(January 8, 2013 at 6:13 pm)Stimbo Wrote: Reading through the last page of posts, a thought occurs. Why is it, I wonder, that Kurt Gödel is held in such high regard amongst apologists for speaking about "God" outside of his field of mathematics; yet when Richard Dawkins speaks on the same subject outside his specialist field of evolutionary biology, those same apologists generate no end of hate mail and public castigation?
i'm actually very new to this whole area so I have to take your word on it as it doesn't have any implications beyond for now, but on a personal level i feel a kindred spirit and as a novice instinct tells me that there may be more support for some of my thinking there so yes I can see your point. But then isn't there always inconsistencies at the heart of human responses. Maybe when I read more about him I may find out if mathematics is his only field of expertise as he seems from my brief reading to have added something to other areas also. Maybe as Neil Degrass Tyson tried to tell Dawkins, people may not feel the need to castigate Dawkins if his method of communication didn't suggest something more at the heart of Dawkins responses than logic and reason. Does Tyson receive the same level responses? yet he holds to Dawkins model of existance or something similar.
