8 posts • joined Friday 16th March 2007 10:12 GMT
"What exactly is his strategy here? If they are beyond reason/help/enlightenment?"
He's helping to create an environment in society where people are given encouragement to start thinking for themselves, and not feel pressured into having to believe idealogical nonsense.
Yes, those who fervently believe will probably never change their minds, but his 'strategy' (or simply 'telling it like it is') will help those that might otherwise succumb to the seductive manipulation of the religious nuts and their organisations.
He might not be able to kill the existing cancer of blind belief, but he is helping to prevent it's spread.
The only other alternative, what you seem to advocate, is just letting them get on with it and hope it doesn't affect us atheists too negatively. But it does, and it has, and it's been too long that we have let them get away with changing society based on something that doesn't even exist, except in their imaginative, but weak-willed minds.
Even if you disagree, calling him an idiot says more about you than him.
@Paul M and Stefan
Dawkins isn't an idiot, you two are. Dawkins can back up his claims with his research, he's written books not just ignorant comments on a comments section.
"If Dawkins is so smart, why does he aggravate the very people he's trying to convert?"
He's not trying to convert anyone. He's pointing out the stupidity of believing in something that you only believe in because someone else told you it existed.
"Because he hates people. He hates people who disagree with his particular view of the world."
Hmmm, where have i seen that attitude come from before...let me think...hmm...ah, religions! That's where.
No-one is trying to convert you. Those rational enough to see through all the nonsense (no hyphen) also realise you're all too far gone to ever come back to the land of the thinking.
i invented the gerbil
i remember when i was 3 thinking that what the world really needs is some form of global digital communication system. i began with crayons, and threw the pieces of paper at my parents. Sometimes i would miss and my parents would say "i'm sorry it didn't work out". Sometimes they would throw leaflets back at me.
Also, i would draw pictures and pin them (or 'upload' them) on the fridge, or what i called, 'the web'.
Since then, someone (and i suspect it was the US military) stole my ideas and created 'The Internet'.
As soon as i have enough money i'm going to buy every ISP and then turn the Internet off until everyone knows it was me that invented it.
i also invented the concept of a mouse, but my version, the 'gerbil', didn't really take off.
i would like to introduce 'my garden' as a unit of internationally accepted measurement.
i have a very clear idea of the size of 'my garden' and so if something were described to me as about 10 times the size of 'my garden', then i would have a much greater appreciation of the size.
Those who haven't actually seen my garden might be at a disadvantage, of course, but then it would up to them to press for an internationally accepted unit of measurement for 'their own garden'.
Furthermore, if someone called Mike had a *really* big garden, the size of Wales for example, anything 'the size of Wales' could be referred to as 'as big as Mike's garden', or 'an area the size of Mike's garden'.
The more people who insisted on a recognised unit based on their own gardens would mean we would have a scalable comparison understood by everyone.
"It's as big as Carol's garden"
"It's quite small, it's about 2 Kevin's gardens wide"
Sadly though, so far, the EEC seem inexplicably reluctant to implement my suggestions. i think they fear change.
i'm not worried..
but my friend Sarah Connor is, and even considering a move out into the desert.
When it comes to the indefensible, call people names, yeah!
"England jackarses were crying about fair trade with china, by dumping opium that would make a Columbian drug lord reach erection."
Looks like you have all the words, now if you can put them in some sort of undertandable order, that'd be great!
Anyway, it doesn't matter what countries are doing what. What Yahoo have done is wrong, however you measure it, and any defence of their actions is a sign of ignorance and/or self-righteous callousness.