This is a Youtube clip less than 3 minutes long, and what Dawkins says to this man, in an attempt to defend his position on Atheism at the end of this clip - is an embarrassment to himself and his cause.
2007-04-25 14:23:13 · 14 answers · asked by Dirk Johnson 5 in Society & Culture ➔ Religion & Spirituality
http://youtube.com/watch?v=-_2xGIwQfik
2007-04-25 14:23:36 · update #1
Alotra, what is the song?
2007-04-25 14:27:05 · update #2
I've seen this. True colors. It shows very clearly why Dawkins is not a scholar anymore but an evangelist. Were he still in academics, he would be required to have the intellectual humility to engage honestly with rebutals to his work. Once you are his age, accomplished what he has, he can just tell everyone to F-off while he gets royalty checks. He hasn't written on science in a decade and now he just snarls and vents pathologies. And those who don't know who Neil deGrasse Tyson is should be reading more.
2007-04-25 14:42:25 · answer #1 · answered by Aspurtaime Dog Sneeze 6 · 2⤊ 1⤋
You completely misunderstood the question and the response.
The question was not asking Dawkins to defend his position on atheism, the questioner seemed to agree with Dawkins actually. The questioner was asking if Dawkins' tone and approach isn't the best for science.
Dawkins is well known for his acidic tone. Dawkins defends this in The God Delusion by saying his passion is only misinterpreted that way because the subject matter is sort of held in a regard that is above criticism. Fact is, in 50 years or so if atheism continues to grow, Dawkins' comments won't even be controversial in the slightest.
I sort of agree with Dawkins on this, and the evidence is here on YA. Post a question that says, "God doesn't exist. So what?" and watch the nonsense that will unfold. Watch theists try and squirm to redefine atheism as a religion, etc, etc. My apologies to non-US readers, but look at these "faith-based initiatives" and the fact that a Senator was quoted as saying he didn't care about the environment because good Christians are going to be raptured long before the effects of global warming are really going to be felt. How on earth does that make sense?
As much as I can appreciate Dawkins point of view on this, I think you can catch more flies with honey, and this is what Tyson was getting at with his question. We, as atheists, have to do more than point out the truth. We have to show the value of it and we have to show how the power of Christianity comes from Christianity, rather than God.
As for Dawkins' response, it was pretty funny and appropriate for the audience.
Check out my source link for another YouTube video. I take on Dawkins, The Blasphemy Challenge and Christianity all in one video!
2007-04-25 21:46:26 · answer #2 · answered by Tao 6 · 1⤊ 1⤋
That man babbled on for so long and his main point was stupid and ridiculous. I think Dawkins gave him a more thorough answer than he deserved. Basically, this guy was blaming Dawkins for people's unwillingness to accept scientific truth.
Swing and a miss, my friend. Atheism wins again.
2007-04-25 22:01:51 · answer #3 · answered by God Fears Me 3 · 1⤊ 1⤋
Now, I like Richard Dawkins AND Neil deGrass Tyson. I can understand Tyson's criticism. And I loved Dawkin's response. He wasn't actually telling Tyson to f* off, just that if he doesn't agree with him than he doesn't have to listen to him.
2007-04-25 21:29:07 · answer #4 · answered by eri 7 · 6⤊ 1⤋
Believe it or not I was just watching that minutes before you posted this question, and yes, his answer is fine - and hilarious. It is in no way an embarrassment to himself or atheism as a whole. When you become a Christian does God take your sense of humor or do you give it away willingly?
2007-04-25 21:25:41 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 5⤊ 2⤋
Uh.... I've seen that clip before. No big deal. They were disagreeing on a minor point - their presentation approach. They are like minded, they laugh with each other, they went to the same conference for the same reason...
No biggie.
2007-04-25 21:28:20 · answer #6 · answered by ZER0 C00L ••AM••VT•• 7 · 6⤊ 1⤋
Richard Dawkins is the man...yes it was justified
2007-04-25 21:26:55 · answer #7 · answered by kramaster 5 · 6⤊ 2⤋
I think it was meant to be more light-hearted than offensive, but an unjustified emberassment nonetheless. Thank you for sharing.
Brightest Blessings
2007-04-25 21:43:59 · answer #8 · answered by Celestian Vega 6 · 2⤊ 0⤋
Seemed a reasonable response to me he came close to admiting he was wrong which a religious person wouldn't be able to do, your logic is an againstembarrassment to yourself and your cause
2007-04-25 21:32:04 · answer #9 · answered by . 6 · 2⤊ 1⤋
The dawkins delusion persists.
2007-04-25 21:35:26 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 3⤋