british press have knifes out for Richard Dawkins

by highdose 115 Replies latest jw friends

  • tec
    tec

    I would just like to state that the woman I referenced Richard calling an idiot... is not the same woman from that video. The conte x t might be similar (don't know)... but just so we're clear.

    I don't think its so simple as calling someone an idiot that makes him seem condescending and arrogant. We've all (well, I have) called people idiots, even if it is just in our heads. It is when someone believes themselves to be more intelligent and others to be just a little higher than cavemen. (or homo erectus ). I personally find most people arrogant and condescending who state there is no God (in whatever form that might come), and who THEN ALSO look down on those who state and believe that there is one. When Richard does this, then he tends to fall into that category for me.

    In all other areas, including science, I find him to be humble and open-minded and intelligent... and he has a polite and courteous way of presenting himself. (from the little I have seen of him... I have not read any of his books)

    Peace,

    Tammy

  • cofty
    cofty

    00DAD thanks for the information about how the scientific method works I had no idea, I thought two scientists got in a boxing ring and the last man standing got published. Silly me.

    Observe that words like "ruthless, merciless and wrong-headed" are notably absent from the scientific approach. Its how we get to truth. - 00DAD

    Really? Have you seen the debates between Dawkins and Gould on punctuated equilibrium or the battle Lynne Margules had to get endosymbiosis accepted. It was most definitely adversarial and brutal. Truth did emerge in the end.

  • 00DAD
    00DAD

    Cofty: Have you seen the debates between Dawkins and Gould on punctuated equilibrium or the battle Lynne Margules had to get endosymbiosis accepted. It was most definitely adversarial and brutal. Truth did emerge in the end.

    No I have not. Do you have links? I might enjoy watching that. Thanks!

  • cofty
    cofty

    No I have not. Do you have links? I might enjoy watching that. Thanks!

    No I doubt very much if it was a YouTube hit, my use of the word "seen" was perhaps misleading. If you google the key phrases I'm sure there will be lots of info.

    Here is an article that will provide a good introduction to the Dawkins v Gould debate.

    The "creation" book even tried to use the punctuated equilibrium debate to undermine evolution, remember the drawing of scientists shouting at each other over the table?

    Here is an introduction to Lynn Margulis' theory on endosymbiosis that had a long hard struggle to find accpetance.

  • 00DAD
    00DAD

    Thanks Cofty,

    I'll check 'em out and let you know what I think!

    00DAD

  • SweetBabyCheezits
    SweetBabyCheezits
    Cofty: Again there is a big difference between a private discussion where it would be appropriate to be very sensitive to another's beliefs and a public forum where a creationist has chosen to make their "personal beliefs" public.

    10-4. Over.

Share this

Google+
Pinterest
Reddit