Nice Richard Dawkins Quote: why gods are so improbable....

[Deicide]

The total amount of suffering per year in the natural world is beyond all decent contemplation. During the minute that it takes me to compose this sentence, thousands of animals are being eaten alive, many others are running for their lives, whimpering with fear, others are slowly being devoured from within by rasping parasites, thousands of all kinds are dying of starvation, thirst, and disease. It must be so. If there ever is a time of plenty, this very fact will automatically lead to an increase in the population until the natural state of starvation and misery is restored. In a universe of electrons and selfish genes, 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 that we observe has precisely the properties we should expect if there is, at bottom, no design, no purpose, no evil, no good, nothing but pitiless indifference.
"God's Utility Function," Scientific American, November, 1995, p. 85

[Butterbean]

Why do you think Dawkins talks about God so much Deicide?

[tonymctones]

Why do you think Dawkins talks about God so much Deicide?

probably for the same reason deicide spends so much time on the topic...

[Deicide]

Why do you think Dawkins talks about God so much Deicide?

To paraphrase him; he cares about what is true, passionately so. That is the hallmark of a scientist. He cares about evidence; that is also the hallmark of a scientist. He also thinks it is an interesting question; whether there is a supernatural intelligence governing the universe? All the evidence that is available points to a big 'NO'.

[tonymctones]

To paraphrase him; he cares about what is true, passionately so. That is the hallmark of a scientist. He cares about evidence; that is also the hallmark of a scientist. He also thinks it is an interesting question; whether there is a supernatural intelligence governing the universe? All the evidence that is available points to a big 'NO'.

I can see that however there are undoubtedly a great number of other "truths" (lol sorry but you knew it was coming) in the world that are debatable that would be easier to prove and more beneficial so why spend so much time on this one?

[Deicide]

I can see that however there are undoubtedly a great number of other "truths" (lol sorry but you knew it was coming) in the world that are debatable that would be easier to prove and more beneficial so why spend so much time on this one?

Scientists care about truth. Dawkins regards the question of god as a scientific question. There's that.

Then there is the rather obvious zealotry, violence and fanaticism that is produced by religion.

Conjoined, gods and religion are worthy are being addressed.

[loco]

Why do you think Dawkins talks about God so much Deicide?

Because Dawkins' goal is to commit "Deicide".  Because Dawkins' agenda is to "kill religion".  An evolutionary biologist obsessed with killing religion, or obsessed with killing God for that matter. 

Imagine how much more a smart scientist like him would have accomplished toward the advancement of science had he put all of this energy, zeal, time, work and money into his work in the lab instead.   

"If your aim is to kill religion, as mine is"... - Richard Dawkins

Hear the rest:

[Deicide]

Because Dawkins' goal is to commit "Deicide".  Because Dawkins' agenda is to "kill religion".  An evolutionary biologist obsessed with killing religion, or obsessed with killing God for that matter. 

Imagine how much more a smart scientist like him would have accomplished toward the advancement of science had he put all of this energy, zeal, time, work and money into his work in the lab instead.   

"If your aim is to kill religion, as mine is"... - Richard Dawkins

Hear the rest:

You obviously have read nothing of his; The Ancestor's Tale, Climbing Mount Improbable, Unweaving the Rainbow; none of these books has anything to do with god or religion.

[loco]

You obviously have read nothing of his; The Ancestor's Tale, Climbing Mount Improbable, Unweaving the Rainbow; none of these books has anything to do with god or religion.

You obviously misundertood what I wrote above.  I know that he has many books dedicated to science alone.  I know that he has put a lot of energy, time and work toward science.  Still, imagine how much more than that he would have accomplished toward the advancement of science had he taken all of the energy, zeal, time, work and money that he has put into "killing" religion and put it into his work in the lab instead.

Then again, fighting religion in a post 9/11 world has made him a very wealthy and famous man.  So good for him.  So much for science.   

[Deicide]

You obviously misundertood what I wrote above.  I know that he has many books dedicated to science alone.  I know that he has put a lot of energy, time and work toward science.  Still, Imagine how much more than that he would have accomplished toward the advancement of science had he taken all of the energy, zeal, time, work and money that he has put into "killing" religion and put it into his work in the lab instead.

Then again, fighting religion in a post 9/11 world has made him a very wealthy and famous man.  So good for him.  So much for science.   

Well, religion is manifestly false and most of its claims are incompatible with modern scientific findings; why not oppose it on those grounds alone?

[Butterbean]

To paraphrase him; he cares about what is true, passionately so. That is the hallmark of a scientist. He cares about evidence; that is also the hallmark of a scientist. He also thinks it is an interesting question; whether there is a supernatural intelligence governing the universe? All the evidence that is available points to a big 'NO'.

How do you think he would feel if he caused someone to question or turn from their faith even if their faith made that person happy and feel at peace?

[Nordic Superman]

How do you think he would feel if he caused someone to question or turn from their faith even if their faith made that person happy and feel at peace?

To say the right thing is never wrong.

Dawkins happens to believe his position is right, and I agree with him. He is not responsible for the paths chosen in ones life, as a scientist he's responsible for finding the truth.

[tonymctones]

Scientists care about truth. Dawkins regards the question of god as a scientific question. There's that.

Then there is the rather obvious zealotry, violence and fanaticism that is produced by religion.

Conjoined, gods and religion are worthy are being addressed.

You always state the negative effects of religion but never the benefits, why is that?

Do you not see the good that religion does in the world? Do you believe that the bad outweighs the good?

[Nordic Superman]

You always state the negative effects of religion but never the benefits, why is that?

Do you not see the good that religion does in the world? Do you believe that the bad outweighs the good?

That's his position. When do you ever bleat on about evolutionary biology and its benefits to scientific understanding? You don't probably because you don't believe it.

[tonymctones]

That's his position. When do you ever bleat on about evolutionary biology and its benefits to scientific understanding? You don't probably because you don't believe it.

while I understand why you would think that way, your wrong. I actually happen to believe in evolution and if you look over my post on this board everytime its brought up I do bleat on about it, but believing in evolution doesnt mean a disbelief in God.

[Butterbean]

as a scientist he's responsible for finding the truth.

What do you think he says when his wife asks if she looks fat in this dress?

[MCWAY]

Because Dawkins' goal is to commit "Deicide".  Because Dawkins' agenda is to "kill religion".  An evolutionary biologist obsessed with killing religion, or obsessed with killing God for that matter. 

Imagine how much more a smart scientist like him would have accomplished toward the advancement of science had he put all of this energy, zeal, time, work and money into his work in the lab instead.   

"If your aim is to kill religion, as mine is"... - Richard Dawkins

Hear the rest:

And, he'll miss that aim, just like every other atheist who has tried it.

[Deicide]

How do you think he would feel if he caused someone to question or turn from their faith even if their faith made that person happy and feel at peace?

Who knows? Most people believe or have faith for exactly those reasons but those are not evidentiary or scientific reasons for believing something; once again as has been said a thousand times, the fact that something is useful or makes people feel good, has no bearing whatsoever on whether or not it is true; you truly don't get that, do you?

[tonymctones]

You always state the negative effects of religion but never the benefits, why is that?

Do you not see the good that religion does in the world? Do you believe that the bad outweighs the good?

bump

[Deicide]

bump

To answer your question: I personally don't care about the utility of religion, whether it does more good than harm or vice versa; I care about whether its propositions and claims are true. I only care if they are true or not. There is not a shred of evidence to suggest they are, hence my reason for opposition to them.

[tonymctones]

To answer your question: I personally don't care about the utility of religion, whether it does more good than harm or vice versa; I care about whether its propositions and claims are true. I only care if they are true or not. There is not a shred of evidence to suggest they are, hence my reason for opposition to them.

ok then again why focus so much on religion? Again there are undoubtebly a number of other subjects that would be easier to prove and more beneficial too.

[Deicide]

ok then again why focus so much on religion? Again there are undoubtebly a number of other subjects that would be easier to prove and more beneficial too.

Because religion is tax exempt, imposes itself on others, interferes with politics and attempts to dictate to people what they can and cannot do, never mind the fanaticism and sheer stupidity of it.

[tonymctones]

Because religion is tax exempt, imposes itself on others, interferes with politics and attempts to dictate to people what they can and cannot do, never mind the fanaticism and sheer stupidity of it.

b/c political parties dont do the same thing? who cares about the fanaticism, you said you dont care about whether religion does more good than harm or vice versa. What about the sheer stupidity and hipocracy of allowing a women to decide to have an abortion or not and not giving the man the male equivilant option? Just an example of how there are better things out there for you to argue about.

[Deicide]

b/c political parties dont do the same thing? who cares about the fanaticism, you said you dont care about whether religion does more good than harm or vice versa. What about the sheer stupidity and hipocracy of allowing a women to decide to have an abortion or not and not giving the man the male equivilant option? Just an example of how there are better things out there for you to argue about.

How can you give a male the equivalent option? A man cannot give birth. 

[tonymctones]

How can you give a male the equivalent option? A man cannot give birth. 

No but a male can wash their hands of a pregnancy and walk away, which is the male equivilant to an abortion. A woman can have an abortion or not and this is not contingent on the fathers approval, however if a man wants an abortion and the women wont get one he is relegated to paying child support. a male abortion would be washing his hands of it, or perhaps a reduced child support payment something along those lines.