Richard Dawkins - Inhuman Humanitarian?
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
23-05-2011, 09:58 PM
RE: Richard Dawkins - Inhuman Humanitarian?
I just started reading Dawkins, The Greatest Show on Earth is where I'm starting (great book). I generally do not see his arguments as aggressive, he uses strong language but he rarely seems to use it in an angry tone (yes I've seen interviews and such). I think his responses to his opponents are very scholastic. When a child says something that completely inaccurate you explain the fact that it's inaccurate with them generally slow, and with simple speech in case they need a better understanding.

He debates a lot, has written many books, and is someone who experiences a huge amount of criticism. He isn't giving up on his goals, he keeps going out there, keeps explaining things though people always show they don't care enough to even try to follow him. I think the way he talks is a lecturing tone that is meant to drive the statement into the listener's mind. Generally he has great conviction in his points, and rather than yelling he describes this in a sensible way to denote that he has convictions. If you use weak language people sometimes observe you as weak. He wants to be as definite as he can that people will know his exact opinion. Realize how often he gets quote mined.

I'm not a non believer, I believe in the possibility of anything. I just don't let the actuality of something be determined by a 3rd party.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
24-05-2011, 01:03 AM
RE: Richard Dawkins - Inhuman Humanitarian?
I don't think RD is inhuman, or even rude for that matter. Although my previous posts do reveal that I am quite a fan of him, so I could obviously be biased.
What I think makes people see him as rude, inhuman etc is that he seldom pulls any punches. Religion is usually given more than it's due share of respect in our society, so it is easy to see RD as rude when he denies it any.
As you said, RD is a phenomenally intelligent man. He could easily have used this to make fun of people who were less educated than he is. However, I have never seen him do such a thing.
The number one video on youtube used to depict him as inhuman is the one Embedded here. I for one feel that if we can ignore our indoctrinated reflex to be unnecessarily respectful of the religious, it does not show him as being inhumane at all.




I want to rip off your superstitions and make passionate sense to you
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
24-05-2011, 02:24 AM
 
RE: Richard Dawkins - Inhuman Humanitarian?
(24-05-2011 01:03 AM)Norseman Wrote:  


Lol... This video is anything but rude. It's hilarious! Big Grin
Quote this message in a reply
24-05-2011, 02:12 PM
RE: Richard Dawkins - Inhuman Humanitarian?
I wouldn't say it was hilarious, but I think it might be the only way of saying to someone "Hey, no one is calling you a liar, you are simply wrong". Without compromising your integrity out of a need to be courteous .

I want to rip off your superstitions and make passionate sense to you
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
24-05-2011, 02:25 PM
RE: Richard Dawkins - Inhuman Humanitarian?
The above video wasn't rude. It was rational , and if some people find that cold , it's their problem.
Whatever you believe , no matter how sincere has no bearing on reality whatsoever , it may change the individual but it does not change physical reality.

Atheism is a religion like OFF is a TV channel !!!

Proud of my genetic relatives Big Grin
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
24-05-2011, 02:39 PM
RE: Richard Dawkins - Inhuman Humanitarian?
Agree with the above posters, there's too much pussyfooting around religious belief, as if the mere fact that faith is involved somehow makes it beyond analysis or reproach. If something is plain wrong or irrational, I see no problem calling it with its real name. Again, how do we treat flat earthers? Do we say "oh, you know, I see your point of view, and really you have the right to believe the earth is flat, and it's not like I am trying to convince you otherwise here, and please don't take it personally, but I'd like to introduce you to the possibility that the earth may not be flat". Or do we just say "The earth is not flat, so you are wrong, and if you continue to believe it after I show you evidence, you are stupid". Personally I favor the 2nd approach. As a society, we need to stop tolerating stupidity and ignorance.

English is not my first language. If you think I am being mean, ask me. It could be just a wording problem.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: