Great Debates Thread.

[Gawdzilla Sama]

Whatcha got?

Would the world be better without religion?: the debate
by whyevolutionistrue

National Public Radio (NPR) has finally posted the audio of a debate between Matthew Chapman, Darwin's great-grandson, philosopher Anthony Grayling, Dinesh D'Souza, president of the King's College of New York, and Rabbi David Wolpe on the question, "Would the world be better off without religion?" You can hear the 50-minute debate here, or get to the debate by clicking the link on the page given in the previous sentence.

I didn't find the debate particularly edifying, nor did I see a clear winner; indeed, the atheist side failed to bring up obvious points like the total lack of evidence for God (or the tenets of Wolpe's Judaism or d"Souza's Christianity)—though evidence was alluded. Nor were the specious roots of supposed "atheist atrocities," like those of Pol Pot and Stalin, really probed. Perhaps the debate was more useful to people who are largely unfamiliar with the arguments. What was painfully lacking here was Christopher Hitchens.

As for the results, the atheist side appeared to have gained a tiny victory, though both sides gained votes at the expense of those undecided at the beginning. NPR reports:

Before the Oxford-style debate, moderated by ABC News' John Donvan, the audience at New York University's Skirball Center for the Performing Arts voted 52 percent in favor of the motion and 26 percent against, with 22 percent undecided. Afterward, 59 percent of the audience agreed the world would be better off without religion, while 31 percent disagreed — making the side arguing for the motion the winners of the debate. Ten percent of the audience remained undecided.

And I'm sure the vote reflects performance and not the actual changes in mindset of the audience. That's the big problem with these debates.