How many of you like Dawkins

  • Thread starter Thread starter dumbseeker
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
D

dumbseeker

Guest
I am reading Dawkins’s books lately and I watch a lot of his videos. I think he’s a rational atheist. How many of you like him? Why or why not?
 
Started reading his book this past summer – hoping for a challenge to my faith by someone seemingly well-educated and well-respected. Couldn’t get through more than a third of the book. I found Dawkins anything but scientific or rational. He repeatedly switched from quasi-scientific, semi-rational arguments to judgmentalism and essentially name-calling. There was no respect for any belief system other than his own. While I believe in the triune God I do respect that others have different beliefs and would never stoop to belittling them for those beliefs.
 
JRWLPC said:
Started reading his book this past summer – hoping for a challenge to my faith by someone seemingly well-educated and well-respected. Couldn’t get through more than a third of the book. I found Dawkins anything but scientific or rational. He repeatedly switched from quasi-scientific, semi-rational arguments to judgmentalism and essentially name-calling. There was no respect for any belief system other than his own. While I believe in the triune God I do respect that others have different beliefs and would never stoop to belittling them for those beliefs.
Click to expand...
Did his works change your faith?
 
I read his selfish gene way back and quite enjoyed it. It seemed to present a refreshing “genes eye view” of evolution. THe mistake he makes in it, in my opinion, is to go that one stage to far whereby he ends up presenting the “selfish gene” not as a different perpective on reality but as the fundamental reality itself. This is scientific reductionism. The world is not inhabited by genes; selfish altruistic or otherwise - it is inhabited by cats and dogs… - and, oh yes - us

I guess the thing that irritates people most about him is his “evangelical spirit”. Why is it such an issue for him. Why does he keep sounding off about it (other than the fact that he has made a pretty darn good living out of doing it…)

A genuiine atheist should, I always thing, have something of a laissez fait attitude to us poor misguided believers (hey if that’s your bag, if that’s what does it for you…) There, is. however, nothing laissez fait about Richard Dawkins.

Still - as it says in the good book - better that than “lukewarm”…
🙂

… oh and as for “memes” - the phrase “category error!!!” screams out
 
dumbseeker said:
I am reading Dawkins’s books lately and I watch a lot of his videos. I think he’s a rational atheist. How many of you like him? Why or why not?
Click to expand...
I totally love Richard Dawkins! He’s so cool! I once saw him on Bill Maher’s Real Time (I think that’s what it’s called) on YouTube. It’s just so funny the way he refers to God(s) as “imaginary friends.”

So far, the only book I’ve read from him was “The God Delusion.” It really got my brain pumping. I look forward to reading more, but I’ve got quite a waiting list of books that I have yet to read.

If you’re really interested in getting an idea about how many people have converted because of his work, you can go to his website:

www.richarddawkins.net

Go to the Community tab and look for “Converts’ Corner.”

Ironically Yours, Blade and Blood
 
He’s a brilliant scientist, and I respect his work in the biological fields. He also has the most beautiful speaking voice.
 
dumbseeker said:
Did his works change your faith?
Click to expand...
As a matter of fact reading a third of The God Delusion prompted me to read more about the early Church, the Church Fathers, etc. – only serving to strengthen my beliefs. The God Delusion certainly didn’t convince me to turn to atheism.
 
pilchard said:
A genuiine atheist should, I always thing, have something of a laissez fait attitude to us poor misguided believers (hey if that’s your bag, if that’s what does it for you…) There, is. however, nothing laissez fait about Richard Dawkins.
Click to expand...
A “genuine atheist”? I’m not really sure what that means…if someone thinks that a belief is a dangerous superstition, why should that person not make a case for it?

How would doing so make that person any less of an anything, let alone an atheist?
 
how would a catholic think of him? Do the catholics recognize his intelligence or rationality?
 
MegaTherion said:
A “genuine atheist”? I’m not really sure what that means…if someone thinks that a belief is a dangerous superstition, why should that person not make a case for it?

How would doing so make that person any less of an anything, let alone an atheist?
Click to expand...
“genuine atheist” - someone who is comfortable with his worldview. Someone who is intellectually driven rather that emotionally driven (for whatever reason - had a bad experience with the church, doesn’t want to face up to the perceived demands that christianity might make

That sort of thing.

I guess I’m doing a bit of reverse engineering here. To paraphrase Shakespeare
“Methinks Dawkins doth protest too much”
 
No, I don’t like him. He’s very smug and his arguments are self-aggrandizing, coy, and frankly not very good. An atheist that conducted himself with balance, and that won respect from many people of different belief systems was Anthony Flew. Of course, he finally succombed to an acceptance of Deism, though never a personal god.

When I think of Richard Dawkins, I will always think of the mannerisms that epitomize his false sense of self-importance and inner insecurity in the Ben Stein documentary. Just watch him, it’s so revealing. His too-confident handshake when Ben Stein sits down… his almost whiny and insecure responses to Ben when he asks him, “So, you don’t believe in any gods, right? Do you believe in any of the Hindu gods…” There was no bombshell moment there, (apart from Dawkins absurd tangent into ET seeding of life on earth), it was just the mannerisms, the way both men conducted themselves that struck me. Ben seemed so much more confident and relaxed, though he had nothing to expose Dawkins with.
 
Et_Cetera said:
He’s a brilliant scientist, and I respect his work in the biological fields. He also has the most beautiful speaking voice.
Click to expand...
Seconded.

His discovery of the field of Memetics is absolutely ingenious.

The God Delusion didn’t introduce any major breakthroughs, but did a good job of summarizing the non-theist position in a rational manner.
 
pilchard said:
“genuine atheist” - someone who is comfortable with his worldview. Someone who is intellectually driven rather that emotionally driven (for whatever reason - had a bad experience with the church, doesn’t want to face up to the perceived demands that christianity might make

That sort of thing.

I guess I’m doing a bit of reverse engineering here. To paraphrase Shakespeare
“Methinks Dawkins doth protest too much”
Click to expand...
But by that logic, anyone outspoken about any position they hold would have to be considered “uncomfortable with [their] worldview [or with that particular position].” Are you saying that the only “genuine” people are the ones who don’t discuss their positions? That’s just silly.

Though it is a convenient way to dismiss someone whose arguments you don’t want to deal with.

Dawkins, as far as I know, did not have a bad experience with the church, nor does he find Christianity “demanding” (any more than the belief in Thor or Wotan is “demanding”). He has rational reasons for thinking that all religion is false and harmful.
 
Angels_Unaware said:
No, I don’t like him. He’s very smug and his arguments are self-aggrandizing, coy, and frankly not very good. An atheist that conducted himself with balance, and that won respect from many people of different belief systems was Anthony Flew. Of course, he finally succombed to an acceptance of Deism, though never a personal god.

When I think of Richard Dawkins, I will always think of the mannerisms that epitomize his false sense of self-importance and inner insecurity in the Ben Stein documentary. Just watch him, it’s so revealing. His too-confident handshake when Ben Stein sits down… his almost whiny and insecure responses to Ben when he asks him, “So, you don’t believe in any gods, right? Do you believe in any of the Hindu gods…” There was no bombshell moment there, (apart from Dawkins absurd tangent into ET seeding of life on earth), it was just the mannerisms, the way both men conducted themselves that struck me. Ben seemed so much more confident and relaxed, though he had nothing to expose Dawkins with.
Click to expand...
Is that the only exposure you have to Dawkins?
 
Et_Cetera said:
He’s a brilliant scientist, and I respect his work in the biological fields. He also has the most beautiful speaking voice.
Click to expand...
Oh my goodness! Yes, he does! Dawkins sounds so gentle!

Ironically Yours. ❤️
 
Angels_Unaware said:
No.
Click to expand...
Actually, it surprises me that anyone would even ask that, unless they had a very arrogant presumption that anyone not bowled over by his arguments must have no exposure to his arguments or to his speaking style.

I think it’s pretty obvious that he’s always like that, and it strikes me as not at all compelling. He says things like, “you’re a Christian because you were brought up to be a Christian in a Christian nation”… just bad arguments. Just stupid, arrogant thinking.

I’m not at all impressed with the quality of his speaking voice, either.
 
Angels Unaware:
"… just bad arguments. Just stupid, arrogant thinking.

I’m not at all impressed with the quality of his speaking voice, either."

I couldn’t agree with you more…
I find him arrogant and quite unconvincing.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top