You can see the results here at You Tube in a clip from British TV series 'Root of All Evil': scientist Richard Dawkins v recently disgraced evangelical preacher Ted Haggard. Says Nicholas Provenzo (to whom goes the hat tip):
It shows the conflict between a philosophically disintegrated advocate of science ("we live in a world of subtle shades and not sharp black and white") and a philosophically misintegrated advocate of mysticism ("we believe the Bible is the word of God") and in my mind, makes it clear which argument is the worse cultural force.Concludes Provenzo, "In analyzing the material presented in the clip, I came to the conclusion that Dawkins is weak, but Haggard is vicious... lest we forget—it is Haggard and not Dawkins who has [the US] President's ear."
LINK: Root of all evil, 1 - You Tube
The Scientist and the Preacher: Disintegration v. Misintegration - Rule of Reason
RELATED: Religion, Science, Politics
5 comments:
Haggard had the president's ear. Why is there no link to support that lie?
Berend
Dawkins quoted Haggard as saying that - not sure if that is true that Haggard did say that but he apparently is in regular contact with the White House, if not Bush. IF Haggard overemphasised his influence
Dawkins comes across as a particularly arrogant prat, which is unfortunate as he misses opportunities because he is so wound up in his own sense of rightness (which H calls him on). In the Haggard interview when H says evolutionists claim the eye popped into existence, rather than saying "name them" he blusters "I know of none" so H says "you haven't met the ones I have". When H says the bible is not contradictory, D has no example to challenge him when it is really Atheism 101.
Haggard is oily too. Is it genetic for fundy preachers to be like that?
The concern I have in Dawkins' approach is that he is attacking otherwise good people for believing in something and which in general is doing no harm to anyone. It seems he is more intent in playing the man not the ball and happy to ridicule people.
It's fine for him to present evidence to counter religionists but he seems intent on destruction, rather than discourse and respecting individuals' rights to believe what they want.
A rabid anti-Americanism and anti bushism infests his view and his writing. There is nothing wrong with that per se but it does become tiresome when he peppers his evolutionary writings with political attacks - he is almost religious in his approach and beliefs around the US, which undermines his credibility in my view.
anonymous, religion IS hurting people. It implictly teaches them to survive qua subhuman instead of qua man by teaching them that reason and this reality don't matter, that only another one does. It strips away man's only means to surive qua man, i.e. reason, as opposed to surviving qua subhuman.
Interestingly enough, on the Sunday before Haggard's "sins" were exposed, he prayed the following in an opeining to his last sermon,
"Father, we pray that lies would be exposed. We pray that deception would be exposed."
Will we become a nation where a segment of our society is forever denied education? Will we become a nation of haves and have nots? JNV Result 2020 Selected List
Post a Comment