Richard Dawkins and Rowan Williams debate religion this week

[Shay HTFC]

doogz said:

This is simply to inform fellow PHers about a pair of aholes arguing like children about something irrelevant on the TV.

Something irrelevant???
Religion (and whether its still a valid concept or not) is possibly one of the most relevant things today. Look around at world politics, local politics, ongoing wars, 'multiculturalism' etc etc - all of it is very much affected by religion, religious ideals, and people who follow religion.

Just because you don't subscribe to religion doesn't mean it is irrelevant.

Edited by Shay HTFC on Monday 28th January 17:02

[TwigtheWonderkid]

AJS- said:

Dawkins insisting that there's no man in the clouds, which everyone over the age of 10 knows anyway,

You must've been a late developer, I figured it out when I was about 8.

[ClassicMotorNut]

I'm afraid this debate is going to have to be bloody excellent to beat what is the greatest religious battle so far.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gBEP5c-SUEQ

Edited by ClassicMotorNut on Monday 28th January 17:24

[anonymous-user]

ClassicMotorNut said:

I'm afraid this debate is going to have to be bloody excellent to beat what is the greates religious battle so far.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gBEP5c-SUEQ

Brilliant

[rxtx]

mattnunn said:

But
But Dawkins isn't. (clever enough to trot out the tired old canards atheists usually rely on that is)

Look who's talking.

[mattnunn]

rxtx said:

mattnunn said:

But
But Dawkins isn't. (clever enough to trot out the tired old canards atheists usually rely on that is)

Look who's talking.

Nice one!

[SWoll]

mattnunn said:

But

But Dawkins isn't. (clever enough to trot out the tired old canards atheists usually rely on that is)

Can I put this forward as the most ironic post in the history of PH.

Tired old atheist canards.

Strange way of describing provable scientific facts...

Please, tell us more.

[dundarach]

If indeed its a sensible debate then it'll be worth a watch...

However it'll more than likely become the Pythons defending Life of Brian moment where one of them quickly reverts to childish name calling...and depending on your choice you'll hope it's not your man

http://justatad.wordpress.com/2012/03/27/classic-b...

[TinyCappo]

omgus said:

TinyCappo said:

I read that as Rowan Atkinson....I'm disappointed now.

Me too,

My issues with Dawkins are nearly as big as my issues with Religon.

I don't care what you believe, provided it doesn't hurt anyone and you can manage not to be a bellend about it.

If Dawkins was religious he has the kind of "i'm right and you are all wrong" evangelical conviction that would make him an extremist.

Although he is very good with words so it might be entertaining.



ETA, or as put slightly better by Hudson

Hudson said:

Dawkins is living proof you can agree with someones views and still think they're a massive cock and should be fired into the sun.

This was my reasoning for being disappointed it was not the other Rowan.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedd...

[ClassicMotorNut]

TinyCappo said:

This was my reasoning for being disappointed it was not the other Rowan.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedd...

Very good

I would have preferred it if it was Atkinson vs. Williams and Atkinson was very much in character:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pOMQLhf7N4Q

[ChrisGB]

NinjaPower said:

This is simply to inform fellow PHers about what will possibly one of the greatest debates of our time.

Seeing as Dawkins can't think outside his "evolution explains everything" reductionism, and Williams needed Kenny's help to pin Dawkins down in logical errors in their last meeting, at Oxford, also on youtube - "Dawkins Kenny Williams Oxford debate" or similar, this may just be overhyped.

On the other hand, why not go to a lecture at the other place that will make you think and impress you and maybe lead you to be more open-minded:

Attend Edward Feser's February 14th lecture at Blackfriars Oxford (St Giles) on "Aquinas and Immaterial aspects of thought"

- it will at the very least show you that materialism can ultimately make no sense.

[SWoll]

ChrisGB said:

NinjaPower said:

This is simply to inform fellow PHers about what will possibly one of the greatest debates of our time.

Seeing as Dawkins can't think outside his "evolution explains everything" reductionism, and Williams needed Kenny's help to pin Dawkins down in logical errors in their last meeting, at Oxford, also on youtube - "Dawkins Kenny Williams Oxford debate" or similar, this may just be overhyped.

On the other hand, why not go to a lecture at the other place that will make you think and impress you and maybe lead you to be more open-minded:

Attend Edward Feser's February 14th lecture at Blackfriars Oxford (St Giles) on "Aquinas and Immaterial aspects of thought"

- it will at the very least show you that materialism can ultimately make no sense.

Having read a large number of your posts on the "other thread" and a few of Mr Feser's blog articles in the past I'm afraid your combined views on what constitutes "open-minded" are very different to mine.


Oh, and I'm washing my hair that night anyway...

[LostBMW]

silverthorn2151 said:

Sadly I have to say that Rowan Williams has the dullest voice I have ever heard. However interesting he may be, I doubt many will stay awake.

But I think there are angels living in his face hair. Probably.

[Art0ir]

I'm looking forward to it. Williams is a very intelligent man and my only complaint about their last bout was that it was all very cosy. Also the Chair didn't do a great job.

Hopefully this one will have some teeth to it, I enjoy hearing two intelligent opposing positions and challenging my own beliefs.

[LostBMW]

Art0ir said:

I'm looking forward to it. Williams is a very intelligent man and my only complaint about their last bout was that it was all very cosy. Also the Chair didn't do a great job.

Hopefully this one will have some teeth to it, I enjoy hearing two intelligent opposing positions and challenging my own beliefs.

"Williams is a very intelligent man..." but mad. Irrational and mad.

[Art0ir]

LostBMW said:

Art0ir said:

I'm looking forward to it. Williams is a very intelligent man and my only complaint about their last bout was that it was all very cosy. Also the Chair didn't do a great job.

Hopefully this one will have some teeth to it, I enjoy hearing two intelligent opposing positions and challenging my own beliefs.

"Williams is a very intelligent man..." but mad. Irrational and mad.

Nutter. Intelligent all the same.

[JDRoest]

NinjaPower said:

The Cambridge Debating Society are saying it will be a highlight of their 200 year history.

Why Rowan Williams though? Couldn't they actually find a proper Christian?

[julian64]

Forget this rubbish. There are actually more interesting things to spend your time on out there if you really want to exercise your mind.

Look up the emerging field of quantum biology and decide whether its the next big thought revolution or just hokum, for instance.

[RegMolehusband]

I would be more inclined to watch if they were to involve an Islamist in the debate.

[Derek Smith]

Art0ir said:

I'm looking forward to it. Williams is a very intelligent man and my only complaint about their last bout was that it was all very cosy. Also the Chair didn't do a great job.

Hopefully this one will have some teeth to it, I enjoy hearing two intelligent opposing positions and challenging my own beliefs.

He's a very pleasant chap and has dedicated his life to his beliefs, so he's honest as well.

But the cosy bit is the problem. If it was some complete fraud, like Muggeridge with his 'miracle on TV' rubbish, it could be fun but I tend to feel sorry for Rowan, and not just because he's named after a tree. I get the feeling that if you met hims socially he'd be very interesting. One of those times you sit around a table and everyone talks to one person. You don't feel the need to contribute and don't feel guilty about not doing you bit.

His pronouncements are always edited before being put in papers or on the news.

He reminds me of a methodist vicar in a little village I used to live in: lovely bloke, willing to help everyone and was a welcome guest as not only didn't he preach at you, he didn't really believe in god.

That's why I had a certain sympathy for the CoE: no one believed in god.

I have the feeling this debate will be a bit of an anti-climax.