RE: Skeptics I no longer have any respect for.
February 16, 2012 at 12:06 pm
(This post was last modified: February 16, 2012 at 12:12 pm by NoMoreFaith.)
The criticisms are on philosophy, not science. Although if you know of some seriously scientific inaccuracies, please share, I didn't spot any, but none of it was my specialty, but regardless, its a body of work comprising of many different criticisms, separately independent. Some of it may be inaccurate, certainly doesn't invalidate the whole book.
Philosophy is not Data, and the bible is stated to be the Word of God, a perfect being. That is why the bible cannot be in error, because the concept of God cannot be in error.
Last time I checked, Dawkins was still human, and therefore his text is allowed to be fallible.
I doubt you are proposing a point of view that any book which consists an inaccuracy is therefore null and void. My point is that there is much in that book which is valuable as an introduction to atheistic arguments, and it does THAT pretty well.
That is my sole contention. Was it always accurate? I said no, and you say no, our difference on this matter appears to be whether it renders a person as not worthy of respect.
I personally think it fallacious to disregard a body of work based upon a single inaccuracy unless that inaccuracy is the basis for all other derivative statements (or whether the body claims to be the work of a being incapable of error).
I think perhaps, there is a difference for respect for his body of work, and respect for personal actions.
I suspect I don't know the whole story, so I happily concede this point on personal respect.
I do have concerns that personal respect and professional respect should remain separate and clarified when stating a lack of respect for someone. A lack of respect for them, or their views, or both.. its seems an important distinction.
When I say I have respect for a skeptic, its based upon how they conduct that skepticism publicly and their contribution to skeptical argument.
For that reason I respect Dawkins, but as I said in my original response, I don't care for his personality at times (and then he makes me laugh at other times).
Self-authenticating private evidence is useless, because it is indistinguishable from the illusion of it. ― Kel, Kelosophy Blog
If you’re going to watch tele, you should watch Scooby Doo. That show was so cool because every time there’s a church with a ghoul, or a ghost in a school. They looked beneath the mask and what was inside?
The f**king janitor or the dude who runs the waterslide. Throughout history every mystery. Ever solved has turned out to be. Not Magic. ― Tim Minchin, Storm
If you’re going to watch tele, you should watch Scooby Doo. That show was so cool because every time there’s a church with a ghoul, or a ghost in a school. They looked beneath the mask and what was inside?
The f**king janitor or the dude who runs the waterslide. Throughout history every mystery. Ever solved has turned out to be. Not Magic. ― Tim Minchin, Storm
