Features

Emu · #1

I like Richard Dawkins. There, I said it.

His name is practically a dirty word anymore. People seem to get flared up in discussions about him, that he's just some giant asshole with a beef with religion who's created something akin to a cult of personality around himself. All that's probably true. But I think what makes most people the angriest about Dawkins isn't so much his ideas as it is the generous population of teat-sucking retards who latch on to him. He has a very unfortunate collection of hero-worshipping idiots who will criticize Christians for being naive and narrow-minded while behaving in much the same narrow-minded matter when people criticise Dawkins or atheism in general. I wish I could find a post made on his website I saw earlier urging people to distribute copies of The God Delusion as one would distribute Gideon bibles, apparently without irony. I get the idea they thought they were being clever, while they were in fact falling into the same crap that they criticize Christians for; the EXACT same crap. It's ridiculous.

For a long time I thought had pretty much brought all this on himself, but the more I've been looking in to it, it seems like this hero-worship has been foisted on to him. He hasn't really made much of an effort to dissociate himself from it, but from what I've seen he doesn't actively condone it, either.

I guess what I'm saying is that I don't honestly find myself disagreeing with most of what Dawkins says, but I abhor his fans, and I think that's the attitude of most people. I remember a discussion on this board about him a few months ago when The God Delusion was released. What's your opinion on him?

Preechr · #2

Science Damn Him

Emu · #3

I found it really ironic that Matt and Trey made fun of Dawkins the way they did when they're both even bigger self-serving, self-righteous assholes than he'll ever be. Hell, I would have thought they'd love the guy.

theapportioner · #4

What's the big deal with distributing Dawkins' books? I see no problem with that, or if someone felt like screening "An Inconvenient Truth" at a local auditorium, or handing out "Gay? Fine By Me" t-shirts. If the message is a worthy one, by all means, proselytize it.

It's not the exact same crap.

El Blanco · #5

Yes, it is, because of the attitude some of them have about it. Its not about Dawkins or religion or anything like that.

Its about some stupid, lonely, tools trying to latch onto something they see as hip and edgy and pioneering (even though it may be none of those things) and make other people feel bad for not being on the bandwagon. We have it here with OaO and Geggy.

Emu · #6

Quote:

Originally Posted by theapportioner

What's the big deal with distributing Dawkins' books? I see no problem with that, or if someone felt like screening "An Inconvenient Truth" at a local auditorium, or handing out "Gay? Fine By Me" t-shirts. If the message is a worthy one, by all means, proselytize it.

It's not the exact same crap.

It may be a worthy message, but the way people treat it is the same way that people criticise Christians for doing. People accuse Dawkins (or more accurately, his fans) of treating atheism like a new organized religion, and they really kind of do.

It puts a bad taste in my mouth to call atheism a "movement," but that seems to be what it's turning in to anymore. I'm not sure what to think of it.

Rongi · #7

I've said it before, but i think it bears repeating. Bertrand Russel did almost the same thing as Dawkins 80 years ago, and if you were to bring his name up to a common athiest, they wouldnt know who the hell he is.

To be fair, I have yet to read The God Delusion, so maybe Dawkins brings something new to the whole athiest ideology. I cant see what else he could say that hasnt been said already though.

Emu · #8

His argument in The God Delusion is basically a lot of what Russell did re-written for contemporary audiences. Which isn't a bad thing. He makes use of the celestial teapot argument specifically.

DeadKennedys · #9

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rongi

I've said it before, but i think it bears repeating. Bertrand Russel did almost the same thing as Dawkins 80 years ago, and if you were to bring his name up to a common athiest, they wouldnt know who the hell he is.

War doesn't determine who is right -- only who is left.

I like the guy

derrida · #10

The only good thing I can say about Dawkins is his reporting on examples of religious stupidity, brutality, etc. is exhaustive. That said, that aspect of his writing contains some significant misrepresentations, such as his belief that "Loyalist" and "Nationalist" are mere code words for "Protestant" and "Catholic." Does anyone seriously believe that if religion were abolished that conflict would cease?

Even ignoring the cliche that "SCIENCE IS A RELIGION TOO HURR DURR" and the incongruity of a professed anti-dogmatist equating the most reasoned theology with the most unthinking fundamentalism, Dawkins is himself convinced of teleology (without a hint of irony). So, yeah it would be nice if this Official Public Science Fag of Oxford was, you know, an actual scientist, lacking predjudice and devoted to reason, but no, he's just another one in a long line of british pseudo-intellectual cocktail party rationalist queens.