking side could respond with simple one word answers. But most times that hemisphere can only point to things in reply to question.

At February 03, 2011 2:56 PM
Bob Prokop said...

Victor (or should I say "Doc Vic"?),
Finally got around to listening to this. You sure picked a tough subject to discuss on popular radio! But all in all I think you did very well, given the limitations of the uber-informal format the show seems to like. Congrats!

At September 04, 2011 1:35 PM
B. Prokop said...

Interesting to see my former "Bob Prokop" login again, the one I had before identity thieves hacked into it. At least Google has it flagged as suspect.

At September 05, 2011 2:19 PM
Jesse Parrish said...

I'm newer around here, but why is it that John Loftus shows up to talk about himself with great consistency, yet he has failed to show up with an adequate response to the earlier series of threads on the OTF? Perhaps I am also being somewhat solipsistic, as my objections were a central matter of discussion. But I think it important to notice definite omissions and deliberate acts of silence. Especially, it is always important to notice the criticisms which someone is willing or unwilling to deal with, if such a disparity exists.

John, you seem to have an uncanny ability to know whenever you are being mentioned. Do you have any comment on my ultra-sophisticated "WTF, LOL, STFU" test for the OTF and the criticisms made by Thrasymachus? I plan on being self-centered until receiving some form of adequate answer. I think your answer to me, if you have one, to be of especial interest to all concerned, since many of your defenses against critics seem to hinge on their being stuck in an `insider mentality'. Let's see how important that really is.

At September 05, 2011 3:28 PM
Victor Reppert said...

This was a redated post, so John's arrival was last January. He said he was taking August off from blogging. On his site he said that he had been getting criticisms faster than he could respond to them, but that his "peeps" had done a great job replying to all the objections that had arisen.

At September 05, 2011 3:47 PM
Jesse Parrish said...

My mistake; I went straight to the comments.

I let my challenge and observations stand, though. :D

At September 05, 2011 3:50 PM
Jesse Parrish said...

And no, his `peeps' haven't done particularly well. I don't have much confidence in his judgment of his peeps, especially as I am forced to recall the (pre-blogging break) cheer leading over at his place. I notice that he `liked' some comments, but never contributed any responses himself.

At September 08, 2011 4:15 PM
vocab malone/jm rieser said...

Ay yo Doc Vic -

There's a few comments from folks over at the podcast site for BPR maybe you could respond to? One from Loftus and one from "Finney" ...


(Ali G's cousin)

No comments:

Post a Comment

Thank you for your comment!

Follow by Email

There was an error in this gadget


To find out more about the ministry of BACKPACK APOLOGETICS or to schedule a speaking event at your church or school, contact Vocab:

E-mail: vocab@vocabmalone.com