Richard Dawkins on the VTech shooter (sort of). What say you, atheists?

Question

In a universe of blind physical forces and genetic replication, some people are going to get hurt, other people are going to get lucky, and you won't find any rhyme or reason in it, nor any justice. The universe we observe has precisely the properties we should expect if there is, at bottom, no design, no purpose, no evil and no good, nothing but blind, pitiless indifference. As that unhappy poet A.E. Housman put it: `For Nature, heartless, witless Nature Will neither care nor know.' DNA neither cares nor knows. DNA just is. And we dance to its music." (Dawkins R., "River out of Eden: A Darwinian View of Life," Phoenix: London, 1996, p.155. Emphasis in original)

No good. No evil. No justice. Just do whatever you want. If people get hurt, oh, well. That's just the luck of the draw.

Answer 1

Pretty much. Sucks, but there's no justice in the world. Cho got away with it, minus the detail of killing himself. He and his victims simply ceased to exist, leaving their families to pick up the pieces.

Also, your twisting his words to say there is no morality is intellectually dishonest. He said no such thing.

Answer 2

The Vtech shooter was the end result of defective genetics and poor socialization. Had the mental health community been brought in to rectify the situation, we would not be having this conversation. Dawkins never mentions justice because it is not part of the topic he is discussing. On an evolutionary level there is no such thing. Justice is an entirely human concept, developed to help maintain societal stability. In nature, it doesn't even enter the picture.

Answer 3

You argument is as poorly considered as those of the atheist that ask, "Why would God allow evil things to happen.".

I don't believe Mr. Dawkins was saying, ...do whatever you want.". I believe a close examination of the part of the statement you presented will show you that. I am pretty sure that you will not see any suggested moral code anywhere in your quote.

You may disagree with Dawkin's conclusions. A reasoned argument along those lines would be interesting to read.

Answer 4

I think that he is trying to say that in nature there are no concepts of good & evil or justice. Those are all man made concepts.

If i lion eats a zebra, do the zebras throw him in jail & have him tried for zebra-slaughter? No! That is the natural way of life. There is no good or evil or justice in nature.

Good & Evil are terms used to describe people who are either for or against the cause... and justice is the term used to describe the punishment for those who are considered evil by one group of people. They are all man-made terms that have no bearing on the nature of the universe.... thus you using dawkin's quote like this is completely irrelevant.

Perhaps if there were no man made labels such as good & evil or rich & poor or popular & unpopular..... tragedies such as this wouldn't happen. It was obvious that the kid had problems yet nobody tried to help him. he was diagnosed with autism & mental instabilities..... but it doesn't seem like anything was done to help him. Everyone just thought he was a "shy outcast".... perhaps if someone would've dropped the whole "popular vs. unpopular" caste system & befriended the kid this may not have happened. He had mental issues that needed to be addressed, but he was classified with man-made terms and nobody seemed to try to help.

Answer 5

Two things. We atheists (well I'm agnostic, but I'll give my two cents) do believe in sentient beings with the ability to make rational decisions. It is through that rational that you will find good, evil, and justice. There are and should be consequences for your actions.

Second, I would much prefer this to be random than to be part of someone's plan. Any plan that involves this much suffering (not just this incident either) is a flawed plan at best and quite possibly an evil one.

If your God is so powerful, why must He torture us so?

Answer 6

I, like you, couldn't care less about Richard Dawkins. Don't know anything about him, and don't want to know anything about him. As for me relying on someone else to tell me what to think, you are wrong about that. My view of Christianity is very unpopular here. I could also care less about that. Unlike many here, I actually spend a lot of time studying the Bible, and rightly dividing the word of truth.

Answer 7

If you are so stupid and careless as to think 'What the hey. I'm going to kill a bunch of people today' you still have to pay the consequences. An atheist acknowledges this is the only life that anyone can be certain about-do you really think they want to spend it trapped in a cell or cut it short?
Besides, killing one of your own species is not a normal instinct. If anyone feels that way, it's a sign that they need a doctor.

Answer 8

This is a commentary on existence and nature, not on human beings. He's saying there's no UNIVERSAL good or bad, but isn't discounting our ability to be decent to each other. He doesn't excuse us to do anything, just tells the truth about reality as a whole.

He's right, you know. The universe IS indifferent. There's no "grand plan", no "ultimate meaning". We're objects in space... but the difference is that we're self aware, sentient, sapient, and can't get away with saying "the universe dictates no rules, so I shouldn't follow any rules!"

Answer 9

Consciousness has a consequence. It's called feelings. People with seemingly no feelings have just bottled them up. You would see the love inside them if you had the key to their heart.
Everyone should trust people to be moral. Everybody hurts. It is the fear put in people by different methods and the maintained beleif that we are sinners (or bad) that is the first cause of horror and violence.
No amount of religion will make it stop. So just give up.
It'll be allright.

Answer 10

Are you actually incapable of understanding what you read, without injecting your own bias? Dawkins was describing the nature of the indifferent universe and you twisted it it into a perverse reflection of your own values. Dawkins said nothing about human behavior. You merely injected your own prejudicial bias. The only connection between the two paragraphs are your own twisted opinions.

Answer 11

I think that you totally misinterpretted what he said. The universe is not here for YOU. Its not for your particular specific use. When people are hurt, it only matters to other people, not to the universe itself.

Stop taking it so personally. Its like you're personally insulted by it.

I agree with him. The universe doesn't care one way or the other. Blind indifference. You are no more important than any other person.