Opinion What is your opinion of Richard Dawkins and his stance on religion ?

[Joe_Armstrong]

Evolutionary biologist Richard Dawkins is publicly stating that religion is a delusion for many years.
Here's his docu 'The God delusion'



Does the man have a point ? Do you think he is too harsh ?
Do you agree ?

 

[ShadBo]

There are no religious arguments that deal with anything Dawkins says about them. Only misdirection and special pleading.

 

[Sketch]

We'll see how good Richard is at debates when he gets to debate God upon his death.

 

[Fawlty]

Basically, yeah. Like most people with scientific training he's really good on questions of the outrageous but universally accepted practice of religious burden-shifting, and he argues well from evolution. He's not one of my favorite speakers on the subject though.

 

[Social Distance Warrior]

My issue with religion is live and let live, if religion gives you meaning, happiness and a sense of meaning...all the power to you.

yea, personally, I find many religioins and their beliefs to be goofy, but I'm not going to be a dick about it.

the only issue I have with religion is when it starts to encroach on the civil liberties of others.

there...that's my rant.

 

[JamesRussler]

“It’s tempting to say all religions are bad, and I do say all religions are bad, but it’s a worse temptation to say all religions are equally bad because they’re not. If you look at the actual impact that different religions have on the world it’s quite apparent that at present the most evil religion in the world has to be Islam. It’s terribly important to modify that because of course that doesn’t mean all Muslims are evil, very far from it. Individual Muslims suffer more from Islam than anyone else. They suffer from the homophobia, the misogyny, the joylessness which is preached by extreme Islam, Isis and the Iranian regime. So it is a major evil in the world, we do have to combat it[.]”

- Dick Dawkins

Edit: Richard Dawkins’s views are not my own.

 

[franklinstower]

He has the right to his opinion but in the realm of theological questions his training gives him no special insight into the answer. Its just another guy with an opinion.

 

[OverCoronavirus Pressure]

I agree with him, and Hitchens.

There's nothing indicating anything supernatural exists, only wishful/superstitious thinking.

Religion has done plenty of good things -that have been accomplished by secular means, so it's nothing special-
But what's special is the harm religious beliefs have done and how they're holding back progress.

 

[Fawlty]

He has the right to his opinion but in the realm of theological questions his training gives him no special insight into the answer. Its just another guy with an opinion.

Not really true. Theologians pretend to answer questions of biology, they reason from natural facts, and they make claims about burden of proof, while he's an actual expert in those areas. You have it backwards in this way, which is a common trait of religious thinkers.

 

[GrayArea]

Richard Dawkins doesn’t even understand science itself.

 

[Blood and Thunder]

Islamophobe spreading hate.

 

[franklinstower]

Not really true. Theologians pretend to answer questions of biology and they reason from natural facts, while he's an actual expert in that area. You have it backwards in this way, which is a common trait of religious thinkers.

You misunderstand. Biology has nothing to say about the existence of God. His opinion is as good as anyone's is what I am saying-- or as useless however you want to word it.

 

[Joe_Armstrong]

What I found great was when they say you can't prove God doesn't exist so it's 50% procent he does.
But just because you can't prove something exists, doesn't make it 50% chance of being true.

 

[SL1200]

Islam spreading hate.

Fixed!

 

[Fawlty]

You misunderstand. Biology has nothing to say about the existence of God. His opinion is as good as anyone's is what I am saying-- or as useless however you want to word it.

That's a specific question within theology. Theology tries to touch on everything, and none of them are experts because there is no metaphysical expertise (they can only be experts of the methods of theology itself, which itself cannot make legitimate claims), while on the other hand, theology touches on many areas of naturalism and science, where they are not experts but Dawkins is. So yes, you have this backwards.

 

[Senzo Tanaka]

Big Dawkins fan. He tries to think objectively. He also has the courage to say we don't have the answers to certain questions...yet.

 

[franklinstower]

That's a specific question within theology. Theology tries to touch on everything, and none of them are experts because there is no metaphysical expertise (they can only be experts of the methods of theology itself, which itself cannot make legitimate claims), while on the other hand, theology touches on many areas of naturalism and science, where they are not experts but Dawkins is.

I am only addressing the question of weather there is God FYI. On that question Dawkins positions is as good or as bad as anyone's.


Off topic-- his positions on theology are a crap shoot. In one of his books he states that majority scholarship doesn't believe Jesus was a real person. He was corrected on this point in a debate with John Lennox but to my knowledge still has not made a correction in his book. I call that being a liar. So it seems in the realm of theology his understanding is quite poor. But I digress because that was never my point anyway.

 

[Islam Imamate]

Evolutionary biologist Richard Dawkins is publicly stating that religion is a delusion for many years.
Here's his docu 'The God delusion'



Does the man have a point ? Do you think he is to harsh ?
Do you agree ?

My opinion is that its 2019, not 2007, so I don't give much of a shit about what Dawkins was saying over ten years ago on religion. I did read his book The Greatest Show on Earth many years ago and I remember enjoying it, a good read for non-specialists interested in the topic of evolution.

 

[Senzo Tanaka]

What I found great was when they say you can't prove God doesn't exist so it's 50% procent he does.
But just because you can't prove something exists, doesn't make it 50% chance of being true.

This is why agnosticism is silly. You either believe or you don't. Being an atheist doesn't rule out a God existing and doesn't make the claim that God doesn't exist.

 

[The ScorpioN]

The selfish gene and extended phenotype were amazing, groundbreaking books.
But Dawkins is afraid to spell out the logical conclusion of his models, and I can't blame him. He's old and probably tired.
Let him make money destroying brainlet arguments imo