May 272010
A clip from Richard Dawkins’ Lecture at UC Berkeley: bit.ly – via www.AtheistMedia.com
A clip from Richard Dawkins’ Lecture at UC Berkeley: bit.ly – via www.AtheistMedia.com
| © 2012 CRYPTE.NET | Suffusion WordPress theme by Sayontan Sinha |
Powered by Yahoo! Answers
You have to love Richard Dawkins. The man that made me realise I was an atheist all along.
@felonarose1
and two:
asmuch crap as we give it, the bible is actually an amazing book.
No one believes in the gods of the iliad anymore, or of the egyption book of the dead. Yet the invisible jewish god lives on. and he and his invisible twin cousin the muslim god still rule most of the world.
And though for thousands of years nations have tried to “rid the world of these delusions,” it lives on. And it will out live us.
at worlds end, there will be christians, jews, muslims, athiests…
two things.
First off, a lot of truth is cultural. Primarily in the area of morality and right and wrong.
Like it or not, that is how life is.
Slavery, polygamy, tyranny, homosexuality, alcohol, drugs, animal abuse, and murder just to name a few.(I still am amazed that Polygamy is considered wrong in america today.)
These are considered black and white truths, yet they are cultural.
just a thought, if religion is purely cultural, then wouldn’t Dawkins be a christian?
or is he an acception
@JMackeyIII
The whole point of Dawkin’s presentation was to illustrate the absurdity of cultural “facts.” Evolution only explains how life developed. How life began is a completely different area of study. We have a few ideas, but we cannot put any of them forward as fact until we have verifiable evidence to support them.
@JMackeyIII
There is no evidence supporting the supernatural claims of any “holy” book. They were written by ancient tribes and contain some good teachings among lots of horrible barbarism and contradictions. Their stories may contain some pieces of valid history, but should be taken with a grain of salt since obviously tribes would alter and exaggerate their stories in their own favor. Mythology should be taken for what it is, and we should rely on our own observations to determine the truth.
@GreatestJason
why do you think the christian world view is an unquestioned belief? what is causing you to think that way? My beliefs are not unquestioned and the answers are substantiated. Most people require more of the CWV claims then they do of evolutions claims. When most of evolutionary claims are contrary yet post claims of the CWV. dawkins is not fighting this fight, he is making jokes and slinging poor jokes, which would not be accepted is said by a christian leader or apologist.
@alibasheer
if that is his point then he is wrong. Religion is cultural, and that is what can lead those of a particular world view into the errors of religion. a world view addresses these main issues origin, destiny, purpose, and morality. Evolution struggles to deliver on the first and neglects the other 3. And since your destiny, purpose and morality are intertwined amongst the relationships with people around you, it becomes cultural. World views are cultural.
Can also be answered in that one must get the other world views that are ‘wrong’ out of the way, and get people to stop extolling flawed logic, in order to open them up to another in the first place.
It’s also a very lengthy corrective measure, addressing many flawed viewpoints and opinions of what his ‘viewpoint’ is from other viewpoints.
@JMackeyIII
Given a wide variety of contrary claims, we will need to examine the evidence through science and critical thinking to determine which one is true. Evolution has survived 150 years of peer-review and has a rich selection of scientific studies and evidence supporting it.
It’s frustrating to see the majority of people relying on unquestioned belief over critical thinking, which leads to terrible division. This is what Dawkins cares about. Most scientists try to avoid that fight.
@GreatestJason
The real issue is all claim truth, so which can be true? Which are at their core contrary? Dawkins talks of religion when really it is a world view. Evolutionary scientist(darwinianists) have a world view to. He is in the very boat he faults, just claiming he has the better way.
To be honest you must admit that he dawkins pays a lot of attention to other world views instead of perfecting his own. if all other world views are so futile then why exert so much energy toward them
@Skindoggiedog
what exactly am I pleading for. No matter how fervently I plead with you, unless you are given understanding it will matter not.
I do not plead for myself. I only make the case for Christ and the gift of Grace thru Him.
Wow,
what a deep, thought out, meaningful conversation this has suddenly become.
@silentmajor hahahaha
One of the funniest responses I’ve ever received.
Splendid!
@Skindoggiedog you’re a fucking super idiot. your such a idiot that not even the cosmos at it’s furthest reaches could find another one as stupidly ignorant as you.
@felonarose1 – “So, I do not call myself an atheist. Because A) I do not know”
You don’t know whether you believe in a god or not? Wow.
@Hkepfer – The point you’re missing is that you’re talking about ages where every cunt was religious.
Most scientists drive cars. Should the cars take some credit for any discoveries the scientist makes?
@GreatestJason – “We can calculate the time since the big bang, but we have no idea what came before that ”
In the Big Bang theory, the ‘Bang’ was the beginning of time itself. So, in this context, ‘before’ is utterly nonsensical.
@JMackeyIII – Special pleading fail.
@silentmajor – You are a fucking idiot.
@silentmajor
I’m going to have to disagree with you on that one.
While I do see the point you are trying to make about changing theories and
such, I believe that being able to see the object being disagreed upon results in there needing to be less faith involved.
Just as it does take faith to sit in a chair, and the chair may break.
But it would take far more faith to sit on a chair you can not see or test or move around. I can see dogs breeding, I can not see them being created from dust.
science is worse than religion. who the hell do you think your’re kidding. scientist argue all day long about what they believe. not to mention changing what they think every time you turn around . it takes more faith to believe in a scientist than in intelligent design any day of the week.
@JMackeyIII
Well then maybe the universe “just is.” Maybe matter and energy “just are.” We know that exists. By resorting to mythology you’re only adding an extra step which can’t be verified.
So good (Y)!
Richard Dawkins FTW!
he made love to mr garrison in south park
Yep. Cosmological argument.
1. Every finite and contingent being has a cause.
2. Nothing finite and contingent can cause itself.
3. A causal chain cannot be of infinite length.
4. Therefore, a First Cause (or something that is not an effect) must exist.
How one jumps from something so vague to a single deity, I have no clue.