HI Caroline,
I have many times encountered people in various fora who think Dawkins
is guilty of exactly the things he accuses religious people of. I think
he is not only rude, but totally neglects to consider that others might
have a different and equally valid conception of the universe. Dawkins'
behaviour makes people consider him a hypocrite and this, along with the
vehemence of his delivery, causes them to laugh at him. I recall in
particular one conversation he had with a rabbi where he asked the rabbi
what right he had to 'brainwash' children into becoming jews. I'd argue
that bringing up children to believe that there is only one, true,
scientific way is also brainwashing, yet it seems Dawkins can only see
the plank in his brother's eye.
While I agree with you that many people are vocal when others criticise
their religious convictions, I feel scientists are no different. I
postulate that the beliefs of observers change the universe. But try
saying to a scientist that they might like to consider that one's
beliefs will actually change physical phenomena and they'll call you a
looney.
Regards,
Morgan Leigh
PhD Candidate
School of History, Philosophy, Religion and Classics
University of Queensland
religionbazaar.blogspot.com
Caroline Tully wrote:
> Actually I did not say that I personally was laughing at academics who
> are religious. While I actually like religion, I do however, think it is
> the height of naivety to believe in it. I realise that sounds rude and I
> am not intending to be rude, but it is hard to be critical about
> religions/religiousness without someone taking high offence. Apparently
> it is off limits to criticise *above all things* someone's religion or
> susceptibility to religion, but imagine if I was talking about your
> partiality to art or favourite piece of art, am I allowed to criticise
> that? Isn't religion just another "favourite aesthetic thing" of
> somebody's? One of the things I found useful from reading Dawkins is
> that he asks why we should give so much respect religious claims. Why?
>
>
>
> ~Caroline Tully.
>
>
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
>
> From: Society for The Academic Study of Magic
> [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of jacqueline simpson
>
> Sent: Friday, 19 December 2008 3:53 AM
>
> To: [log in to unmask]
>
> Subject: Re: [ACADEMIC-STUDY-MAGIC] Dawkins
>
>
>
> Caroline,
>
>
>
> As an academic who is also religious, may I enquire just what it is that
> you find laughable in that?
>
>
>
> Jacqueline Simpson
>
>
>
>
>
> --- On Thu, 18/12/08, Caroline Tully <[log in to unmask]
> <mailto:[log in to unmask]>> wrote:
>
>
>
>> From: Caroline Tully <[log in to unmask]>
>
>> Subject: [ACADEMIC-STUDY-MAGIC] Dawkins
>
>> To: [log in to unmask]
>
>> Date: Thursday, 18 December, 2008, 8:48 AM Morgan, who exactly is
>
>> "laughing at academia"
>
>> because of Richard Dawkins?
>
>> I'd have thought that people would be laughing at academia because of
>
>> academics who are religious, rather than at those who are atheists.
>
>>
>
>>
>
>>
>
>> ~Caroline.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
--
|