ali smack Posted February 11, 2013 #1 Share Posted February 11, 2013 I am not religious myself and to be frank it doesn't interest me. But I have never understood Richard Dawkins fanatical hatred and ( Let's be frank here ) Ignorance of religion. And it isn't just Christianity he hates. He hates Islam, Judaism and even Buddhism. He has very little knowledge of religion and is very arrogant with his views. He does have all the bench marks of a fanatic. I wonder why he has such hatred of religion. http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-2253640/Battle-professors-Richard-Dawkins-branded-fundamentalist-expert-God-particle.html Even some scientists think he goes OTT. To say raising a child catholic is worse than child abuse is ignorant and nonsensical. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
White Crane Feather Posted February 11, 2013 #2 Share Posted February 11, 2013 (edited) I am not religious myself and to be frank it doesn't interest me. But I have never understood Richard Dawkins fanatical hatred and ( Let's be frank here ) Ignorance of religion. And it isn't just Christianity he hates. He hates Islam, Judaism and even Buddhism. He has very little knowledge of religion and is very arrogant with his views. He does have all the bench marks of a fanatic. I wonder why he has such hatred of religion. http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-2253640/Battle-professors-Richard-Dawkins-branded-fundamentalist-expert-God-particle.html Even some scientists think he goes OTT. To say raising a child catholic is worse than child abuse is ignorant and nonsensical. Dawkins is pretty irrelevant. He learned a Long time ago that controversy makes money. That's is all that he is really about. Edited February 11, 2013 by Seeker79 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ever Learning Posted February 11, 2013 #3 Share Posted February 11, 2013 he is quite fanatical Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
+ouija ouija Posted February 11, 2013 #4 Share Posted February 11, 2013 Before I answer that you'll have to give me the definition of 'fantantical' ...... thanks. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
keithisco Posted February 11, 2013 #5 Share Posted February 11, 2013 (edited) I think the point that he is making is that raising a child to believe in a Supernatural Omnipotent Being, thereby ignoring and / or denigrating the real advances that Science has made in improving the lives of mankind (with no Religious input), is utterly devoid of logic and reason. It is a "Stunting" of real scientific endeavour Edited February 11, 2013 by keithisco 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spartan max2 Posted February 11, 2013 #6 Share Posted February 11, 2013 when i first started looking in to other view points and stuff i tried reading his book god delusion and it turned me off so fast. i didnt read all the book. He just sounds way to bitter and insulting. If you have the truth no your side then you do not have to be insulting. Wish the politicans would learn that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sean93 Posted February 11, 2013 #7 Share Posted February 11, 2013 (edited) He's a bit of both. Reasoonable at time while other times a bit over board...just like most people. Edited February 11, 2013 by Sean93 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eldorado Posted February 11, 2013 #8 Share Posted February 11, 2013 A money-making atheist is what he is. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sean93 Posted February 11, 2013 #9 Share Posted February 11, 2013 That being said, he has a point when hw says that raising a kid to believe that such horrors as hell exist for their bad actions is ****ed up and is one of the reasons why I say that no kid should ever be indoctrinated into a religion and should find it themselves...I gurantee there would be a lot less mindless, uneducated fanatics out there. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JesseCuster Posted February 11, 2013 #10 Share Posted February 11, 2013 His popular writings on evolution and science in general are fantastic - Blind Watchmaker, River out of Eden, Climbing Mount Improbable, The Ancestor's Tale, Unweaving the Rainbow, etc. - he really has a knack for making you understand evolution. He comes across as a bit of a smug **** when I see him discussing religion though, even though I agree with a lot of what he says. 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ever Learning Posted February 11, 2013 #11 Share Posted February 11, 2013 (edited) I think the point that he is making is that raising a child to believe in a Supernatural Omnipotent Being, thereby ignoring and / or denigrating the real advances that Science has made in improving the lives of mankind (with no Religious input), is utterly devoid of logic and reason. It is a "Stunting" of real scientific endeavour in what way is it stunting, i know both theorys through and through. i believe in the supernatural due to being an atheist and then having relgious experiences. there is an omnipotent being you have just missed out on these experiences and speak arrogantly because of it. i was humbled by finding out about it. i read alot and i only had a craving for knowledge because i had these experiences. Edited February 11, 2013 by Armchair Educated Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hasina Posted February 11, 2013 #12 Share Posted February 11, 2013 When he convinces someone to blow themselves up to kill others cause it's the 'right thing to do', then I'll call him a fanatic. 6 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scowl Posted February 11, 2013 #13 Share Posted February 11, 2013 The media tends to ignore atheists. Dawkins doesn't like being ignored so he says outrageous things to get attention. I wish he didn't do that. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eight bits Posted February 11, 2013 #14 Share Posted February 11, 2013 Howdy, Star (Love the Butch & Sundance avatar) What's the poor man to do? Everybody needs a hobby, and we all know that he isn't a stamp collector. 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Star of the Sea Posted February 11, 2013 #15 Share Posted February 11, 2013 Howdy, Star (Love the Butch & Sundance avatar) What's the poor man to do? Everybody needs a hobby, and we all know that he isn't a stamp collector. LOL 8ty!!! I could think of better things to do with my time... like UM Anyhow, Butch Cassidy and the Sundance Kid is one of my 'all time favourite' films! Robert Redford *sigh* 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
+Sherapy Posted February 12, 2013 #16 Share Posted February 12, 2013 Yes, I think Dawkins approach is extreme/perpetuates intolerance ( whether he intends this as the effect-- I do not know without knowing him personally.) I think one can be an athiest and be tolerant of others path even if it isn't one they would chose. Hoping all is well for you Star ! Waves to 8ty! 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Religulous Posted February 12, 2013 #17 Share Posted February 12, 2013 (edited) He is an individual who simply wants the truth, and is intolerable of nonsense. What is wrong with that? I am a huge fan of his work -- I have an immense amount of respect for him both as a person, and as a scientist. Take into consideration the amount of atrocities carried out, and still being carried out, in the name of religion. It is banal, and irrelevant to modern society. Edited February 12, 2013 by Religulous 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
+Link of Hyrule Posted February 12, 2013 #18 Share Posted February 12, 2013 I think Dawkins is just arrogant in what he believes and is intelligent enough to make money off that arrogance. Several years ago I borrowed the God Delusion from a friend. I didn't read it all, but I did read parts of it. One thing that stuck in my mind as I read it was his claims about children and belief. On one hand, early on in the book he ridiculed the idea of "religious children". He says that kids and pre-teens are not developed enough to understand things such as God and those kids that believe do so only because their parents tell them and they accept it. On the other hand, at another point in the book, Dawkins says that ever since he was 9 years old (I think it was 9) he knew knew that there was no God. In other words, there is such a thing as atheist children, but there is no such thing as religious children. His basis for this view is nothing but his own opinion. As I said, arrogant. ~ Regards, PA 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beckys_Mom Posted February 12, 2013 #19 Share Posted February 12, 2013 I think Dawkins is just arrogant in what he believes and is intelligent enough to make money off that arrogance. I think you will find a lot of arrogant people seem to be the ones who wind up stinking rich from their arrogance, and you will notice a lot of religious people who are without arrogance remain poor.. It's a crazy mixed up world we live in.. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sean93 Posted February 12, 2013 #20 Share Posted February 12, 2013 (edited) A lot of these comments seem to be attacking his wealth...seriously? Grow up. He wrote one book that mainly deals with God 'The God Delusion'. Before that he was well established as a prominent scientist and sold millions of copies of his other books which are mainly about evoultion, natural selection and science in general. It was inevitable that books like 'God Delusion' would be controversial and sell a lot because of that reason, don't all books in that regard be surrounded by scandal? People seem to be confusing Dawkins as a man mainly out to get god when his major area of focus is Evolution. I rarely hear of anyone complain about the wealth of major religions of the world or the stupid idiotoc fact that they actually SELL the word of god in shops...sell the word of god...shouldn't they be free? Same for those charaltans that write books on their NDE'S and make millions from it. I like Dawkins' works but hate the fact that he surrounds himself with those nobs at the 'Athiest Convention' and the likes. Edited February 12, 2013 by Sean93 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tiggs Posted February 12, 2013 #21 Share Posted February 12, 2013 He says that kids and pre-teens are not developed enough to understand things such as God and those kids that believe do so only because their parents tell them and they accept it. On the other hand, at another point in the book, Dawkins says that ever since he was 9 years old (I think it was 9) he knew knew that there was no God. In other words, there is such a thing as atheist children, but there is no such thing as religious children. His basis for this view is nothing but his own opinion. Dawkins claims to have been a Christian until his mid-teens. So - probably not 9, I'm guessing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
+Liquid Gardens Posted February 12, 2013 #22 Share Posted February 12, 2013 Yes, I think Dawkins approach is extreme/perpetuates intolerance ( whether he intends this as the effect-- I do not know without knowing him personally.) I think one can be an athiest and be tolerant of others path even if it isn't one they would chose. Hoping all is well for you Star ! Waves to 8ty! You may be correct, but playing nice has a long history of accomplishing about nothing on minority issues, and at least in the US, atheists are pretty much the most reviled minority. Suffragettes, black civil rights movements, gay rights movements, all of these definitely involved extreme measures and some amount of intolerance, as earlier efforts to be gentle and considerate were not effective. I don't think you can divorce these comments from popular atheists from this environment anymore than you can get an accurate understanding of what someone like Malcolm X was agitating for without of that context. Although I didn't really like his books on atheism just because I thought they were scattered and boring, I guess I don't have as big a problem with his arrogance, extremism and intolerance, as it is dwarfed in intensity and frequency by theists' statements towards atheism and atheists. I guess I typically see his intolerance not projected at people but at bad ideas, and I don't think intolerance towards bad ideas is necessarily wrong, and is somewhat inherent in science. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ali smack Posted February 13, 2013 Author #23 Share Posted February 13, 2013 When he convinces someone to blow themselves up to kill others cause it's the 'right thing to do', then I'll call him a fanatic. a fanatic isn't just someone who is a terrorist. It's anyone who has an extreme view/or hatred for something. Evangelists are fanatics. And so is Richard Dawkins. He has an extreme hatred of religion, and some could say his views are fanatical or certainly bordering on them 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ali smack Posted February 13, 2013 Author #24 Share Posted February 13, 2013 I don't care for religion myself but even I think some of the things he says are a bit extreme. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hasina Posted February 13, 2013 #25 Share Posted February 13, 2013 (edited) a fanatic isn't just someone who is a terrorist. It's anyone who has an extreme view/or hatred for something. Evangelists are fanatics. And so is Richard Dawkins. He has an extreme hatred of religion, and some could say his views are fanatical or certainly bordering on them When he ruins someone's life, when he's done something horrible, I'll call him a fanatic. So what if he has a hatred of religion, the majority of religions are based around forcing their views on others (or guilt tripping you into their views), he's just taking the fight to them, on their own terms. Through bigotry and intolerance. Edited February 13, 2013 by Hasina 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now