Slugfester

Stephen Law

Stephen Law's Slugfester profile includes score averages, opponents faced, topic performance, and linked debate scorecards.

Background

About Stephen Law

Stephen Law is a philosopher and author who writes for academic and general audiences. His work in philosophy of religion includes the Evil God Challenge, which examines how arguments about goodness and suffering bear on belief in God.

Biographical source ↗

Published debate record

5 eligible one-on-one scorecards. Average published score: 83.4/100. Scores describe these debates, not the person's overall ability or worth.

Michael Jones vs Stephen Law: Christianity vs Humanism · 2025

Law’s comparative, neutrality, and evidential challenges outweighed Jones’s stronger pluralism case and qualified historical, social, scientific, and theological defenses.

Michael Jones: 72 · Stephen Law: 81. Scores assess the reasoning in this debate.

William Lane Craig vs Stephen Law: Does God Exist? · 2011

Craig’s cumulative creator, morality, and resurrection case met Law’s stronger suffering evidence and evil-God symmetry challenge, which remained insufficiently distinguished by providential skepticism.

William Lane Craig: 76 · Stephen Law: 88. Scores assess the reasoning in this debate.

Alvin Plantinga vs Stephen Law: Is the EAAN Successful? · 2010

Plantinga develops a self-defeat argument from evolutionary reliability doubts, while Law counters with adaptive truth-tracking, content constraints, and skeptical parity.

Alvin Plantinga: 81 · Stephen Law: 81. Scores assess the reasoning in this debate.

Keith Ward vs Stephen Law: Does God Exist? · 2015

Law’s evidential and symmetry challenges outscored Ward’s carefully limited mind-like theism, especially on suffering, hypothesis discrimination, and experiential reliability.

Keith Ward: 70 · Stephen Law: 85. Scores assess the reasoning in this debate.

Peter Atkins vs Stephen Law — Science or philosophy? · 2014

Atkins champions evidence-driven scientific expansion; Law concedes science’s empirical authority while defending conceptual analysis, ultimate explanation, and moral justification as indispensable.

Peter Atkins: 65 · Stephen Law: 82. Scores assess the reasoning in this debate.