The Art in Argument
Just like a quarter there are two sides to any issue. A side that’s for it and a side that is against the issue. One person might say that the front of the quarter has George Washington on it, but another person might say they see an eagle. Both people in this case are right, but in order to make sense of what the other is arguing they must step in each others shoes and see from the other’s point of view. In Freud’s Last Session, a play written by Mark St. Germain, two well-known philosophers debate their personal beliefs. Both Freud and Lewis expose the insecurities of their argument in a crusade to convince one another of their own worldview. Ignorance murders hope. While in a debate with C.S Lewis, Sigmund Freud embraces …show more content…
In Lewis’s conversation with Freud, he makes a few dangerous statements debating a Christian worldview against atheism. One error that C.S. Lewis makes in his argument is when he argues that, “The wish that God doesn’t exist can be just as powerful as the belief He does. I’d even say choosing to disbelieve may be stronger evidence for His existence, since you have to be aware of what you’re denying” (16). He tries to create evidence by using non-believers as an example that God exists. If this theory was applied to other religions then every god must exist. This statement does not align with the Christian worldview. Freud explains the danger of his argument by using the example of unicorns to refute Lewis’s claim. Freud rebuttals, “I deny the existence of Unicorns. Therefore, they exist?” (16). Lewis makes another dangerous claim that is mistakenly perceived as a weakness, but is essential to his argument. Freud asks Lewis why there is pain and suffering in the world if God exists and he responds, “I don’t know” (33). Lewis admits that there is something much bigger than himself. He humbles himself by admitting that he does not know everything. Others might perceive things differently and might use this against Lewis to discredit his argument for Christianity. Lewis, despite his risky claims, still withstands a solid
Just like a quarter there are two sides to any issue. A side that’s for it and a side that is against the issue. One person might say that the front of the quarter has George Washington on it, but another person might say they see an eagle. Both people in this case are right, but in order to make sense of what the other is arguing they must step in each others shoes and see from the other’s point of view. In Freud’s Last Session, a play written by Mark St. Germain, two well-known philosophers debate their personal beliefs. Both Freud and Lewis expose the insecurities of their argument in a crusade to convince one another of their own worldview. Ignorance murders hope. While in a debate with C.S Lewis, Sigmund Freud embraces …show more content…
In Lewis’s conversation with Freud, he makes a few dangerous statements debating a Christian worldview against atheism. One error that C.S. Lewis makes in his argument is when he argues that, “The wish that God doesn’t exist can be just as powerful as the belief He does. I’d even say choosing to disbelieve may be stronger evidence for His existence, since you have to be aware of what you’re denying” (16). He tries to create evidence by using non-believers as an example that God exists. If this theory was applied to other religions then every god must exist. This statement does not align with the Christian worldview. Freud explains the danger of his argument by using the example of unicorns to refute Lewis’s claim. Freud rebuttals, “I deny the existence of Unicorns. Therefore, they exist?” (16). Lewis makes another dangerous claim that is mistakenly perceived as a weakness, but is essential to his argument. Freud asks Lewis why there is pain and suffering in the world if God exists and he responds, “I don’t know” (33). Lewis admits that there is something much bigger than himself. He humbles himself by admitting that he does not know everything. Others might perceive things differently and might use this against Lewis to discredit his argument for Christianity. Lewis, despite his risky claims, still withstands a solid