There Was No First Human (page 4)

Laika

Is there anything more boring than arguing semantics?

Viviane

People complaining about arguing sematics, maybe? ;)

Anyway, I just don't want to misunderstand. I am struggling to udnerstand why providing a simple "This is what I mean..." is so challenging.

galaxie

Cantleave;...I think the middle bluey red may be a grey area!!

Kate .Isuspect you agree with the premise of the video.Would you agree also there are many many churchgoers who still believe man was created by god from the soil of the earth ( literally ) perhaps these are the types Dawkins refers to, I would have to agree with him.

Oubliette

Interesting explanation of the process.

Maybe it's just me, but Paleolithic man reminded me of Val Kilmer!

Oubliette

Laika, Is there anything more boring than arguing semantics?

Yes, reading posts where people argue semantics.

That's why I always skip those.

Comatose

Personally I like the vdeo. But, on the fundie stuff, I don't think that can apply to someone who is non religious. I don't get it. I think thats why the questions happened Kate. It doesn't make much sense. As I read the thread I kept hoping you were going to explain why you used the word fundie. Saying he is a radical atheist is not the same as being a fundie. Not sure why you used the term radical... Is it just because he says things like they are instead of trying not to hurt feelings? I think its okay for a scientist to be bold and clear with facts.

Laika

Viv, as you know fundamentalist is a term that technically should only apply to a specific group of very literalist christians, but language being what it is now tends to be used as a pejorative term against any group of people considered 'extreme' in their views. Somehow I doubt you would be demanding Katewild explain herself if she referred to 'fundamentalist' Muslims, but if you must know, Katewild simply thinks Dawkins can be overly harsh on people who don't share his religious views, with examples provided in her post 503 (I also agree with her). Happy to help, I hope we can now go back to discussing the far more fascinating subject of human evolution.

Viviane

Laika,

I appreciate your concern, but I would rather not speculate on what Kate means by "fundamentalist". It's a simple enough thing for her to explain if there is defnition she is using.

As far as speculating on what I would or would not do, that is, of course, your right to do, but let's don't pretend it has any basis in knowledge. Besides, a fundamentalist Muslim is a pretty well defined term. As Kate is using the word fundamentalist... not so much. I am just looking for clarity is this murky world.

Laika

but let's don't pretend it has any basis in knowledge.

I didn't, I said 'I doubt' not that 'I know', though you did just confirm I was right. I also think you're being deliberately obtuse, but I don't know that either, nor do I know what you're trying to achieve here. I guess I can argue semantics with the best of them. Meanwhile, I am done here.

Vidiot

Laika - "Is there anything more boring than arguing semantics?"

Eyeball-roll-worthy, anyway.

As far as I'm concerned, once you've resorted to using semantics to defend your argument, you've lost the f**king argument.

Sometimes I think there's a whole subdivision in the WTS's Writing Department that specializes in it.

There Was No First Human

Share this