Richard Dawkins has had a Stroke

by cofty 74 Replies latest social current

  • slimboyfat
    What would be the next step - complaining about the people downvoting you?

    Yeah but... I didn't do that. What I did was remove a joke that wasn't appreciated. Seems strange to call me out for something I might have done but didn't. I wish Dawkins well but I don't think he has knowledge on the God issue to impart. And I don't like dislikes being misinterpreted. I told a joke no one found funny and I removed it. It was intended to be an "inside" or obscure joke not spiteful. I am not a Christian or a believer in God by the way, I don't think.

  • Landy
    2) being instructed by Landy what a dislike means I think it probably meant something else

    How the fuck should it be interpreted when you dislike the post of someone wishing a person well?

  • slimboyfat

    Because it's obviously not the wishing well that's objectionable, but the idea that he must live on because he is especially knowledgable. I think a generous interpretation of the dislikes would have read them that way. If the comment had simply wished Dawkins well I doubt anyone would have disliked it in the first place. I had no intention of liking the comment. The only reason I went back and liked it was because I found your interpretation obnoxious! It's annoying when others impute obviously wrong motives to promote their own agenda.

  • Landy

    I didn't comment that people hadn't liked it. I didn't 'like' it (and fwiw have never yet and never plan to click 'dislike' on any post (except perhaps by accident on the ipad)) - my comment was to those who had actively chose to dislike it.

    Nowt as queer as folk.

  • slimboyfat
    Yeah well I didn't dislike it until you gave an obviously false spin on why other people were disliking it, so I joined them because of your comment. Because it seemed obvious to me that they were not disliking wishing well an ill man, as you claimed, what they were disliking was the idea that Dawkins should live in order to teach us something. That's a problematic sentiment for a couple of reasons. 1) I don't think Dawkins' output on God is enlightening and 2) surely the main reason to want someone to live should be because they are of value in themselves, not simply that they are a stalwart for a particular ideological position.
  • MarkofCane

    I wish the man well and a quick recovery.


  • Landy


    1) It may be enlighting to some, but that's beside the point.

    2) His life is probably of value to his family. The fact it's dawkins is irrelevant - it could be anyone. The basic tenets of human decency allow us to pause for a just a moment and wish anyone a speedy recovery - whether it's the bloke next door, the president of the US, or dawkins. The fact that some disliked it says a lot more about them than it does about dawkins.

  • Village Idiot
    Village Idiot

    On an interesting note, there's this article from CNN:

    Church of England criticized over prayers for atheist Richard Dawkins

  • Simon

    slimboyfat you're being a douche. You disliked a post that was voicing their admiration for someone and wishing them a speedy recovery. Stop trying to spin it into something else to justify your callous and obvious "playing the man" instead of responding to the post.

    There are a few people who do this A LOT and it's frankly annoying. Get a clue.

  • cofty

    I understand why creationists would dislike Richard Dawkins. IMO a lot more just don't get him. I think it may be a cultural difference that makes him difficult to read. His background is very Middle-class English Academia. I really don't see it when people accuse him of being arrogant.

    He is committed to what is true and has no patience for bullshit. I think he is a very kind and compassionate person who is angered by the sort of abuse of power we see in religion and has zero tolerance for wilful ignorance. I kind of relate to that.

    His "Selfish Gene" way of understanding natural selection is still unsurpassed. "The Blind Watchmaker" was very influential in my thinking, it demolishes arguments from design in a way no other book has before or since.

    If you really want to appreciate his genius and depth of his knowledge read "The Ancestor's Tale". When it comes to criticising religion he is not in the Premier League IMO.

    why exactly is this one special again that he merits his own personal post on the state of his health? Is he a close relative? Do I detect a mild case or personality worship? Idolatry? Fan Boy-ism - Godzoo

    Godzoo if I heard that a mutual acquaintance had suffered a stroke I would let you know. Would you accuse me of idolatry for doing so? Dawkins is a public figure whose work has been important to millions of people including many on this forum. Why is it strange that we would comment on his stroke? Don't be so churlish.

Share this