|
|
|
romantic composers Richard Dawkins is proof that you can be intelligent AND really shupid.
|
|
|
i'm no expert on science and will take it on faith that dawkins is one of the great biological scientific minds in the world. but, outside science, this guy says some really dumb things. if chomsky should stick to linguistics, dawkins should stick to science. at any rate, please stay away from arts and culture. in Foreign Policy, the shupid fool shares one of his epiphanies with us. he says 'if bach had been brought up in an atheistic culture, he might have produced oratorios just as sublime, but inspired by the universe by the galaxy, by plate tectonics.' what a dumbass. for starters, bach WAS inspired by the stuff dawkins mentions
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The administrator has disabled public write access. |
|
|
|
romantic composers Richard Dawkins is proof that you can be intelligent AND really shupid.
|
|
|
of the great biological scientific minds in the world. but, outside science, this guy says some really dumb things. if chomsky should stick to linguistics, dawkins should stick to science. at any rate, please stay away from arts and culture. in Foreign Policy, the shupid fool shares one of his epiphanies with us. he says 'if bach had been brought up in an atheistic culture, he might have produced oratorios just as sublime, but inspired by the universe by the galaxy, by plate tectonics.' what a dumbass. for starters, bach WAS inspired by the stuff dawkins mentions
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The administrator has disabled public write access. |
|
|
|
romantic composers Richard Dawkins is proof that you can be intelligent AND really shupid.
|
|
|
i'm no expert on science and will take it on faith that dawkins is one of the great biological scientific minds in the world. but, outside science, this guy says some really dumb things. if chomsky should stick to linguistics, dawkins should stick to science. at any rate, please stay away from arts and culture. Dawkins has no relevance to Bach. The latter was a composer who had to earn a living. The best opportunity was in the Church. Cormac.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The administrator has disabled public write access. |
|
|
|
romantic composers Richard Dawkins is proof that you can be intelligent AND really shupid.
|
|
|
of the great biological scientific minds in the world. but, outside science, this guy says some really dumb things. if chomsky should stick to linguistics, dawkins should stick to science. at any rate, please stay away from arts and culture. in Foreign Policy, the shupid fool shares one of his epiphanies with us. he says 'if bach had been brought up in an atheistic culture, he might have produced oratorios just as sublime, but inspired by the universe by the galaxy, by plate tectonics.' what a dumbass. for starters, bach WAS inspired by the stuff dawkins mentions
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The administrator has disabled public write access. |
|
|
|
romantic composers Richard Dawkins is proof that you can be intelligent AND really shupid.
|
|
|
i'm no expert on science and will take it on faith that dawkins is one of the great biological scientific minds in the world. but, outside science, this guy says some really dumb things. if chomsky should stick to linguistics, dawkins should stick to science. at any rate, please stay away from arts and culture. As someone once put it in a blog post: THAT FOOL DAWKINS Rational debate about the existence/ non-existence of God, and the ethical implications thereof, is good. It belongs to human dignity to seek to discern what is true. There is an academic discipline which studies questions such as what constitutes a warranted belief, what religious language 'means', whether it has a possible reference and what it means for our conceptions of the good life. That discipline is philosophy. There is also an academic discipline whose remit of study includes the atrocities committed in the name of religion. That discipline is history. So why, when Channel Four want to air a programme about these issues do they give air-time to a biologist with no training whatsoever in either discipline? Moreover one whose previous pronouncements in this area have only been published because he has piggy-backed on his (justified) scientific reputation and which, considered in their own right, are unworthy of a moderately bright A-level student.. Yet another example of the ignoring of the humanities in mainstream culture and, in spite of the irrationalism of our age, the persistence of the Victorian cult of the polymath scientist. Boo, hiss.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The administrator has disabled public write access. |
|
|
|
romantic composers Richard Dawkins is proof that you can be intelligent AND really shupid.
|
|
|
i'm no expert on science and will take it on faith that dawkins is one of the great biological scientific minds in the world. but, outside science, this guy says some really dumb things. if chomsky should stick to linguistics, dawkins should stick to science. at any rate, please stay away from arts and culture. read more » If people where as diligent with their spirituality as Dawkins is with his scepticism, there would be a lot less believers, and many more people would be more confident in their own experiences. BOfL
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The administrator has disabled public write access. |
|
Favoured: 0
