LinkBack URL
About LinkBacksAnd I thought I couldn't admire the man any more. Great quotes.
And I thought I couldn't admire the man any more. Great quotes.
"Politics is not the art of the possible. It consists of choosing between the disastrous and the unpalatable."
John Galbraith
Economic Left/Right:-8.38
Social Libertarian/Authoritarian:-6.97
Nauseating as Richard Dawkins is with his fascination with "flying spaghetti monsters", no his books shouldn't be banned.
MJ Coughlan,
Waterford City.
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
They certainly show him for the kind of man he is all right!Originally Posted by Eddiepops
Europa Conventus Delenda Est
Nicked it from Billy Connolly actually.
'It would actually give me the greatest of pleasure watching non-compliant taxpayers going to jail. That's the kind of person I am.' Bertie Ahern, 1993.
We should ban them and burn them, that way more people would be likely to read them and consider his point of view.
"Should We ban Richard Dawkins Books?"
Who are 'We'?
Whoever the OP is, he's no peer of mine.
Actual morality is doing what is right regardless of what you're told. Religious morality is doing what you're told, regardless of if it's right.
Dawkins didn't come up with the flying spaghetti monster, nor does he emphasise it. It's simply an easy way of explaining a particular concept.
What exactly do you find 'nauseating'?
Failed liberal traitors:
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
It's a bit odd considering the title of this thread that not one concrete reason has been given for actually banning Dawkins' books.
Liquidate labour, liquidate stocks, liquidate the farmers, liquidate real estate.
Should we ban "Should we ban" threads. Unfortunately unlike God or The Flying Spaghetti Monster there is a legendary creature that does exist and that creature is known the Troll. Most of these little critters are content to post the odd annoying post. However there is a particularily nasty variety of these creatures that plants a kind of a weed known as a "Troll Thread" an example of which this is. The "Troll Thread" is designed to bait by, for example, posing a proposistion such as banning a particular authors book in the hope that fans of said author will post irrate responses thus giving the lonely creature the attention it craves. By clicking on the Profile of this particular specimen of the species you will find that it has been busy planting quite a few of these in the past. Having said all this I will now depart and invite others to do the same and leave this Troll to his thoughts and leave his Troll Threads to wither back into the obscurity from whence they came
Terry Eagleton demolishes Dawkin's ignorant observations on religion. Eageton at his best:
"Imagine someone holding forth on biology whose only knowledge of the subject is the Book of British Birds, and you have a rough idea of what it feels like to read Richard Dawkins on theology. Card-carrying rationalists like Dawkins, who is the nearest thing to a professional atheist we have had since Bertrand Russell, are in one sense the least well-equipped to understand what they castigate, since they don’t believe there is anything there to be understood, or at least anything worth understanding. This is why they invariably come up with vulgar caricatures of religious faith that would make a first-year theology student wince. The more they detest religion, the more ill-informed their criticisms of it tend to be. If they were asked to pass judgment on phenomenology or the geopolitics of South Asia, they would no doubt bone up on the question as assiduously as they could. When it comes to theology, however, any shoddy old travesty will pass muster. These days, theology is the queen of the sciences in a rather less august sense of the word than in its medieval heyday."
The full, brilliant article:
http://www.lrb.co.uk/v28/n20/eagl01_.html
Reply With Quote