(August 12, 2013 at 11:03 am)Fidel_Castronaut Wrote: So maybe this was his attempt to stir. It certainly got a lot of people talking, regardless. And I think we can all agree to a point on the actual central issues regarding racism and the nature of political/social Islam.

What exactly would this attempt to stir accomplish? I'm not saying that wasn't the purpose, but what did he achieve? People aren't talking about him instead of Islam.

(August 12, 2013 at 11:11 am)Faith No More Wrote:

(August 12, 2013 at 11:03 am)Fidel_Castronaut Wrote: So maybe this was his attempt to stir. It certainly got a lot of people talking, regardless. And I think we can all agree to a point on the actual central issues regarding racism and the nature of political/social Islam.

What exactly would this attempt to stir accomplish? I'm not saying that wasn't the purpose, but what did he achieve? People aren't talking about him instead of Islam.

There could be multiple factors. I've met Dawkins and seen him debate numerous times, and generally hes very abrasive (rightly or wrongly), but clearly knows his stuff.

It could have been an attempt to criticise the seeming prevailing attitude towards some religious practices here in the UK (a de facto discourse unegalitarian [sic] tolerance), or maybe someone made a comment to him that is hitherto unknown (at least to me) and his wanting to respond got the better of him.

Or he could have been trolling in his own unique way. Maybe he's writing a new book on a similar subject and wanted to test the water on a topic. Regardless, and alluding to my
Point earlier, sometimes Dawkins says stuff in RL that requires you to read between the lines. Still, comes across terribly on twitter regardless.

---

Maybe he just didn't think the outcome would be what it was/is. Seems that aside the talk of him, the issue of Islam and 'race' is the predominant topic of discussion.

I just don't see why Dawkins thought a twitter post would be sufficient to tackle this subject. Muslim countries have a lot of problems, ONE of them being the incredibly harsh enforcement of Islam which has been hindering progress. History, economics, etc are missing from his little rant. Stick with biology, Richard.

(August 12, 2013 at 12:35 pm)Psykhronic Wrote: I just don't see why Dawkins thought a twitter post would be sufficient to tackle this subject. Muslim countries have a lot of problems, ONE of them being the incredibly harsh enforcement of Islam which has been hindering progress. History, economics, etc are missing from his little rant. Stick with biology, Richard.

I think his point was that one of the problems of Islamic countries is the hindered progress Islam causes.

I think he comes across as if that's the major or only problem.

Quote:Your thoughts?

He's right. How many waste their lives "studying" the fucking koran instead of doing something useful.

And "islam" is not a race so people ought to get their heads out of their asses on that claim.

(August 12, 2013 at 7:38 am)Fidel_Castronaut Wrote: For those who haven't heard, Dawkins has had some criticism thrown at him for comments made over Twitter about the lack of Muslim Nobel Prize winners (among other things).

A good summary is here:

http://rationalist.org.uk/articles/4267/...g-catch-up

Effectively folk criticising Dawkins have accused him of being racist for pointing out two things (his words)

1. Cambridge (Trinity) has more Nobel Laureates than all of the Islamic world put together (and)
2. 'They' [The Islamic world I'm guessing] did some great things in the middle ages (but have effectively produced or contributed nothing in hundreds of years).

Your thoughts? (I've simplified the entire debate/row, but the summary site gives some good background).

My first reaction is to say (truthfully) that whatever else his comments are, they're not racist, as 'Islam' is not a race. In fact the assumption that all muslims are brown is pretty stupid.

Anyway, if anyone cares, share your thoughts.

Since there is actually no such thing as separate races (biologically) and there are Muslims, then no, Muslim cannot be considered something that does not essentially exist in the first place or we would have no Muslims...

So-called Islamism is not a matter of race at all, argument finished. I yearn increasingly (but not seriously, and so, not really *cue fake laughter at a completely unfunny psuedo joke*) for a world where perhaps even the majority of people shall ultimately gather the knowledge required to comprehend this matter.