You can visit my new homepage, True Freethinker, via this feed

Tuesday, July 29, 2008

"Darwin’s Rottweiler and the Public Understanding of Scientism"

Please note that this essay is being moved and will be shortly reposted at True Freethinker

1 comment:

  1. Hello again.
    I think the strongest point of the ones you posted against Dawkins is the False Dilemma (the others such as Ad Hominem just prove that Dawkins sometimes doesn't know what to do so he just starts attacking religion, which I think is obvious).

    The problem is, Dawkins seems to be very ignorant in knowledge areas apart from biology. I mean, he says religion is the root of all evil yet he believes some traditions are good (masking them as "with historical importance"). It seems as if Dawkins hasn't really studied different religions and philosophical theories apart from thinking that every religious person is a crazy fanatic. It seems he hasn't heard about Pandeism (the theory that God is an indifferent energy) or basically all the religions that preach "being a good person" and values such as respect and TOLERANCE (something he obviously doesn't know the meaning of).
    He says wars were caused by religion and the atheists are the good guys.
    It seems he hasn't heard that in DPRK everyone with a religious faith is prosecuted by their atheist leaders, just to cite an example.

    Anyway, back to the False Dilemma.

    I've been thinking about evolution as a proof of God's existence. According to Dawkins, animals are our cousins since every single thing on earth comes from ONE organism. Apparently even though the conditions for life in Earth were fulfilled, only one living organism appeared and from that one every living being evolved... How come? If the conditions were there and, by "spontaneous generation" life appeared (or by whatever pretext he has), then life should have appeared at the same time in different parts of the planet...
    Yet all living things have extremely similar DNA structures, cells, and are carbon based!!

    Personally, I think THAT points to a "formula" which says "all living beings should be THIS way", that seems to point at some sort of planning, not just random occurrence.

    Now, still considering Dawkins idea that we all come from the same ancestor, I've found a HUGE flaw that apparently he either missed or obviously won't mention:

    How many animals can breathe underwater?
    How many animals can fly?
    Obviously the answer is many. And for example, in the case of flying, it isn't a bird-only quality, since insects can fly too.

    And now, how many animals have writing systems, economics, airplanes, telescopes, computers, electricity, cars, etc?
    Humans, that's it, no one else.

    But how come we are the only race in the whole planet that evolved to such a level that we can call ourselves "THE rational animals"?

    It would appear that evolution was meant so that we could improve, but from the beginning, we were MEANT to be humans.



Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.