Friday, January 07, 2011

Pride Goeth

Here's what Carrier says about his chapter of The Christian Delusion. 


Two of The Christian Delusion's fifteen chapters are mine. The first is Why the Resurrection Is Unbelievable, which is the most definitive refutation of warranted belief in the resurrection I have ever composed. It's a deliberate tour de force, such that I doubt I'll ever have to write another. It even takes down recent attempts to use Bayes' Theorem to argue for the resurrection, and it contextualizes everything so there just isn't any rational basis left for claiming the resurrection is historically proven.


In the next paragraph he refers to both of his contributions as tours de force. 


When you talk like that, you had better be able to take out the McGrews. In my brainwashed opinion, that's a chess game he has no chance of winning. 



17 comments:

unkleE said...

I wonder how he would fare against WL Craig or Gary Habermas also?

Doug Benscoter said...

He's debated Craig formally, as well as Habermas informally. My own opinion is that Craig and Habermas won those debates definitively, but everyone can decide for themselves.

Duke of Earl said...

He'd beat me, because I can't debate for crap.

Morrison said...

Doug, I was at Carrier's debate with Craig in Maryville, Mo. last year, and his arrogance was impressive.

It was horrible.

On his own blog he had to admit, "I lost the debate", and then started making excuses.

His claims now about his "Tour De Force", etc. border on Delusions of Grandeur.

Seriously, its weird.

And the fact that he has not obtained an academic appointment has got to be stressing him out.

Walter said...

Here is a dialog between Habermas and Carrier. I would post click-able links but Blogger's spam filter will eat the comment.


http://www.garyhabermas.com/audio/infidelguy_radio_10-27-06_2.mp3

http://www.garyhabermas.com/audio/infidelguy_radio_10-27-06_3.mp3

http://www.garyhabermas.com/audio/infidelguy_radio_10-27-06_4.mp3

Anonymous said...

I want to meet Carrier and Loftus one day, so I can ask them what it's like to be so awesome, and to be so constantly aware of your awesomeness?

Blue Devil Knight said...

Let's do an analysis of his refutation of the resurrection.

Deus Ex Machina said...

"In my brainwashed opinion"

This was pretty hilarious. :)

James A. Gibson said...

"The first is Why the Resurrection Is Unbelievable, which is the most definitive refutation of warranted belief in the resurrection I have ever composed. It's a deliberate tour de force, such that I doubt I'll ever have to write another."

Then let us all hope that Carrier resolves to never write another! The above self-aggrandizement reminds me of what Descartes said in his Letter to the Sorbonne:

"What I have done is to take merely the principal and most important arguments and develop them in such a way that I would now venture to put them forward as very certain and evident demonstrations. I will add that these proofs are of such a kind that I reckon they leave no room for the possibility that the human mind will ever discover better ones" (CSM II, 4).

Mr Veale said...

Carrier is obviously an intelligent and articulate man. If he was a fool he would maintain that he understood Bayes Rule.He knows that a tactical retreat is necessary.

It seems to me that he has not actively sought an academic appointment. He would rather work outside the academy. Whether he is using the resulting freedom wisely is open to question.

Graham

Mr Veale said...

He has apologised; but keep this in mind. The tutorial based on his errors is not likely to continue. So a very long, public thread exposing his incompetence/chicanery will be brought to a premature end.

As we say in Ulster, "he's not as green as he's cabbage lookin' "

Graham

Nick said...

Didn't he also claim to be a greater thinker than Aristotle?

Reminds me of Chris Hallquist who claimed to refute the resurrection in one page and has said on his blog that if he debated William Lane Craig on the resurrection, he would win.

Mr Veale said...

As I predicted, the McGrew's have acted honourably and the long thread exposing Carrier's sophomoric mistakes seems to be drawing to a close.
I am not a scholar, and not much of a gentleman. So I will point out that Carrier had little choice but to withdraw his comments. He had not made abstruse technical errors. He had misunderstood Bayes rule at a rudimentary level. I am a math-o-phobe, and I am not known for my piercing intellect. The fact that I could spot his errors says much about Dr Carrier's competency in this area.
Dr Carrier had no choice but to withdraw his comments. The alternative was to be exposed as a fraud. Eventually we would have reached his discussion of the criteria of authenticity. And there can be no excuse for the misrepresentations he makes in that section.
I am sorry that Dr Carrier dodged this particular bullet. That said, I believe that Tim and Lydia have done the right thing. They should be commended for their generosity.

Graham

awatkins69 said...

For unkleE, here's the debate between Craig and Carrier:

http://www.philvaz.com/CraigCarrierDebate.mp3

Landon Hedrick said...

Veale,

Wait, so Carrier's apology means you'll spare his bad arguments from criticism? That doesn't make any sense. If you think there's something wrong with his argument, say what it is. Don't just say that he's lucky he apologized before you pointed out the problems with his argument.

Mr Veale said...

Landon
There is a significant difference between a punter like me pointing out flaws, and acknowledged academic experts on both Bayes Theorem and the Historical Argument for Christianity pointing out very basic errors on a public forum.
I would be more than happy to share my thoughts on Dr Carrier's critique of the criteria of authenticity. Briefly, he interprets the criteria crudely, and does not examine how they are actually used in various ways by different Historical Jesus researchers. He does not reflect on other academic discussions about the use of these criteria. He has little to say about historiography in general. That is the kindest way that I can put it!
I don't want to see Carrier debate Craig or Habermas! I would like Carrier to debate Borg, or Meier, or Wright, or Crossan, or Friedriksen, or Keener, or Crossley, or Casey, or Stanton or...
but we have a cessation of hostilities. Hopefully Vic will return to this paper when the smoke has settled.

Graham

Morrison said...

Craig did debate Carrier in Maryville Mo last year, and Carrier lost.

He even it admits it on his blog.

And Landon Hedrick was there, since he arragned the debate.

In the process, I found Landon to be very disengenous about his views...he didn't say until later, that I know of, that he is an atheist.