After watching this discussion last night between William Lane Craig, Rebecca Goldstein, and Jordan Peterson (whom my roommate really likes), from nearby Wycliffe College, I looked through a lot of the comments on Youtube and casually browsed Twitter – and at least a few people liked what Peterson had to say, but wished that he could have put it in a bit more syllogistic form.
We get it though, he is not a philosopher, but a psychologist; so, we’ll try to best understand him according to the norms of the form he speaks. Overall, Peterson presented an interesting view, though it would certainly have to be hammered out further. To the contrary, Goldstein’s naturalism would only be found convincing to a certain group.
Personally, of course, I think Craig has the best presentation, and Goldstein threw him a softball in the Question & Answer session (The Erythro Dilemma), which he then hit out of the park. After the three presentations, much of the discussion eventually circled back to having a transcendental, moral basis for the meaning every human being holds dear.
All in all, I don’t have too much to say about this video, but some people from Tyndale ended up going and I think even got their questions answered by Craig in the previous day’s discussion. That’s really just what’s happening ’round here.