Faith and Belief: Richard Dawkins evolves his arguments
1–10 of 62 posts
Re: Faith and Belief: Richard Dawkins evolves his arguments
#2This was a really interesting insight to Dawkins' character. Thanks for sharing.
Re: Faith and Belief: Richard Dawkins evolves his arguments
#3I heard an interview where Dawkins said something like "if there is a God, He must have evolved." Maybe he was joking, but it didn't sound like it.
Evolution is a biological process. It would have no bearing on a being who created space and time.
Biologists should not presume to trump philosophy and theology, any more than preachers should dictate which biological theories are acceptable.
Re: Faith and Belief: Richard Dawkins evolves his arguments
#4I heard an interview where Dawkins said something like "if there is a God, He must have evolved." Maybe he was joking, but it didn't sound like it. Evolution is a biological process. It would have no bearing on a being who created space and time. Biologists should not presume to trump philosophy and theology, any more than preachers should dictate which biological theories are acceptable.
Dawkins does not believe that theologists have any special insights to offer on the mysteries of life. In his view, anyone's opinion is just as good as that of a theologist.
Re: Faith and Belief: Richard Dawkins evolves his arguments
#5> There is no master plan.
As much as I am an atheist, I still think no one can ever make that claim. He should have said, there is no evidence yet of a master plan, or there probably is no master plan. This same thing would apply to the existence of God. Unfortunately this logical fallacy (of prematurely concluding the nonexistence of something that theoretically can't be proved to not exist) beholds too many atheists.
Re: Faith and Belief: Richard Dawkins evolves his arguments
#6> There is no master plan. As much as I am an atheist, I still think no one can ever make that claim. He should have said, there is no evidence yet of a master plan, or there probably is no master plan. This same thing would apply to the existence of God. Unfortunately this logical fallacy (of prematurely concluding the nonexistence of something that theoretically can't be proved to not exist) beholds too many atheis…
There is no master plan in the same sense that there is magic cookie monster.
Re: Faith and Belief: Richard Dawkins evolves his arguments
#7I heard an interview where Dawkins said something like "if there is a God, He must have evolved." Maybe he was joking, but it didn't sound like it. Evolution is a biological process. It would have no bearing on a being who created space and time. Biologists should not presume to trump philosophy and theology, any more than preachers should dictate which biological theories are acceptable.
The reason he says this, is that evolution by natural selection is the only process that we know of that describes how complexity comes to be.
Re: Faith and Belief: Richard Dawkins evolves his arguments
#8I heard an interview where Dawkins said something like "if there is a God, He must have evolved." Maybe he was joking, but it didn't sound like it. Evolution is a biological process. It would have no bearing on a being who created space and time. Biologists should not presume to trump philosophy and theology, any more than preachers should dictate which biological theories are acceptable.
It's a mistake to lump philosophy with theology. Philosophy requires no "givens", which is to say it is a valid field without requiring you to make any assumptions to partake in it. Theology, meanwhile, requires you first to assume the existence of God, and I'm one of the many many people who think that's a ridiculous beginning to a field of study. It's like if Nietzsche began his books by telling you his concepts and thoughts were only worth consuming if you first assume that we're living on a gigantic turtle. Preposterous.
I like religion-as-sociology, however, and there's where the "evolution of God" concept is most fascinating. If you haven't read Douglas Adams's speech "Is There An Artificial God?", it's worth the read.
Evolution is a biological process. It would have no bearing on a being who created space and time.
And bullets bounce off of Superman because he's from Krypton.
Re: Faith and Belief: Richard Dawkins evolves his arguments
#9I heard an interview where Dawkins said something like "if there is a God, He must have evolved." Maybe he was joking, but it didn't sound like it. Evolution is a biological process. It would have no bearing on a being who created space and time. Biologists should not presume to trump philosophy and theology, any more than preachers should dictate which biological theories are acceptable.
It's a mistake to lump philosophy with theology. Philosophy requires no "givens", which is to say it is a valid field without requiring you to make any assumptions to partake in it. Theology, meanwhile, requires you first to assume the existence of God, and I'm one of the many many people who think that's a ridiculous beginning to a field of study. It's like if Nietzsche began his books by telling you his concepts an…
What exactly are the accomplishments of philosophy, aside from logic which is better studied by mathematicians and computer scientists?
Re: Faith and Belief: Richard Dawkins evolves his arguments
#10All most all religions are based on http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Self-fulfilling_prophecy