1. Comment #57143 by Fedler on July 18, 2007 at 11:34 am

I must say, not bad for an extemporaneous speech :).

I've always loved Douglas Adams. I believe this is also reprinted in 'Salmon of Doubt' which was published posthumously. It was actually Douglas Adams that 'introduced' me to RD and his books (among many others). Every time I hear his puddle analogy, it makes me smile. Douglas, and his wonderful humor and insight, is greatly missed.

Other Comments by Fedler

2. Comment #57145 by chezzyd on July 18, 2007 at 11:47 am

A long article - but wonderfully engaging and really made me think. I can see why Professor Dawkins admires and misses him so much..

Other Comments by chezzyd

3. Comment #57154 by VinceMcD on July 18, 2007 at 12:18 pm

Let's just hope we don't enter the 5th age of sand- where we 'de-volve' as a result of clash of religion with technology. Although this will 'clear the room' for those finicky dragons :-)

Other Comments by VinceMcD

4. Comment #57171 by _J_ on July 18, 2007 at 12:54 pm

Oh, brilliant! This has been one of my favourite articles on this subject ever since reading it in The Salmon of Doubt. It makes subtle, interesting and balanced points about religion that still usually get overlooked today.

Very excited to be able to actually hear it! [Claps hands, dances jig.] :D

(Oh, and Fedler: me, too - all of it.)

Other Comments by _J_

5. Comment #57200 by Jiten on July 18, 2007 at 2:17 pm

At last something good about religion-it helps the Balinese to grow rice.

Other Comments by Jiten

6. Comment #57229 by Shuggy on July 18, 2007 at 3:54 pm

I love DNA too, and I was very pleased by the 4th age of sand, which sounded like it was going to be utter nonsense (or someone had misheard him) and proved to be something you and I are both right in the middle of - this one-to-several communication, which has the useful sorting feature that people reading are probably interested in what is being written - and you can't get much more self-referential than that.

Other Comments by Shuggy

7. Comment #57240 by denoir on July 18, 2007 at 4:17 pm

This is an brilliant speech - one of my absolute favourite pieces by Adams. I can't express in words how impressed I was the first time I heard it. And although I've heard and read it many times now, it still puts a smile on my face.

What a loss his very premature death was :(

Other Comments by denoir

8. Comment #57246 by Wonko the Sane on July 18, 2007 at 4:33 pm

This and many other of Douglas Adams' works can be found in "The Salmon of Doubt" I think this bit is onw of th best explanations of why humans made up god in the way that they did.

Other Comments by Wonko the Sane

9. Comment #57275 by Rosemary on July 18, 2007 at 6:09 pm

I love Douglas Adams' work in general, but I was surprised and disappointed by all the sexist language in his discussion of "early man".

Around here (Canada), using "man" as a generic word to refer to people is really archaic and nowadays it seems like it is hardly ever used this way except by those wanting to make an anti-feminist point, which I don't think is Adams' intention here.

Is using "man" as Adams used it here still common usage in the UK?

Other Comments by Rosemary

10. Comment #57301 by Enlightenme.. on July 18, 2007 at 8:27 pm

^ We're still working on this area of consciousness-raising in the UK, dear.

Other Comments by Enlightenme..

11. Comment #57302 by rationallady on July 18, 2007 at 8:41 pm

Is he saying that the dragon in the room, God, and money are artificial constructs created by man(sorry Canadians)to serve a purpose? If so, I quite agree. I may be a defacto atheist, but if religion serves those in need, why take their placebo away? (As long as their placebo doesn't hurt anyone else. Unfortunately a lot of those placebos have been very harmful!)

Other Comments by rationallady

12. Comment #57304 by DV82XL on July 18, 2007 at 8:49 pm

I'm sorry, this just again reminds my just what a tragic loss this mans death was. Were he still around he would have been right in the thick of this debate, skewering opposition with a deadly mix of humor and logic.

Other Comments by DV82XL

13. Comment #57306 by Goldy on July 18, 2007 at 8:53 pm

Maybe he used man meaning...errr.....men :-)
Strange, working in Alberta, I never really came across this lack of sexism. You from the east, Rosemary? (light humouredly asking - really, look, I'm smiling!)

Other Comments by Goldy

14. Comment #57307 by Goldy on July 18, 2007 at 8:56 pm

Rationallady
"if religion serves those in need, why take their placebo away?"
If they are not sick, why do they need "medicine"

Other Comments by Goldy

15. Comment #57335 by AndyD on July 19, 2007 at 1:10 am

Great talk, I will have to read more of his work. I had read The Hitchhiker's Guide as a kid and been fascinated by it, but never before now had I understood Dawkins' admiration for Douglas Adams. Now I do. It is quite sad indeed to have lost him; this man is a gem.

Other Comments by AndyD

16. Comment #57368 by bamboospitfire on July 19, 2007 at 3:23 am

Isn't any reference to "early man" going to be archaic by definition?

Other Comments by bamboospitfire

17. Comment #57371 by CJ22 on July 19, 2007 at 3:33 am

"Is using "man" as Adams used it here still common usage in the UK?"

Don't you worry your pretty little head about it.

*ducks

Other Comments by CJ22

18. Comment #57377 by Logicel on July 19, 2007 at 4:08 am

This transcript is great. It has a similar, pleasing effect on my mental/emotional well being as doing a comprehensive brain teaser--every lobe in my brain was exercised.

Other Comments by Logicel

19. Comment #57387 by Philip1978 on July 19, 2007 at 5:21 am

I am a massive Douglas Adams fan, I read this speech when I got the Salmon of Doubt but I appreciate it a whole lot more listening to his voice.

I love the caveman and his cousin Ug analogy, priceless, plus I love the "Anything that happens, happens" argument very powerful indeed, that and "I'll have it off him"! kind of explains religious history quite well hehehehehehe!

Its weird, I obviously never knew him or met him but I lament the fact that I will never have the chance, in all improbability of it happening in the first place, to say to a friend if he had ever walked past "Hey you, sass that hoopy Douglas Adams, now there's a frood who really knows where his towel is!"

Thanks Douglas, much appreciated

Philip

Other Comments by Philip1978

20. Comment #57492 by hopeful on July 19, 2007 at 2:28 pm

This is a fantastic talk, not only very funny but also presents some profound ideas in a slightly novel ways.

One point that struck me was the way he presents the idea of the "complexity arising out of simplicity" mental shift required to understand evolution and the parallel in computers. I think this is a profound point that may help to explain, at least in part, the mental wall that often seems to exist between atheist and theist.

It is something that probably most people here take for granted, but perhaps the majority of the population quite literally find the concept of complexity arising from simplicity to be inconceivable. With the majority of people not having much understanding of the inner workings of computers (and also not having other academic interests) they have no practical example to help make the shift.

Other Comments by hopeful

21. Comment #57718 by Fedler on July 20, 2007 at 5:44 pm

Hey, where did Dr. Dawkins' excerpt go? It was his beautiful Lament for Douglas from "A Devil's Chaplain".

Other Comments by Fedler

22. Comment #57728 by Richard Dawkins on July 20, 2007 at 7:54 pm

My apologies for posting my 'Lament for Douglas' here and then removing it again. I put it up impulsively, in a fit of grief, on hearing his voice again. Later I calmed down and decided it was an over-sentimental gesture given that it is available elslewhere. The Douglas Fir we planted in his memory is growing up nicely, by the way.
Richard

Other Comments by Richard Dawkins

23. Comment #57731 by Fire1974 on July 20, 2007 at 8:08 pm

Dr. Dawkins,
It is a privilege to post below you. If you are reading, I would like to thank you for this site and all your brilliant work. The real world, as you strive to reveal it, is so much better for having had the likes of you and Adams in it.

Other Comments by Fire1974

24. Comment #57799 by nogod on July 21, 2007 at 5:49 am

Prof Dawkins,

Its good to hear the Douglas Fir is growing well : )

Other Comments by nogod

25. Comment #57846 by ricey on July 21, 2007 at 3:08 pm

Adams was brilliant but he is dead! And we all buy into, and indeed sell the notion that he is not coming back! It's very sad, but probably true.

Dawkins "spoke" to Adams in the first person, in a memorable part from TGD. A theist might say this was evidence of Dawkins' innate belief in the afterlife, rather than a clever literary device.

Dosen't that rile you? It denegrates the honesty we bring, as atheists, to our dearly departed. We don't need to set ships ablaze, or bury unwilling virgins with our loved ones to express our joy and appreciation of their lives.

Because their decaying remains aren't going anywhere (at least not anywhere in a spiritual sense) and we will never see them again, dosn't mean their lives were wasted. But it makes it easier to see where the ranks of the faithful are coming from.

It is easier to believe a lie like life after death than to face the square reality ...

this massive universal millstone - grief, means, as "sellers" of reason, we have a very high mountain to climb.

Other Comments by ricey

26. Comment #57869 by seals on July 21, 2007 at 6:18 pm

It is easier to believe a lie like life after death than to face the square reality ...

If an artificial god, why not an artificial afterlife... at least we'll never be disappointed.

Other Comments by seals

27. Comment #58077 by TIKI AL on July 23, 2007 at 10:04 am

Comment #23 is nothing but shameless ass kissing.

Please add my name to it.

Richard and the rest of you make it easier to scratch and claw thru the godbot's and chickenhawk's influence everyday in redstate Arizona.(at least we don't have a creation museum....yet)

Other Comments by TIKI AL

28. Comment #59208 by prelevent on July 28, 2007 at 9:28 am

Just an off-topic question for fellow users here. Has anyone else noticed the little text box added to this posting about deep linking? Isn't any url other than a link to a home page a form of deep linking? Including the url in the little text box?

Other Comments by prelevent

29. Comment #59699 by mdowe on July 30, 2007 at 9:33 am

As judged by his writing, Douglas Adams was a kindred spirit I only wish I'd had the opportunity to meet. I was a fan of his comedy-sci-fi books, but I think 'Last Chance to See' was amongst the best books I have ever read ... or rather heard -- I have the audio book (read by Douglas Adams). If you haven't read it (or better, heard it) you are really missing out. Precious few people could take a sad and serious topic, and yet keep you amused for the entire read.

In this respect, I think there was a touch of Douglas Adams in the TGD (whether Prof. Dawkins intended for it to be so or not).

Other Comments by mdowe

30. Comment #59700 by _J_ on July 30, 2007 at 9:37 am

Is anything going to be done to make amends with Tom Barbalet?

Other Comments by _J_

31. Comment #60268 by mdowe on August 1, 2007 at 12:38 pm

RE: Comment #59700 by _J_

I don't know if anything is being done to make amends with Mr. Barbalet, but if you listen to the Douglas Adams speech, Mr. Barbalet himself reads at the end:

"This podcast is covered by Creative Commons, if you use this podcast either in audio or text form please include a link back to biota.org as the source of this podcast."

The CC license is a bit muddled, but it certainly looks to me like it is perfectly legitimate to deep link to the file, or even mirror the whole thing. I'm not sure I really understand why Mr. Barbalet feels aggrieved.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Creative_commons_license

Other Comments by mdowe

32. Comment #61977 by mdowe on August 7, 2007 at 5:49 pm

And speaking of Douglas Adams and 'Last Chance to see', a sad note:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/6935343.stm

I think Mr. Adams was impressed with the dedication of the Chinese scientists trying to save the Yangtze river dolphin and hopeful the story might end well. It seems the influence of those in China concerned with the fate of the dolphin was insufficient to save it. Yet another stain on mankind's honour.

Other Comments by mdowe