Comments

You must log in or register to comment.

ziq wrote

Is it me or are you tankies completely unable to form your own thoughts? All you do is quote other people.

5

[deleted] wrote

4

ziq wrote

This kid should make a sequel to Chairman Mao's Little Red Book called Lord Dawkin's Little Yellow Book.

3

CaptainACAB wrote

Okay, okay, I hear you, but...has Richard Dawkins actually changed anything for the better? Beyond a few discoveries in terms of genetics? Like, has he affected the political landscape at all? Started or participated in a revolution? I mean if you wanna stretch things, I guess he contributed to the Islamophobia of the Alt-right and the connection between him and the pipeline to that train of thought isn't nonexistent. Some old guy whining about how angry people hurt his ears doesn't strike me as the bastion of reason that he clearly thinks he is, but the pretentious, whiny old shit that he proves himself to be whenever he jerks off to how "logical" he his and how everyone should emulate him.

3

jaidedctrl wrote

Literally all he's done is push the “skeptic” and “new atheist” movements more to toward the reactionary side. What a prick.

2

comrade_pikachu OP wrote

He's not a politician, why would you expect him to create a political revolution? He created a revolution of the mind, which is just as important.

1

CaptainACAB wrote

I know he's not and I don't. What "revolution of the mind"? He hasn't said anything that hasn't been said before.

1

comrade_pikachu OP wrote

Dawkins demonstrated that religion is socially dangerous, even harder to eradicate than the smallpox virus and that's something every communist should listen to.

"The enlightenment is under threat. So is reason. So is truth. So is science... We have to devote a significant proportion of our time and resources to defending it from deliberate attack from organized ignorance..."

1

CaptainACAB wrote

And Dawkins' "revolution of the mind" has changed things for the better? In what way? If you can't provide some form of proof of this claim, I'm inclined to believe that the world would be the same without him; what's "revolution" without some form of change?

0

comrade_pikachu OP wrote

In what way have you changed the world?

1

CaptainACAB wrote

I haven't, nor have I claimed to. You're the one who quoted Dawkins and stated that he created a "revolution of the mind". You've responded to my question about him with a question about me. Can you not provide proof of this alleged "revolution"?

0

comrade_pikachu OP wrote

Read his books.

1

CaptainACAB wrote

So you can't. Okay. I'm not inclined to believe you, in that case.

0

comrade_pikachu OP wrote

It's not a reasonable expectation for me to read his books to you

1

CaptainACAB wrote

I didn't ask you to do that. I asked you to provide proof of a "revolution". To which you responded with "read his books". Which isn't proof.

0

comrade_pikachu OP wrote

The anti-reason sentiment on this site is seriously off-putting.

−4

ziq wrote

good. smuglord reason-fetishism is now against the rules

3

[deleted] wrote

2

comrade_pikachu OP wrote

What's wrong with being rational or skeptical?

−5

paxcow wrote

You're falsely equating emotional with irrational. You can be rational and skeptical while being emotional as well.

5

ziq wrote

Maybe that the people who claim to be rational and sceptical are just smug and self-important?

3