Maybe you could just buy his book "The God Delusion" where he kind of talks about it quite a bit.
God & Science Proved!
- Thread starter RadoX
- Start date
Maybe you could just buy his book "The God Delusion" where he kind of talks about it quite a bit.
And the only link you posted was to a biased site at Cambridge university, and some misquoted dictionary references.
No, weren't allowed to use internet references of any kind. Did yours allow you to only reference a single, biased source?
If you prefer, I can reference this to support my view (used as a source for the Wiki Page btw)
http://www.iep.utm.edu/atheism/
Of course, it's philosophical rubbish, because atheism is a philosophical position, but hey
That's really really funny. At my uni we were only allowed to use journal articles, not website or text book refernces. However those sources could be obtained from the internet.
Also all the links you post have a philosophical bias. There is no definitive right or wrong answer in philosophy because as soon as you give a universally accepted definition to something, philosophy fails.
Maybe you could just buy his book "The God Delusion" where he kind of talks about it quite a bit.
It doesn't mention much about 'atheos' specifically. That's all I asked. None of the 'highly educated' people on this forum would even agree with any of Dawkin's highly respected opinions on atheism.
Lol.... consulting the preacher?
That's like asking Fred Phelps for definitions on christianity.
We were only allowed to use direct journal references, where you found it was largely irrelevant, but in most cases, paper was much better than the net.
But you can't discuss atheism without discussing philosophy, because that's what it is
What you're really saying is that you don't like anything that could contradict your own world view, irrespective of whether it is correct or not.
A person who believes in Christianity, Jesus, the holy spirit and the biblical God?
While atheism can be discussed in philosophy, and many atheistic philosophies be made, atheism itself is not a philosophy.
If I wanted to find out what a Christian was then yes I would ask a Christian, that makes more sense than asking a Muslim and possibly getting a reply like 'Christians are crusaders and cows', or asking an atheist and getting 'brainwashed sheep'
While atheism can be discussed in philosophy, and many atheistic philosophies be made, atheism itself is not a philosophy.
If I wanted to find out what a Christian was then yes I would ask a Christian, that makes more sense than asking a Muslim and possibly getting a reply like 'Christians are crusaders and cows', or asking an atheist and getting 'brainwashed sheep'
Last edited:
Dawkin's opinions on atheism are not highly respected in the philosophical world, because they are essentially him presenting his own world view by referencing his expertise and education in other, unrelated areas, and failing to acknowledge the assumptions implicit in doing so.
Atheism is a position that can only be discussed in a philosophical context, it doesn't fit into anywhere else...
And philosophy is not highly respected in the scientific world, or by me.
BS.
Then stop arguing philosophy then?
You seem to want to steamroller your faith in science into other areas where it was never designed to go, much like a christian wants to steamroller biblical teachings into all aspects of life. it's scary how religious you behave.
What a convincing argument, complete crap of course, but highly convincing if you've got an IQ of 12.
I'm not arguing philosophy at all, you are.
IQ is not a valid measure of intelligence, yet in my early 20s I scored a 140.
He's got an IQ of 140 you know! He said so in another thread - it's like the best you can get in an OcUK of Poster Top Trumps:
bhavv
Credibility: 1
IQ: 140
Only 140? Which test and was it Mensa certified?
Any discussion around atheism, theism, religion etc tends to be philosophical (or theological) in nature. There's no other context to discuss it in, certainly not the scientific method
And only 140? I guess that explains a lot.
Here:
I've already done you the service of saying it is an appeal to intellect. You should be proud of me!
I have no idea what it was certified by, we don't even officially do mensa certified IQ tests in the UK.
Anyone living in the UK and whining about IQ tests is a grade A clown, they are regarded very poorly as a test material here.
IQ tests don't demonstrate anything but your ability to pass an IQ test. If I practiced enough past papers beforehand, I could do a Mensa one and end up in the top 1% scoring category.
Anyone living in the UK and whining about IQ tests is a grade A clown, they are regarded very poorly as a test material here.
IQ tests don't demonstrate anything but your ability to pass an IQ test. If I practiced enough past papers beforehand, I could do a Mensa one and end up in the top 1% scoring category.
Last edited:
I would offer that anyone who knows that they are regarded poorly and then uses them to be the foundation for an appeal to intellect should be considered the clown.