Should we Ban Richard Dawkins Books?

[Simon.D]

I could but it would confuse you.

So I'll put it in simple terms.

You're so up your own ar*e you can't see the wood for the trees.

Give it a go... I'm not the only one reading this thread, so surely someone may be able to comprehend the complexity of your thoughts, and try and break it down for us simple folk...

Please just try and explain your logic.. Why is science futile, if we can't ever know anything..

[Sync]

Ridiculous thread. Only an idiot wants to ban books simply for expressing a contrary belief to their own.

[Mitsui2]

. (agnostic has always traditionally meant - without spiritual experience/knowledge)

If that statement were true then I'd have to say that a lot of Christians I knew - in particular Catholics, and particularly in particular Irish Catholics - gave every evidence of being agnostic.

Thankfully any fool with a dictionary (a very useful tool that you might consider consulting before posting such nonsense, Krabb13) can easily discover that the statement is false.

[Drico]

Dawkins is a pompous ass who has made a living writing up other people's scientific theories and hypocritically bashing religion while displaying many of religion's dogmatic, negative traits himself as a "militant" atheist.

However, his books should definately not be banned. Such a ruling would rage against free speech and as much of an ass as Dawkins is and as unoriginal as his science is, the layman can get a lot of valuable information (and insight into the twisted mind of a "militant" atheist) by reading his books.

EDIT: left out a crucial "not" the first time around...

[dotski_w_]

Dawkins is a pompous ass who has made a living writing up other people's scientific theories and hypocritically bashing religion while displaying many of religion's dogmatic, negative traits himself as a "militant" atheist.

However, his books should definately be banned. Such a ruling would rage against free speech and as much of an ass as Dawkins is and as unoriginal as his science is, the layman can get a lot of valuable information (and insight into the twisted mind of a "militant" atheist) by reading his books.

I take it you've not read the selfish gene, then....

[Drico]

I take it you've not read the selfish gene, then....

I have... a good informative read but it's not particularly original science.


The first few lines of the wiki article:

The Selfish Gene is a book on evolution by Richard Dawkins, published in 1976. It builds upon the principal theory of George C. Williams's first book Adaptation and Natural Selection. Dawkins coined the term "selfish gene" as a way of expressing the gene-centred view of evolution, which holds that evolution is best viewed as acting on genes and that selection at the level of organisms or populations almost never overrides selection based on genes.

What Dawkins did was popularize the theories so that "laymen" could get a grasp of them. The book made a big impact on popular science but uncovered little for those with a science background. Certainly an achievement but not deserving of the Godlike status that Dawkins has fostered.

[Fantasia]

Should we Ban pauriceenjack posts?

[evercloserunion]

I love richard dawkins books....they make great christmas gifts

Why did you bump a year old thread to say that?

[Thranduil]

What Dawkins did was popularize the theories so that "laymen" could get a grasp of them. The book made a big impact on popular science but uncovered little for those with a science background. Certainly an achievement but not deserving of the Godlike status that Dawkins has fostered.

Precisely, his hero Darwin is also one of the most overcelebrated of all scientists.... Around the time that Darwin was formulating his theory a humble priest and scientist Gregor Mendel was actually exploring the exact scientific mechanisms involved in heredity - a hundred years before DNA would be discovered. Darwin's work is notable for it's importance - it's 'effect' rather than the degree of originality and novel brilliance in it.

[Baron von Biffo]

the Godlike status that Dawkins has fostered.

Now that's the internet at its very best.