Originally Posted by ohreally
I have not the slightest issue with someone saying, "I don't believe in God, Christian or otherwise." End of statement. But when the likes of Dawkins, Hitchens, Harris want to demonstrate the inexistence of God by mocking the irrationality of older thinkers then they must be held to the same exacting standards Anselm and the rest set themselves to. After all, to shut up is always an option.
Reminds me of vos Savant dismissing Wiles's proof of Fermat because it relied on... hyperbolic geometry, thereby proving that the world's smartest person is in fact a freaking idiot.
What a pile of obscurantist horsehit and sheer mystification in hiding behind the impenetrability of ancient philosophers.
Repeat one of their convincing, high order arguments for the existence of God, and I, with no formal training in philosophy save for a couple of undergraduate courses, will be happy to disassemble it for you.
As if any of these old dudes, regardless of the high order of their logic, has anything meaningful to say to us today on the existence of God.
You need to distinguish between the beauty of self contained systems of elegant argument and their inutility when they have nothing to tell us about the world.