Posts: 55
Threads: 5
Joined: May 2, 2009
Reputation:
1
RE: Dawkins
January 8, 2010 at 11:48 pm
Pippy, the fallacies and flaws are valid. Otherwise there wouldn't be so many literary responses to his books, one of which you mentioned. And might I just add that your appreciation is much appreciated, and very admirable. I second fr0d0. xD
I think Dawkins is trying to usher in an activist age of atheism, and who knows where that will lead to. Hopefully people read Dawkins with an open-mind, and close his books with an open-heart.
~We, the atheist, in creating a purpose for ourselves where there was none, are greater than God himself.~
Posts: 18
Threads: 2
Joined: January 13, 2010
Reputation:
0
RE: Dawkins
January 14, 2010 at 11:11 am
Where did you two have the said disagreement?
Believe nothing, no matter where you read it, or who said it, no matter if I have said it, unless it agrees with your own reason and your own common sense
- Buddha
Posts: 3989
Threads: 79
Joined: June 30, 2009
Reputation:
41
RE: Dawkins
January 14, 2010 at 11:57 am
Little battles in many threads. They should have a debate about the terms evidence vs. faith in my opinion. I side with Evie on this one so far but would like to see them defend their ideas.
Posts: 25
Threads: 3
Joined: July 7, 2009
Reputation:
0
[split] dawkins quoting
February 25, 2010 at 8:49 pm
"Suppose you found yourself described as an 'utter twat' a 'suppurating rectum. A suppurating rat’s rectum. A suppurating rat’s rectum inside a dead skunk that’s been shoved up a week-old dead rhino’s twat.'"
lawl lawl lawl
Mysturji
