I havent posted this to the site. I might, but not now.

[firecrest]

Dear Mr Dawkins

Its doubtful you will read or reply to this but I felt I should write it anyway.   ive been a member of this site around 6 months and like many people here, i came looking for a place on the internet where I could discuss atheism and rational thinking.     The forums on this site have been an eye-opener and not for all the right

Comments

[staggeronward]

The difference between the Dawkins camp and our (ever shrinking) band of heathens is that, well, you and I at least, see good that needs doing and we do it because we recognize that, without that belief that "everything happens for a reason" bull, WE are the ones in charge of becoming the change we want to see in the world

"Oh my Science!"

[justreadingct]

Well...I agree that he's a jackass, and I don't know what he shot off on the radio, but I don't think he wants to promote a belief system without morality. He thinks altruistic genes have been selected through evolution, and we're naturally empathy...which is spoken like someone that's spent way too much time in the ivory tower. He's has been very active in the Ape's Right's Movement and I'll give him credit for that.

That being said, I read part of The God Delusion at Borders (and some old lady kept coming up to me and tellng me he was evil, but that's another story). He goes on about how religion always subverts science, creates fanatcism, causes discrmination, blah, blah, blah. I might agree with him - if the entire world was populated by Landover Baptist. I have lots of religious friends and colleagues that do not meet his descriptions. Most intelligent people learn that stereotypes are bad when they're fairly young

Re: "Oh my Science!"

[staggeronward]

yeah I should have mentioned that I'm only familiar with him through random news clips and that interview, and that interview was just completely focused on how stupid and backward religious people are, and how religion and science are mutually exclusive (which is utter poppycock). He was snide with callers and just generally unpleasent. His behavior gave me the notion that he believed morality and science were mutually exclusive as well.

Re: "Oh my Science!"

[greatgreybeast]

Dawkins has been around for a long time, and I've always respected him as a scientist and progressive thinker in general. He is, after all, the creator of the concept of memetics, which is revolutionizing a number of fields. Recently he's become a lot more visible as he's ramped up this fight against religion, and I think he's kind of overextended himself. He seems kind of awkward in the encounters I've seen him in, as if he's become overly defensive under the limelight. Perhaps he should leave the politicking to somebody else. Perhaps it doesn't need to be done at all. But, frankly, I agree with most of his conclusions. I believe there is compelling positive evidence that God isn't real, at least not in any form that Christians would claim as their own. And even if it is impossible to prove God doesn't exist, it is certainly possible to prove that a number of other religious beliefs aren't true. I wouldn't go so far as to call anybody who believes the world is 6,000 years old 'stupid,' because the social pressures behind

Re: "Oh my Science!"

[justreadingct]

I really liked The Selfish Gene and The Blindwatchmaker. I liked him as a person until I read about half of The God Delusion. Dawkins had insufficient understanding of the religious concepts he attacking and it shows by his overbroad generalizations. He's said that wrote the book to help improve atheist public image. I don't think that this book is going to do that.

We need Carl Sagan back, man.

Re: "Oh my Science!"

[firecrest]

yeah I felt the same way. the god dellusion was thin on the ground, though he does specify he is narrowing it down to simply biblical gods its not correct to call religious people unrational

Re: "Oh my Science!"

[justreadingct]

Yeah. I've been reading articles on the possible "God gene." Dean Hamer (who is the quasi-founder of this research) has a much better understanding of faith than Dawkins. He noted that there isn't a record of an early secular civilization and notes that the impluse to believe in a higher power may be natural. He also notes how much comfort it often brings people - a concept that Dawkins failed to grasp.

While I agree with Robin that people who have faith in a supernatual being that there is no evidence for probably aren't thinking clearly, I don't really see faith in the supernatural as unnatural. We might possbily be the evolutionary abnormalities.:) Although it does seem that even secular humans need to have faith in something - be it each other, progress, the justice system, etc - to keep from slipping into despair.

Re: "Oh my Science!"

[firecrest]

Also people often forget belief in the supernatural isnt an `irrational` belief

Re: "Oh my Science!"

[justreadingct]

I also don't think belief in the supernatural is actually irrational. It's so deeply ingrained in our culture, perhaps even our genes. Humans are social animals and we always try to find common ground to connect to others on. Having some sort of belief in something is often that common ground.

I thought I saw a ghost once. When I was 5, my mother was obsessed with our basement being haunted. One day I was playing down there and I turned around quickly. I saw a woman in a white flowing robe looking at me, so I ran upstairs screaming. My mom, being kind of nuts, told me that she had "felt" the woman too and I must also have the gift.

I don't think I saw an actual ghost. I think I imagined it because people in my family were always talking about things like ghost and I was a creative child. Given the cultural history of ghosts, most people have an idea what a ghost should look like.

Re: "Oh my Science!"

[justreadingct]

I was just thinking I didn't finish this comment.

Anyway, I don't mean to imply anyone that sees something supernatural is crazy. I don't think there is anything outside the natural world, but that doesn't inherently mean us humans understand everything about what is natural and what is not.