Ed Babinski: Though I do disagree with you and others who appear sometimes to be fawning at C. S. Lewis's feet over his ability to argue his way past all the toughest problems in philosophy and religion, and imagine he has solved all questions concerning the unseen world and afterlife and history, all solved in favor of his particular orthodox faith and holy book, and solved via the use of picturesque analogies.
VR: This is a typical way of responding to people who think well of C. S. Lewis. If they agree with him on many issues, they just be "fawning" followers.
We could just as easily say that you are a "fawning" follower of Robert Price. You think Price has a lot of things right, you admire his work, so you must be a fawning follower. What could be more obvious?
I have various disagreements with Lewis; for example you will have noticed that neither in my book nor on this site have I given a full endorsement of the trilemma argument.
If I thought Lewis had solved all problems, it wouldn't be necessary for me to write anything myself.
This procedure can potentially turn into dirty pool. You tell some negative story about Lewis, and impugn his arguments. I point out that Lewis can be defended on the point at issue, and you respond by saying that of course, as a devoted Lewis fan, I would say that. So any negative claim about C. S. Lewis gets a free pass, using this kind of argument.
1 comment:
Vic,
I notice you concetrated on the "fawning part" and missed the rest of what I wrote. Oh well.
And in so far as comparing my "fawning" over Price with yours over Lewis, I haven't as yet written a book "Price's Dangerous Idea," nor would Price and I agree over any particular explanations concerning such things as the unseen world, afterlife and events in history, or holy books whose teachings one MUST believe in order to be saved.
Post a Comment