tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5524682876220396502.post8492288226900297176..comments2024-03-27T06:56:10.255+00:00Comments on Broad Oak Magazine: A mild defense of DawkinsUnknownnoreply@blogger.comBlogger7125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5524682876220396502.post-25556914291748034242012-01-04T14:31:14.295+00:002012-01-04T14:31:14.295+00:00After Duane Gish, a famous YEC, who is well-known ...After Duane Gish, a famous YEC, who is well-known for the tactic. Even when publically corrected, he uses the same arguments at his next appearance.Paddingtonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07952088638231881617noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5524682876220396502.post-2000940465615823492012-01-04T05:39:19.945+00:002012-01-04T05:39:19.945+00:00Why "Gish"?Why "Gish"?Sackersonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17284329249862764601noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5524682876220396502.post-24490666319667859192012-01-03T19:52:39.593+00:002012-01-03T19:52:39.593+00:00He's actually done many debates. However, when...He's actually done many debates. However, when the opponent is a Young Earth Creationist, ot's a little difficult. They are famous for what is called the 'Gish gallop', spouting so many lies in a few minutes that the opponent can barely answer one in the time alloted. The major problem is that most answers in science are tentative, and require a lot of background to express clearly. That's why there are so few real science questions on trivia shows.Paddingtonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07952088638231881617noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5524682876220396502.post-34458333221601181472012-01-03T19:05:40.615+00:002012-01-03T19:05:40.615+00:001. Leaves open the question of overt vs covert age...1. Leaves open the question of overt vs covert agenda in the Simonyi case and I'd like to know more.<br />2. Defer to you.<br />3. Not just personality, I think there's a strong cultural element when you contrast UK with US styles of discussion. Unless I just don't read enough UK message boards. And Dawkins appears to be a bit rigid himself, to judge by his behaviour, e.g. refusing to debate with an opponent and making the latter somehow responsible for mass murder.Sackersonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17284329249862764601noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5524682876220396502.post-18434921581509461002012-01-03T17:47:58.629+00:002012-01-03T17:47:58.629+00:00Thank you for the compliments. As for Dawkins:
1....Thank you for the compliments. As for Dawkins:<br /><br />1. Setting up endowed chairs for particular individuals is not uncommon in academia.<br />2. He is always spot-on with the science.<br />3. His major failing is a lack of understanding that strong belief appears to be a matter of personality. Remove belief in God from such a person, and they will replace it with belief in something else, equally unsupported by data.Paddingtonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07952088638231881617noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5524682876220396502.post-81887725505371507402012-01-03T08:06:02.674+00:002012-01-03T08:06:02.674+00:00Clarification: by "position" in para 2 I...Clarification: by "position" in para 2 I mean his philosophical position, whereas in para 3 I mean the Simonyi Professorship.Sackersonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17284329249862764601noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5524682876220396502.post-25116345728591149712012-01-03T07:57:15.847+00:002012-01-03T07:57:15.847+00:00Clearly the ideological environment in the USA is ...Clearly the ideological environment in the USA is very different from that in the UK, and those over here who imagine that they are right-wing need people like you to explain what it's really like to debate religion, science, politics, education and even finance in America.<br /><br />As I said in my piece, my beef is not about the theist issue but about Dawkins' approach. Despite his scientific achievements he appears very limited as a public advocate for his position and may have done rather more harm than good - I am sure you would do a far better job. He completely let himself in for Professor Flew's strictures.<br /><br />I also continue to be concerned at the way that a chair was created specifically for Dawkins, and suspect that the officially stated aims of the position are not the real driver of how it is to be filled and fulfilled. Bias, deceit and subterfuge in academe run the danger of being seriously counter-productive.Sackersonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17284329249862764601noreply@blogger.com