1. On TV: The Genius of Charles Darwin: Presented by Richard Dawkins

Comment #234600 by MrDarwinist83 on August 21, 2008 at 6:14 pm

During last year I had been drifting apart from the thinkgin of Richard Dawkins. It has been in part because of what my professor, Petri Ylikoski, had thought to me about the shortcomings of Dawkins' theory and the meme -theory developed by Susan Blackmore. Also some of the stuff that Davis Sloan Wilson has said seemed to be justified.

I must say my respect towards Dawkins has risen again after this film. He was ready to take criticism and went to talk to a professional that disagrees with him. I used to think that he is a bit hard-headed, and he might be - but in the end he seems to be a true, honest scientist.

At the moment I can't understand how my professor got me to think that there was anything wrong with Dawkins' way of thinking about altruism. I myself would bet my money mostly on handicap principle as an explanation for it. I think empirical evidence supports it too. Males are more altruistic when there is a change that it boosts their mating changes - and as Dawkins pointed out: women like nice guys.

2. Beyond Belief 2006 Videos

Comment #67191 by MrDarwinist83 on September 2, 2007 at 2:57 pm

I've come to understand Dawkins' speech in session 3# more as I've thought about it and as I've watched it again. I disagree a bit with logical. I think the way Roughgarden seems to address these subjects is just confusing. She isn't teaching science to fundamentalists, I belive. She is giving them a change to think "Bible was right all along. Evolution IS in the bible, so it is true then." I've been religious, and that's excatly how I would've taken it. I would've accepted Roughgarden as my new "prophet" and go along saying "god guided evolution" and avoid all the evidence of evolution that suggest something else. It would've helped me to stay hostile to real science and evidence. That sort of stuff is excactly what Templeton foundation support I guess. And it's excactly what science should not accept. I'm glad that you can't find her new book in the science kategory - but in the religion one.

3. Beyond Belief 2006 Videos

Comment #67186 by MrDarwinist83 on September 2, 2007 at 2:28 pm

sunny649, I really belive it is a different case with sciece. You sayed that if there were no religion nothing would be different. That some other ideas would be perverted to dogmas and people would be killing each other just like before. I see that as deep wisdom as South Park can offer us. In the episodes that also featured Dr. Dawkins, the philosophical message one could find (if one would really watch South Park for philosophical insight) was just that. But in reality - the situation would, i argue, be totally different. You see the simple thing is that in sciense (no matter what Roughgarden claims) critisism can always be done. And there are no prophets. The main thing being: If there were no religion, but a scientific idea, that some person of authority is using for atrocitys - that idea would be more open to critisism. I'll give you an example. A scientist in Finland, the father of our prime minister actually, had a theory suggesting that through evolution, some races have aquired lower IQ and that is the reason for poverty in Africa and so on. That idea was a scientific idea and so was open to discussion. Very quickly a lot of the methodology of the research was found faulty and some big jumps to conclusions without rational basis. Now if that would've been an argument made by a religious leader... Or just think of the racist arguments really made, by for example mormons. Can you see it now? Religion is not really open to discussion. (I know some claim religious theology is just that, but it's not. Comparative religion actually is) And in science discussion is the essence. That's why it is different with science.

4. 'Jesus loves you' email

Comment #66520 by MrDarwinist83 on August 30, 2007 at 8:13 am

scooternyc: I would love to go there. It's just a bit too far from Finland. Next time RD is in Europe i'll go see him for sure. Enjoy yourself in there :)

5. Enemies of Reason

Comment #66082 by MrDarwinist83 on August 28, 2007 at 12:35 pm

It's a bit similar to Penn&Teller's "Bullshit". Even some of the material from the 1st episode was presumably from the same study done with sand and water. I strongly think that both styles are important to cover these subjects. I would love to see Dawkins in P&T Bullshit some time. Don't know if they even make it anymore though =S