Enemies of Reason

Did anyone watch the first of Prof: Richard dawkins progammes 'Enemies of Reason',started on channel 4 last Monday,2nd this Monday..He visited a 'new age' type fair and stopped in on a couple of stalls of clayrvoiants and tarot readers,while we did'nt see him having the cards read for him, we did see him shoot down in flames the guy who tried to connect the Prof: with a 'dead' relative.Basically the good Dr: poo-poos all that a lot on this site hold dear.(currently I have to say I'm somewhat on the fence as I'm reading The God Delusion)

Robin

Hi robinchun

I didn't watch that as I knew it would make me *grr*.

It is weird, as an agnostic I am usually very sympathetic to atheists/freethinkers.

But Dawkins! Can't stand his arrogance.

Talk about throwing the rattle out of the crib...he just angrily talks AT people who don't share his world view.

reason/rationality/science are all essential and fascinating. But they're not the ONLY way. It is as if he can't see logic is BUT ONE way to experience the world...what about ritual, intuition, tradition, visionaries etc? he labels these as diseases as they can't be called logical. Science CANNOT encompass or explain all of the human experience, as I'm sure most will agree on AT!

Edited to add: It is also rich that he is attcking New Age/spiritual types. OK, everyone knows there are fraudulent 'psychics' etc out there so to him it is an easy target. But he attacks mainsteam religion for being too traditional and unquestioning and now he attcks those of us who have broken away from religion and on alternative spiritual quests! So only scientists are acceptable then...

OK end of rant!

Nope, missed that one, but caught last week's ...a severely edited programme, judging by his interview with the astrologer from The Observer (was it? can't recall).
The experiment he watched on the dowsers was interesting ...they only had success rates of 1 in 6, which the tester said was what they'd expect for chance ...

ribbitcat

Edited to add: It is also rich that he is attcking New Age/spiritual types. OK, everyone knows there are fraudulent 'psychics' etc out there so to him it is an easy target. But he attacks mainsteam religion for being too traditional and unquestioning and now he attcks those of us who have broken away from religion and on alternative spiritual quests! So only scientists are acceptable then...

OK end of rant![/QUOTE]

I think he says..show me the evidence..his point is science is based on fact and evidence,where as faith,religeon,mediums,astrology and the like have no proof.

Robin

NOTE: This isn't some kind of crazed over-reaction to your post Robinchun! And can I say I do not like cold-readers or manipulative 'psychics' who prey on the vulnerable. I know what you are saying.

This is a rant on Dawkins generally, basically I'd like to lay out my feelings on the whole evangelical-atheist thing, people may disagree but here goes:


Historically the West has had a history of putting things into 2 categories: science/magic, reason/intuition, West/East, male/female, black/white, civilised/uncivilised, straight/gay etc. It labels one as 'normal' and/or superior and sees the other as inferior and/or strange. Dawkins, of course, would dismiss everything that opposes the 'science' label. I feel that the world doesn't fit into such neat dichotomies, and thinking in this way robs us of so much human experience.

In some cases very ancient experiences, such as trances and rituals, have no 'logical' value. Human knowledge is very imperfect, like the story of the blind men trying to describe an elephant- we do the best we can, each of us, with our own little portion of the universe. Different communities have different vocabularies for describing truth- scientists use scientific terminology, mystics use the language of revelation.

I have no problem at all with atheists and scientists...it just...we're all human, with our imperfect senses as our only guide...scientists freely admit that their theories are just the best they have 'for now', and that it is pretty unlikely they will ever come up with a 'perfect equation' to explain all of our marvellous universe. What is a good theory today is rubbish tomorrow. I applaud science for science's sake, and see reason and logic as very valuable. Yet why does this make other things- intuition, tradition, ritual- less valuable? Why should Dawkins be so defensive of science that he feels the need to attack any 'competing' way of thinking? Why do we need to 'compete' at all, we imperfect seekers of imperfect truths on this little rock floating through space?

So, before I started rambling...I was really trying to say...just because science is Dawkin's truth why does it have to be everyone else's?

Those who haven't seen the series can watch it on Google video here: http://tinyurl.com/2ma596