Monday, December 11, 2006

Richard Dawkins, arrogant?

A little off topic but I've just read an interview with Richard Dawkins in the Independent. He comes out with some interesting quotes, I thought I'd share some of them with you.

When talking about comparing his views to that of a religious person -
"I have a (you might say) fanatical desire for people to use their own minds and make their own choices, based upon publicly available evidence. Religious fanatics want people to switch off their own minds, ignore the evidence and blindly follow a holy book based upon private 'revelation'. There is a huge difference.

On the difference between private religious belief and organised religion:
There is also the little matter of whether or not they are true. Scientists care about such things.

On peace and love
Nothing is wrong with peace and love. It is all the more regrettable that so many of Christ's followers seem to disagree.

On religion as an emotional crutch
I think there is a higher nobility - and greater solace- in coping with what is true, even if it is fightening or painful.

On the resurrection
Accounts of Jesus's resurrection and ascension are about as well-documented as Jack and the Beanstalk.

On Christians
The majority are ignorant, which is not the same thing as stupid. Natural selection will not remove ignorance from future generations. Education may, and that is the hope to which we must cling.

If you arrived at the gates of Heaven, what would you say to God to justify your lifelong atheism?
"Not enough evidence God, not enough evidence." But why is God assumed to care so much about whether you believe in him?

Does anyone on the blogosphere care to offer any opinions on Dawkins?

No comments: