Richard Dawkins

For all things philosophical.

Moderators: AMod, iMod

Post Reply
User avatar
Hjarloprillar
Posts: 952
Joined: Thu Aug 30, 2012 7:36 am
Location: Sol sector.

Richard Dawkins

Post by Hjarloprillar »

What is mind?

The freedom to think. And think maybe religion is in a nutshell . idiotic.
In our enlightened times people PICK the least offensive/stupid/racist/bigoted path through their religion to appear fair and equitable.
god is love. and quietly forget to beat you wife with a precisely weighed rod.
While having little idea what 'their' religion is. 80% have no idea where arimathea is let alone the language aramaic
[or where greece is for that matter. ask the idiot '300' fans where thermopylae is .. may as well have been on moon]

Dawkins points out this path is called science. Or impartial methodology.

A brave man to agree to face the blustering idiocy of talk show hosts without batting an eyelid. he lets them crucify themselves..

I believe in 'a' direction. This has squat to do with religion. im a generalist. that tinker of what is.

prill
lonrdkelvin
Posts: 1
Joined: Fri Jan 30, 2015 1:20 pm

Re: Richard Dawkins

Post by lonrdkelvin »

Great thinkers—or as Dimnet called them, “people possessed of a mastering purpose leaving no room for inferior occupations”—stand apart for the “directness of their intellectual vision.” The mind of the weak thinker, on the other hand, has a “fatal capacity for letting in extraneous thoughts or mental parasites.
:oops:
User avatar
GreatandWiseTrixie
Posts: 1547
Joined: Tue Feb 03, 2015 9:51 pm

Re: Richard Dawkins

Post by GreatandWiseTrixie »

lonrdkelvin wrote:Great thinkers—or as Dimnet called them, “people possessed of a mastering purpose leaving no room for inferior occupations”—stand apart for the “directness of their intellectual vision.” The mind of the weak thinker, on the other hand, has a “fatal capacity for letting in extraneous thoughts or mental parasites.
:oops:
He is a thinker. He performs no real action other than cheap entertainment. He offers no scientific investigation on the nature of life and death, no experiments concerning the metaphysical, or scientific experiments on what occurs after bodily death.

Extraneous thought is the stuff of dreams, one must take breaks if one is to avoid repetition and closemindness, a sure sign of stagnancy indeed.
Systematic
Posts: 345
Joined: Wed Feb 04, 2015 5:29 am

Re: Richard Dawkins

Post by Systematic »

GreatandWiseTrixie wrote:He is a thinker. He performs no real action other than cheap entertainment. He offers no scientific investigation on the nature of life and death, no experiments concerning the metaphysical, or scientific experiments on what occurs after bodily death.

Extraneous thought is the stuff of dreams, one must take breaks if one is to avoid repetition and closemindness, a sure sign of stagnancy indeed.
Speculation is what we do when we have no way of performing an experiment. Hopefully we do it as rationally as possible. It's not like people who deny climate change in spite of the evidence, because avoiding evidence is a denial of what is known while speculating rationally in the absence of evidence is our best option to know.
User avatar
GreatandWiseTrixie
Posts: 1547
Joined: Tue Feb 03, 2015 9:51 pm

Re: Richard Dawkins

Post by GreatandWiseTrixie »

Systematic wrote:
GreatandWiseTrixie wrote:He is a thinker. He performs no real action other than cheap entertainment. He offers no scientific investigation on the nature of life and death, no experiments concerning the metaphysical, or scientific experiments on what occurs after bodily death.

Extraneous thought is the stuff of dreams, one must take breaks if one is to avoid repetition and closemindness, a sure sign of stagnancy indeed.
Speculation is what we do when we have no way of performing an experiment. Hopefully we do it as rationally as possible. It's not like people who deny climate change in spite of the evidence, because avoiding evidence is a denial of what is known while speculating rationally in the absence of evidence is our best option to know.
There is no way to perform the experiment now, but only due to dillydallying on Oprah TV showing us how white his teeth is.

Make way for science. They say man is the scientific mind, but if this is the case, why do I feel like GladOS from Portal (who is a feminine AI) is the only one with true scientific balls anymore? When flight was impossible, we did not dillydally around saying that nothing could be done, even Leonardo had plans for flying machines (but was surrounded by people who could care less.)
Blaggard
Posts: 2246
Joined: Fri Jan 10, 2014 9:17 pm

Re: Richard Dawkins

Post by Blaggard »

Richard Dawkins is a good scientist but a remedial philosopher, Daniel Dennett is his best friend, I magine if they combined forces to make the Dennetkins?
User avatar
GreatandWiseTrixie
Posts: 1547
Joined: Tue Feb 03, 2015 9:51 pm

Re: Richard Dawkins

Post by GreatandWiseTrixie »

Blaggard wrote:Richard Dawkins is a good scientist but a remedial philosopher, Daniel Dennett is his best friend, I magine if they combined forces to make the Dennetkins?
Hmm...combining two minds...an experimental force. Hmm, but the best way to boost power in this way is just to tell your friend the truth, though most would rarely want to here it. Otherwise, friendship often results in mutual stupidity, slowly dragging both into the vortex day by day.
Ginkgo
Posts: 2652
Joined: Mon Apr 30, 2012 2:47 pm

Re: Richard Dawkins

Post by Ginkgo »

GreatandWiseTrixie wrote:
Blaggard wrote:Richard Dawkins is a good scientist but a remedial philosopher, Daniel Dennett is his best friend, I magine if they combined forces to make the Dennetkins?
Hmm...combining two minds...an experimental force. Hmm, but the best way to boost power in this way is just to tell your friend the truth, though most would rarely want to here it. Otherwise, friendship often results in mutual stupidity, slowly dragging both into the vortex day by day.

Dawkins is an evolution biologist so he doesn't do metaphysics, On the other hand. Dennett does. Dennett's area is philosophy of mind.
User avatar
GreatandWiseTrixie
Posts: 1547
Joined: Tue Feb 03, 2015 9:51 pm

Re: Richard Dawkins

Post by GreatandWiseTrixie »

Ginkgo wrote:
GreatandWiseTrixie wrote:
Blaggard wrote:Richard Dawkins is a good scientist but a remedial philosopher, Daniel Dennett is his best friend, I magine if they combined forces to make the Dennetkins?
Hmm...combining two minds...an experimental force. Hmm, but the best way to boost power in this way is just to tell your friend the truth, though most would rarely want to here it. Otherwise, friendship often results in mutual stupidity, slowly dragging both into the vortex day by day.

Dawkins is an evolution biologist so he doesn't do metaphysics, On the other hand. Dennett does. Dennett's area is philosophy of mind.
Perhaps then, they should stop limiting themself to only one area.
Systematic
Posts: 345
Joined: Wed Feb 04, 2015 5:29 am

Re: Richard Dawkins

Post by Systematic »

GreatandWiseTrixie wrote:
Systematic wrote:
GreatandWiseTrixie wrote:He is a thinker. He performs no real action other than cheap entertainment. He offers no scientific investigation on the nature of life and death, no experiments concerning the metaphysical, or scientific experiments on what occurs after bodily death.

Extraneous thought is the stuff of dreams, one must take breaks if one is to avoid repetition and closemindness, a sure sign of stagnancy indeed.
Speculation is what we do when we have no way of performing an experiment. Hopefully we do it as rationally as possible. It's not like people who deny climate change in spite of the evidence, because avoiding evidence is a denial of what is known while speculating rationally in the absence of evidence is our best option to know.
There is no way to perform the experiment now, but only due to dillydallying on Oprah TV showing us how white his teeth is.

Make way for science. They say man is the scientific mind, but if this is the case, why do I feel like GladOS from Portal (who is a feminine AI) is the only one with true scientific balls anymore? When flight was impossible, we did not dillydally around saying that nothing could be done, even Leonardo had plans for flying machines (but was surrounded by people who could care less.)
May I humbly suggest science and rationalism. I mean reason.
User avatar
GreatandWiseTrixie
Posts: 1547
Joined: Tue Feb 03, 2015 9:51 pm

Re: Richard Dawkins

Post by GreatandWiseTrixie »

Systematic wrote:
GreatandWiseTrixie wrote: There is no way to perform the experiment now, but only due to dillydallying on Oprah TV showing us how white his teeth is.

Make way for science. They say man is the scientific mind, but if this is the case, why do I feel like GladOS from Portal (who is a feminine AI) is the only one with true scientific balls anymore? When flight was impossible, we did not dillydally around saying that nothing could be done, even Leonardo had plans for flying machines (but was surrounded by people who could care less.)
May I humbly suggest science and rationalism. I mean reason.
I do have a reason, and it's glorious! Salvation. Do not worry, do not fret. We will require the existence of your planet in the foreseeable future, in order to secure our wonderous Glory.
Systematic
Posts: 345
Joined: Wed Feb 04, 2015 5:29 am

Re: Richard Dawkins

Post by Systematic »

GreatandWiseTrixie wrote:
I do have a reason, and it's glorious! Salvation. Do not worry, do not fret. We will require the existence of your planet in the foreseeable future, in order to secure our wonderous Glory.
I certainly hope so.
Post Reply