"The arrogance and intolerance of the atheists, exemplified by Prof Dawkins, is their Achilles heel" (page 4)

EntirelyPossible

And I as you know, I put "bible" in quotation for a reason.

From your link, the meaning varies on context. For instance, in the U.S., it is often a pejorative. In which sense did you mean it?

PSacramento

I think that Dawkins calls himself a "Darwinist" no? Even been called "Darwin's rottweiller" yes?

Dawking, if I remember correctly, holds Darwin in very high regard as he does the book Origin of species.

When I say Darwinist I mean someome that is a proponent that life has NO purpose other to propegate itself and I think the Dawkins states that, yes?

EntirelyPossible

When I say Darwinist I mean someome that is a proponent that life has NO purpose other to propegate itself and I think the Dawkins states that, yes?

I don't know. It's clear you used that phrase and didn't even know what you mean my it, yes?

FlyingHighNow

Oh my !!! How us Atheists have suddenly seen our Chief Guru exposed as a Johnny-know-nothing !

PSacramento

Well, he called himself in in his bbok the Devil's chaplin, yes?

That in his book, the selflish gene, he says that propegattion of the species is the purpose of life.

So, it seems that He, Dawkins is a Darwinist in the since that He beleives Life has no other purpose other than propegation.

Some are Darwinists because they believe that natural selection and survival of the fittest are the sole/primary agents of evolution ( as Dawrin claimed) and others such as "neo-darwinists" believe that other factors are at play.

EntirelyPossible

Well, he called himself in in his bbok the Devil's chaplin, yes?

Citation, yes?

That in his book, the selflish gene, he says that propegattion of the species is the purpose of life.

Well, not you've gone from "no other pupose" to simply purpose without a single citation, yes?

So, it seems that He, Dawkins is a Darwinist in the since that He beleives Life has no other purpose other than propegation.

Actually, it doesn't quite seem that way at all yet, no?

Some are Darwinists because they believe that natural selection and survival of the fittest are the sole/primary agents of evolution ( as Dawrin claimed) and others such as "neo-darwinists" believe that other factors are at play.

There is a wide range of thoughts on the matter and the word can be used a pejorative and you weren't clear how you meant it (and are still waffling around on it quite a bit), yes?

PSacramento

http://www.beliefnet.com/News/Science-Religion/2003/12/Rebelling-Against-Our-Selfish-Genes.aspx?p=2

I prefer to agree that natural selection is the dominant force in biological evolution, admit its unpleasantness, and fight against it as a human being. I hear the bleak sermon of the Devil's Chaplain as a call to arms. As an academic scientist I am a passionate Darwinian, believing that natural selection is, if not the only driving force in evolution, certainly the only known force capable of producing the illusion of purpose which so strikes all who contemplate nature. But at the same time as I support Darwinism as a scientist, I am a passionate anti-Darwinian when it comes to politics and how we should conduct our human affairs. I have always held true to the closing words of my first book, 'We, alone on earth, can rebel against the tyranny of the selfish replicators.'

TheClarinetist

Facepalm @ that article.

PSacramento

Actually, it doesn't quite seem that way at all yet, no?

I think I understand what you were trying to point out and I apologise if I was giving the impression that Dawkins believes SOCIALLY that life is only about propegating the species.

I don't want you to think that I mean that DAwkins is a Darwinist in the "crude and rude" sense as used by some creationists ( remember I agree with evolution), I simply meant that He is a Darwinist in that he agrees with Darwins scientific view of natural selection.

Socially, like the link and exert I posted, Dawkins beleives that there is and should be more to life than just "gene propagation".

I want to make that clear.

cofty

This thread is an example of people who prefer to misunderstand others so they can score points.

in his book, the selflish gene, he says that propegattion (sic) of the species is the purpose of life.

You either didnt read the book, didn't make it to the end or chose to misrepresent it.

"The arrogance and intolerance of the atheists, exemplified by Prof Dawkins, is their Achilles heel"

Share this