Interview with 'The God Delusion' author Richard Dawkins

[GOD]

Professor Richard Dawkins is the guest on a BBC world program called " Have your say " where you can phone up and ask questions or write E-mails with questions for him to answer . The programe is usualy repeated several times so that no matter where you live in the world you can see it if you can recieve BBC world . For more information and 10 pages of public comments you can look here :-

Taken from :- http://newsforums.bbc.co.uk/nol/thread. ... 1207104333

"Our guest on the Have Your Say programme on Sunday 9 December will be Professor Richard Dawkins. He is an outspoken atheist who says science explains the world better than religion. Pope Benedict has attacked atheism in his latest encyclical. He says it is responsible for some of the "greatest forms of cruelty and violations of justice" in history. He adds "man needs God, otherwise he remains without hope". Professor Dawkins says "many of us saw religion as harmless nonsense ... September 11th 2001 changed all that. Revealed faith is not harmless nonsense, it can be lethally dangerous nonsense". Did God invent man or did man invent God? Does religion stoke conflict or help to avoid it? Is it possible to have hope without belief? Does science provide more answers than religion? Is atheism a religion? Professor Richard Dawkins will be our guest on the Have Your Say programme at 1406 GMT on Sunday 9 December. If you want to take part in the programme please leave your phone number with your comment. "

 

[Caduceus Mercurius]

Professor Dawkins says "many of us saw religion as harmless nonsense ... September 11th 2001 changed all that.

Give me a break!

Yes, monotheism isn't exactly harmless, but is science?

Why emphasize the difference between atheistic science and monotheistic religion, when the truth is more likely somewhere in the middle of these fields? Dawkins is too far removed from that meeting point (where you'll find the psychedelics, amongst many other things) to ever come to a true understanding of what consciousness and this world really are.

 

[GOD]

I agree . The guy is "strange " in my opinion , but quite a few people on this site showed interest in his theorys a few weeks ago in another thread and i think it would be interesting to see what he has to say , especialy after what "the " pope has been quoted as saying in the explenation . Both are oposits on a scale of fanatics .

" Yes, monotheism isn't exactly harmless, but is science? "

Science is not harmfull , what some people make out of it is harmfull . But are you saying we should ignore science and go back to superstisious theorys like astrology , i-ching or " chakras " and other mentaly confused pseudo knowledge spread by many confused people .

 

[Forkbender]

Science is not harmfull , what some people make out of it is harmfull.

Religion is not harmfull, what some people make out of it is harmfull.

 

[Caduceus Mercurius]

But are you saying we should ignore science and go back to superstisious theorys like astrology , i-ching or " chakras " and other mentaly confused pseudo knowledge spread by many confused people.

I wasn't saying we should go back to anything. I'm all for science, but to claim the development of science has not had disastrous results would be a lie. And I'm not just talking about men abusing science. Although science is great for the human race, generally, it does destroy the environment. But I'm not saying we should abandon science and go back to primitive life.

Bringing in astrology, i-ching and chakras wasn't necessary to make your point. First of all, there's no "going back" because these concepts and methods have been understood or practiced without interruption for thousands of years. And second, they are not part of any belief system as theism is. They are not positioned at the far end of the polarities of science and theism, but in the middle area. To you they are hocus-pocus, we all know that by now, but they are only hocus-pocus because you don't understand how they work, like people in general have no idea how psychedelics work.

They say psychedelics are just as bad as drugs like heroin, and you say astrology is just as unscientific as the belief in a creator God figure. Both are based on insufficient understanding of, and experience with, the phenomenon.

 

[Guest]

I think Dawkins is a dick, although he's right about a lot of things.
If I see him I don't think being an atheist is any better then being religious.

He has some nice stances against religeon though

 

[WetStaples]

I'm an atheist but I believe religion is beautiful. What I do not find beautiful, however, are brain-damaged religious people.

Oh yeah, science is beautiful, too. I'm not too interested in practical applications – let someone else figure those out and someone else determine what are good/moral applications and what aren't – but I'd love to learn the science and contribute anything I could to the general understanding of our universe.

 

[Forkbender]

I think Dawkins is a dick, although he's right about a lot of things.
If I see him I don't think being an atheist is any better then being religious.

When I see Dawkins, I see a person that is not so sure about himself and his worldview. I think he's too obsessed with religion to be an atheist. And I don't like his approach: he polarizes the debate, tries to get mild theists over to his side, while the hardcore believers will never get nearer, only further away.

 

[GOD]

Caduceus , out of compasion i will wait to reply to your last post , to give you time to think rationaly about it , about how it contradicts itself and edit it .

Space , WetStaples , Forkbender i agree with every word you say .

The program is called " Have your say " wich means we , and anyone else can get in touch with the BBC and ....... have their say !!! I will definately watch the program , to see what Dawkins has to say about the antichrist in rom , and what questions and comments the public confronts him with and how he replys . I think it should be somewhere between having a good laugh , shaking my head in disbelief and interesting .

 

[Caduceus Mercurius]

about how it contradicts itself and edit it.

Thanks for your infinite compassion GOD, but why don't you just correct me? I know it sounded a bit contradictory: science isn't bad, and yet science was involved in lots of ecological disasters. But the thing is that "science" (an extremely broad term) does correct itself. For example: DDT is no longer used to kill insects, because it turned out to be a bad idea. There are numerous examples of this. Science is responsible for the current dependency on fossil fuels, and the toxification of the planet, but science is also trying to correct this situation.

But religion (again, a very vague term, including moderate, pious folks, as well as conservative, fanatic fundamentalists) seems to be correcting itself as well. It's a slow process, but it does occur.

Where do the changes occur fastest? I think in the middle area, where science and religion meet. You know, Christians who dig quantum physics and psychology, or mathematicians who dig psychedelics and astrology. It's in the middle ground where you'll meet the broadminded folks. Even if they're deluding themselves a bit (with chakras, tarot or whatever you despise), they are not harming society or this planet as much as the fanatic religionists or scientists do.

Go study old Egyptian or Vedic texts. You'll find that in those days, science and religion were not separate issues. And indeed they had a firm grasp of mathematics, physics and astronomy (including the heliocentric model, described in the Rig Veda). Again, we don't need to go back to building pyramids, but we should try to unify science and spirituality again, and personally I think that cannot be done unless we change our views towards the psychedelics.

 

[HeartCore]

... September 11th 2001 changed all that.

911 was an inside job and for financial reasons. Religion had nothing to do with it.

 

[Caduceus Mercurius]

911 was an inside job and for financial reasons. Religion had nothing to do with it.

I agree 100%, however Islam is based on the Quran, which is a text filled with direct orders to violently conquer the world in the name of Allah. Religious fundamentalism is a serious problem, and although it can't be linked to 9/11 or 7/7, it can be linked to numerous other incidents, including the death of artists like Theo van Gogh and the threatening of every cartoonist and comedian on the planet.

 

[buffachino]

This whole thing seems more like ego games than actual attempts at broadening ones intelligence.

Science as an absolutist institution is just as bad as religion as an absolutist institution.
Religious fundamentalism and scientific fundamentalism are both vehicles for the same domination; the domination of understanding.

WetStaples; do not disempower yourself by ignoring or relinquishing the possibility of your understanding.

Total desegregation of all facets of our reality is direly needed, otherwise were just deluding ourselves and restricting our own possibility.

Peace.

 

[GOD]

I watched the program twice . The guy seems quite nice , had lots of sensible things to say and didnt talk shit . I was pleasently surprised . Most of the people who were talking to him did though . There were only two realy good callers , one a school teacher from cambridge and one a guy called Richard from ............Holland ......................... OK wich of you is Richard ?????

" it can be linked to numerous other incidents, including the death of artists like Theo van Gogh and the threatening of every cartoonist and comedian on the planet. "

Before anyone starts talking about Theo van Gogh they should check his past , long before the press made him to a martyr they had reported that he was a dangerous racist and mentaly ill . One sided religeous agitation , trouble making in the name of humor is only pouring oil on the fire and keeping it going . Where are the cartoons about Jesus , why isnt the zionist press full of them ?

" Science is responsible for the current dependency on fossil fuels, and the toxification of the planet "

No it isnt . Greedy peoply , egoism and ignoring science is .

" if they're deluding themselves a bit (with chakras, tarot or whatever you despise), they are not harming society or this planet as much as the fanatic religionists or scientists do. "

Yes they are , ignorance , pseudo knowledge and fanatics are harming society . I dont despise deluded people i have compassion for them .

" the Quran, which is a text filled with direct orders to violently conquer the world in the name of Allah. "

No it isnt . Where , wich pasages ?

 

[Guest]

Before anyone starts talking about Theo van Gogh they should check his past , long before the press made him to a martyr they had reported that he was a dangerous racist and mentaly ill . One sided religeous agitation , trouble making in the name of humor is only pouring oil on the fire and keeping it going

Theo wasn't mentally ill (far from actually) nor was he a racist.
He only had some harsh things to say and not many people could cope with the way he said things.
Kinda reminds me of you and the way people react to your posts, GOD

 

[st.bot.32]

I sense confusion. I think the media (which is generally anti-intellectual) makes it easy to confuse science and technology, which are different things.. science is not people in lab coats in wierd rooms. Nor is it oil rigs, uranium isotopes or anything else.

Science is merely a set of rules for testing the observable universe, objective shared reality, call it what you will.

Science: Hypothesize.. test.. observe.. note the results. If others can duplicate the experiment, then yeah you've found something.

eg: If I drop an orange and a grape, the orange will fall at the same speed as the grape. If you repeat my experiment, it will work. Now we have established the law of gravity. That is science. Merely a set of rules.

Off topic I guess, can't help it. :wink:

And I use psychedelics strictly out of scientific interest :lol:

 

[ararat]

I just have seen an interview with dawkins. he had very good points.
and all along, I didn't see somebody who is insecure about himself or his worldview, rather the opposite was the case.
I'd love to see discussing him with the pope. sure, it won't happen. but it would be funny. both say that the opposing side brings evil and death...

 

[Dantediv86]

" the Quran, which is a text filled with direct orders to violently conquer the world in the name of Allah. "

No it isnt . Where , wich pasages ?

Have you read the Q'ran in the first place?

 

[toolfan]

people have miscreated this world from the beginning. not "science" and "religion". there is nothing to blame but people. and from what i can see happening these days, its only going to get worse...

 

[GOD]

Misery , i agree with you .

" Have you read the Q'ran in the first place? "

Yes , 35 years ago . Have you ??? My objection was to the word " filled " , and dont you think it would be more sensible to ask Cadeus if he has read it and to say if you have read it . Maybe if you are both Koran experts you could both tell me where it is " filed " with " direct orders to violently conquer the world in the name of Allah. " , in wich pasages ?