Dawkins>Prospect(?)

[Edwardo Piet]

Dawkins was voted by Prospect as Britain's top intellectual, and also - on another poll - he was voted as the world's 3rd top intellectual.

However then he was either genuinely criticized or he was double-crossed for political reasons.

Here is the article that criticized TGD - I think they surely 'believe in belief' -:

http://www.prospect-magazine.co.uk/artic...hp?id=7803

Dawkins the Dogmatist! WTF?! He's the opposite! Dogmatism is exactly what he's against!

Sounds like a SERIOUS case of 'belief in belief'. I know of people who say 'I haven't read the book, but that doesn't matter, from the reviews and responses it got, it was clearly a bad move. Because after all, Dawkins wrote this book for Political reasons, why else would he write it? You write things like that for political reasons.'

Such an idea is political correctness gone mad!

Dawkins said himself "I'm a bad politican".

BUT he also replied when more or less asked 'what if religion is winning?':

"So what if it is? What I care about is what's true"

Dawkins clearly writes his books more for scientific reasons than political reasons, it just so happens that when you stand up for the truth - rather than delusion - you're in accordance with morality aswell. Dawkins clearly states that Religion is immoral, basically because of faith. And faith is immoral because its not based on evidence - ie its blind - its ignorant, its a delusion.

Dawkins cares about truth. And rightly so.

This is the paragraph from the article that shocked me - and I've highlighted in bold the important bit -:

'...This persistence is what any scientific attack on religion must explain—and this one doesn't. Dawkins mentions lots of modern atheist scientists who have tried to explain the puzzle: Robert Hinde, Scott Atran, Pascal Boyer, DS Wilson, Daniel Dennett, all of them worth reading. But he cannot accept the obvious conclusion to draw from their works, which is that thoroughgoing atheism is unnatural and will never be popular.'

IF that's true...So what?! So popularity is more important than THE TRUTH all of a sudden?!

(Actually I don't think its sudden!)

Crazy Frog's terrible version of Axel F got to number 1 in the charts here in Britian. For several weeks! That's popularity for you!

What's scientific truth/evidence done? What's Darwin done?

I think we can see what's more important: Crazy Frog or Natural Selection(?)...

I'll leave it at that.