Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Evolution -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Tunica Albuginea who wrote (783)	9/18/1999 2:03:00 AM
From: Tunica Albuginea	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 69300

LatherRR:Part II:The truth about JSGould and RDawkins: These are Gould's and Dawkin's ( two leading modern biologists )religious views. Like Sagan's Part I of Tunica's exploration of the confused mind of biologists this stands out by it's complete lack of any proof for their " cosmic", "religious" thoughts. They are based on blind faith. The same blind faith that they will deny religious people: Also, they are obviously profound atheists. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ annonline.com "Humans are not the end result of predictable evolutionary progress, but rather a fortuitous cosmic afterthought, a tiny little twig on the enormously arborescent bush of life, which if replanted from seed, would almost surely not grow this t wig again." - Stephen Jay Gould ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ DARWIN'S DANGEROUS DISCIPLE Richard Dawkins, fellow of New College, Oxford, is one of the leading thinkers in modern evolutionary biology. here is what the man Wired magazine termed "the Bad Boy of Evolution" had to say to Skeptic about Darwinism.........about...... Catholic religion as a virus of the mind,.................. . skeptic.com a ]Skeptic: In River Out of Eden, you also say that, "Science shares with religion the claim that it answers deep questions about origins, the nature of life, and thecosmos. But there the resemblance ends. Scientific beliefs are supported by evidence, and they get results. Myths and faiths are not and do not" (p. 33). But doesn't one first have to make the choice or decision to use pragmatism as the standard by which we judge? That is, we must first agree to base our decisions on what works, rather than on revelation or intuition. Isn't the most we can ask of the religious crowd, "Either lay hands on flat tires and pray for the sick, rather than taking them to a mechanic or a doctor, or if you are not willing to be consistent, just shut up and go away?" Doesn't the religious view amount to, "When we're afraid, we seek God. When God doesn't answer our prayers, blame it on the Devil?" AnswerDawkins: Yes, it's a kind of pathetic, childish response to some failure. b ]Skeptic: Along that line, you have the following passage in River Out of Eden: In a universe of 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 we observe has precisely the properties we should expect if there is, at bottom, no design, no purpose, no evil and no good, nothing but blind, pitiless indifference (p.133). c ]Skeptic: Then wouldn't we be better to throw out all this half-baked religious mumbo jumbo and move on to something else? Answer,Dawkins: Well yes, but that's obvious! Comment: The " coup de grace: Catholicism is " a virus " and " a disease of the mind". d ]Skeptic: You also took a bit of flak for likening religion (I think specifically Catholicism) to a virus? Is that still your position? Answer,Dawkins: Yes. I come to it through the analogy to computer viruses. We have two kinds of viruses that have a lot in common--namely real biological viruses and computer viruses. In both cases they are parasitic self-replicating codes which exploit the existence of machinery that was set up to copy and obey that kind of code. So I then ask the question, "What if there were a third kind of milieu in which a different kind of self-replicating code could become an effective parasite?" Human brains with their powerful communication systems seem to be a likely candidate. Then I ask, "What would it feel like if you were the victim of a mind virus?" Well, you would feel within yourself this deep conviction that seems to come from nowhere. It doesn't result from any evidence, but you have a total conviction that you know what's true about the world and the cosmos and life. You just know it and you're even prepared to kill people who disagree with you. You go around proselytizing and persuading other people to accept your view. The more you write down the features that such a mind virus would have, the more it starts to look like religion. I do think that the Roman Catholic religion is a disease of the mind which has a particular epidemiology similar to that of a virus. Comment: i have left out Dawkin's idiotic writings in his book "The Selfish Gene" which gave the British left a heart attack because I don't have more time to give this idiot. You can read it however for yourself, in above link as well as here: world-of-dawkins.com ======================== There you have it folks: Dawkins,Oxford University. Is Harvard, J.Gould. The modern Biology's " Intelligentsia ". Are these the people you want to teach your kids? TA