Richard Dawkins versus Richard Dawson, sort of (reprise)
A different version of this article was originally posted May 19, 2008.
Since then my readership has grown and this article has received many page views.
In the thousands. I thank you Lord.
So, I represent this post with some minor changes.
I have nothing against either gentleman. Richard Dawson is a fine comic actor and host.
This is posted for educational and satirical purposes.
World of Dawkins
'Religious people split into three main groups when faced with science. I shall label them the "know-nothings", the "know-alls", and the "no-contests".'
There is also room for persons who are educated in both science and religion. It is closed-minded to overlook such a possibility. This would not make someone a 'know-all', or 'no contest', but simply someone with education in both science and religion.
The link is dead now, please see:
A pejorative term for the concept that only the methods of natural science and related categories form the elements for any philosophical or other enquiry. Blackburn (1996: 344).
If at first you don't succeed....kill 'im. (Family Fued)
"I suspect that today if you asked people to justify their belief in God, the dominant reason would be scientific. Most people, I believe, think that you need a God to explain the existence of the world, and especially the existence of life. They are wrong, but our education system is such that many people don't know it."
Granted there are religious people that are not very educated within religious studies.
There are also non-religious people not very educated within their particular worldview.
One of my complaints on this blog over the years has been the overall lack of philosophical education within the Western education system until University/college.
Christian theism can appeal to first cause philosophical arguments which reason that an immaterial, non-measurable, infinite, eternal, first cause created the laws of science.
This would be mainly/primarily an appeal to philosophy/philosophy of religion and not science.
Philosophical ontological (and related) arguments are secondary considerations concerning the existence of God within Christian faith.
Philosophical ontological (and related) arguments are for theism and not the neccessarily the Christian God.
Christianity primarily appeals to historical, Biblical revelation for a belief in God.
Richard Dawson: I asked you to name a time when people usually get out of bed. And being the Einstein you are, you said..."Morning." Our survey said...[Bzzt]
Richard Dawson: Zero. And then as if that wasn't bad enough, I asked you, name a time when people usually go to bed. You said, of course..."Night." Our survey said...[Ding!]
Richard Dawson: Two!
"...when it comes to choosing from the smorgasbord of available religions, their potential virtues seem to count for nothing, compared to the matter of heredity.
A good point, but then some persons are educated in religious philosophy and faith, and do not simply follow the worldview of parents.
Children often grow up being taught the worldview of parents.
The worldview often goes significantly intellectually unchallenged by the children.
Some parents are religous.
Some parents are non-religious.
The worldview of children who become adults could be religious or non-religious.
"It's all part of life's rich pattern.
"Faith is the great cop-out, the great excuse to evade the need to think and evaluate evidence. Faith is belief in spite of, even perhaps because of, the lack of evidence."
Yes, some religious faith is not warranted. On my blogs this type of faith is challenged again and again.
Those who hold that empiricism and science provide the ultimate answer to all questions do not have all the specific answers on how this takes place.
Faith may be placed in energy/matter as its own cause.
Religion can be a cop-out, but so can simply following pop science philosophy which can in ignorance and without proper religious education, reject all religion as blind faith.
Anyone that dismisses all religious academia and its philosophical and theological complex workings as pseudo-academic is intellectually ignorant on the issue, and there are plenty of these people on-line.
“ABC has told me that a sponsor has complained about my making anti-Nixon jokes. I would just like to say that I believe Mr. Nixon did his best to destroy this country.”
"It is often said, mainly by the "no-contests", that although there is no positive evidence for the existence of God, nor is there evidence against his existence. So it is best to keep an open mind and be agnostic. At first sight that seems an unassailable position, at least in the weak sense of Pascal's wager. But on second thoughts it seems a cop-out, because the same could be said of Father Christmas and tooth fairies. There may be fairies at the bottom of the garden. There is no evidence for it, but you can't prove that there aren't any, so shouldn't we be agnostic with respect to fairies?"
There is not historical documentation from many sources over many years from different geographical areas for fairies at the bottom of a garden.
There is Biblical historical documentation of approximately 3500 years of actual persons, from various religions who experienced God. There are scribes, prophets, apostles and of course the resurrected Christ who are actual documented persons.
The documentation would still be actual even if the Scripture contained some falsehoods, meaning a false comparison and false analogy is presented.
Definition of False Analogy:
“There were people I know that got upset that I kiss people. I kiss them for luck and love, that's all. That's what my mother did to me.”
BLACKBURN, SIMON (1996) Oxford Dictionary of Philosophy, Oxford, Oxford University Press
Allan Holdsworth back with Tempest 1972-73. Back before he was stuck in his current jazz-rock tone.
Thanks Philip from L.A., for the image below.
The original email message suggested these people were Obama supporters, but for the purposes of this blog let us just state that these people are very poor philosophers.
My more specific suggestions are:
These people are under the control of aliens and are being sacrificed for the cause.
These people are hellbound and going to a plain literal hell on earth. Yes, some fundamentalists hold to that type of view on hell.
These people are cultists giving it all for the cause.
Have some suggestions who these people are and what is happening? Please leave a comment.
Interesting how they jump in, rather than walk in and fall like mindless Zombies. No offense Zombie.
The final animation is Benny Hinn at 'work'.
Posted by admin