Richard Dawkins
Clinton Richard Dawkins, FRS, FRSL (born March 26, 1941) is a British ethologist, evolutionary biologist and popular science writer. He holds the Charles Simonyi Chair for the Public Understanding of Science at the University of Oxford.
Born in Nairobi, Kenya, Dawkins moved to England with his parents at the age of eight and later completed his education at the University of Oxford. He came to prominence with his 1976 book The Selfish Gene, which popularised the gene-centered view of evolution and introduced the term meme. In 1982, he made a widely cited contribution to evolutionary biology with the theory, presented in his book The Extended Phenotype, that phenotypic effects are not limited to an organism's body but can stretch far into the environment, which includes the bodies of other organisms.
In addition to his biological work, Dawkins is well-known for his views on atheism, evolution, creationism, intelligent design, and religion. He is a prominent critic of creationism and intelligent design. In his 1986 book The Blind Watchmaker, he argued against the watchmaker analogy, an argument for the existence of a supernatural creator based upon the observed complexity of living organisms, and instead described evolutionary processes as being analogous to a blind watchmaker. He has since written several popular science books, and made regular appearances on television and radio programmes, predominantly discussing the aforementioned topics.
Dawkins is an atheist; a freethinker, secular humanist, sceptic, scientific rationalist, and supporter of the Brights movement. He has widely been referred to in the media as "Darwin's Rottweiler", by analogy with English biologist T. H. Huxley, who was known as "Darwin's Bulldog" for his advocacy of natural selection. In his 2006 book The God Delusion, Dawkins contends that a supernatural creator almost certainly does not exist and that religious faith qualifies as a delusion—as a fixed false belief. As of November 2007, the English language version had sold more than 1.5 million copies and had been translated into 31 other languages, making it his most popular book to date.
Redneckophobia
Thu, 05/29/2008 - 06:39 — Meg Lee Chin
I have a deep fear of rednecks. As a 6 year walking alone to school in smalltown America during the height of the US involvement in Vietnam, I got blamed for the war. I had slanty eyes and looked like the enemy. Thus I was bullied, taunted and teased. That's probably why I feel more at home in cities and amongst educated people. Being in the US after 911 scared the hell out of me. America was gearing up for conflict based on ignorance, propaganda and the exploitation of passion untempered by reason. I could smell the rednecks a coming out of the woodwork and so I got out of that country fast!
I now find myself experiencing this same fear with this new Richard Dawkins/Brights movement. I've got no problem with atheism. What what worries me is that lately, I perceive an atmosphere of of sarcasm and hostility toward others with a different view. Ironically, athiests were always one of the groups whom I used to feel safe with. By and large I used to see atheists as rational, logical and reasonable people. I don't think I would be wrong in stating that by and large atheists tend to come from the more educated and intelligent.
Richard Dawkins is making out that atheists are an oppressed class of people. There is probably some truth in this as Amercia is becoming over-
by zealots. But it's an exaggeration and like a virus, this attitude spreads among atheists. It then becomes a self fulfilling prophecy. In other words, he is amplifying whatever potential for hostility was there in the first place. I will agree that religious fundamentalism has taken over America in a big way. I think this can be largely blamed on George Bush's government who have spread lies, stereotypes and falshoods. They've created a more dangerous world than was there before 911. There are more terrorists today than there were before 911.
Has Dawkins bitten off more than he can chew?
Wed, 05/28/2008 - 22:18 — Meg Lee Chin
According to Dawkins the question as to the purpose of the Universe is "STUPID". Why is the question stupid? Because Richard Dawkins can't answer it. Thus Dawkins belittles his customer. Children go through a phase where they play a little game called WHY? They badger their parents with ever increasingly diffcult "WHY"'s until they can no longer answer. At that point, the frustrated parent pulls rank. "Because I said so! Now go brush your teeth and get to bed!"
Thus Richard Dawkins' rather egotistical ambition to rid the world of religion has hit a wall. In his exuberance, he has ignored that science, philosophy and religion though interelated and sharing common characteristics are not interchangeable. No Dawkins appears not have thought far or deeply enough into this issue.
There is probably not a being on planet Earth who has not asked these questions. What is the purpose and meaning of life? Why are we here? So is everybody who has asked this question throughout history just been STUPID for asking? Has there been no intelligent life on Earth before the appearance of Richard Dawkins?
Science may one day explain the mechanism behind everything. But it won't explain WHY? Simply to bury your head in the sand and to ignore the question and worse yet, to label it as STUPID is guaranteed to lose you points even at the high school debate level.
