|
U-Know! Forum » Dawkins seems a bit *confused* here |
Log In to post a reply
|
|
|
|
| Topic View: Flat | Threaded | |
sanshee 1080 posts |
Jun 28, 2009, 20:51
|
||
|
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009/jun/28/atheism-camp-uk-richard-dawkins No he doth defend the right of the child against being prescribed religious indoctrination. But what will this be if it ain't prescribing just another 'world view'? Surely adventure camps and the like are fairly 'secular' affairs. This won't end at learning yer cumulus from yer nimbulus (or whatever) though, will it? x
|
|||
handofdave 3515 posts |
Jun 28, 2009, 21:22
|
||
|
Why can't kids just go to a summer camp to hike and swim and sing songs and just be kids? Why does it have to have an ulterior motive dragged into it by adults with an agenda? Dawkins is lying when he says this isn't a 'response' to religious camps. If you call it an atheist camp, you are preloading. If they wanted to call it 'debate camp', that might be more palatable. I am uncomfortable with the move to hitch science to the wagon of anti-deism. Science that's bent towards the motives of political thought gets perverted, as we've seen in the cases of scientists that whore themselves out to heavy industry to 'disprove' the negative effects of their operations.
|
|||
|
sanshee 1080 posts |
Edited Jun 28, 2009, 22:00
Jun 28, 2009, 21:41
|
||
|
The bus campaign, the cheesy so called discussion shows (he does them over here by the ton). It's always worth debating and questioning everything and anything, sure, but in supporting this he's sort of reducing it to 'atheism 101'. Get a certificate in 'rationality', make your parents gleam with pride! All for a small fee... He's making the biggest philosophical tug-o-war in the universe come across as something as meaningful as Bono clapping hands to save Africa, or whatever he does. Only the dilettante need apply, sort of thing. I ain't saying that's what he is, far from it. Unfortunately, that seems to be the climate he creates though, making yer atheism somehwhat of an 'accessory'. x
|
|||
|
handofdave 3515 posts |
Jun 29, 2009, 01:51
|
||
|
Well, he's used atheism as a way to become a celebrity and cash in on it. Which makes him little better than the holy rollers who exploit faith for a quick buck. Whores for God, Whores for Science.
|
|||
|
nigelswift 8112 posts |
Jun 29, 2009, 08:51
|
||
|
Agree with all and everything that's been said. BUT.... let us not forget that most of the world's children are subject to persuasion towards the religious beliefs of their elders from a very early age and this situation is broadly accepted as acceptable. Whatever criticism is directed to Dawkins ought to be directed in exactly equal measure to every priest and billions of parents. Freedom of religious thought is a right that is deliberately withheld from the world's youngest citizens. Atheist Summer camps are no more noteworthy than Sunday schools.
|
|||
|
sanshee 1080 posts |
Jun 29, 2009, 10:17
|
||
|
Something tells me Darwin would not have entirely approved:-) x
|
|||
|
handofdave 3515 posts |
Jun 29, 2009, 13:35
|
||
|
It's inevitable that parents are going to end up 'indoctrinating' their kids towards their own beliefs, to some extent, and yes, religion is by far the predominate meme that's forced on children. But an atheist who does the same thing is no better. As I said, if the goal here is to encourage children to think for themselves, frame the 'indoctrination' in terms that truly do support this goal. Tell kids that there are people who believe and people who don't, and other people who honestly don't know, and the only right answer is the one that kids arrive at themselves after they've studied it long and hard and weighed all the facts and feelings about it. And most importantly, don't teach kids to judge others too harshly... if on the whole, people are respectful and honest, be respectful and honest back. Treat others as you would wish to be treated. Sound advice for everyone.
|
|||
|
nigelswift 8112 posts |
Jun 29, 2009, 14:41
|
||
|
"an atheist who does the same thing is no better" Quite. But my point was that he was also no worse. Packing your child off to an Atheist Camp might quite rightly be considered wrong but how many million kids have to get up early and polish their shoes on a Sunday to hear the inarguable word of God? In both cases it's not "inevitable" that parents do that, it's totally avoidable. Like you say, the right thing to do is "Tell kids that there are people who believe and people who don't, and other people who honestly don't know, and the only right answer is the one that kids arrive at themselves after they've studied it long and hard and weighed all the facts and feelings about it." How wrong and arrogant and abusive to take active steps to stamp an impressionable young mind with YOUR truth rather than nurturing it's ability to self-determine it's own truths. In my day if you married a Catholic (which I did) you had to tell the priest you'd bring the kids up in the Faith else he wouldn't go ahead. That's abuse of the rights of the unborn in my book. Rather worse a crime than 3 weeks in the sun with Dawkins telling you there ain't no God. ;)
|
|||
|
sanshee 1080 posts |
Edited Jun 29, 2009, 15:00
Jun 29, 2009, 14:58
|
||
|
I think that atheism or antitheism a some prefer has now suffered like much of the issue of climate change has. I don't for a second doubt that the planet's being fucked up, and that the actions of humans are much to blame, but for some so long as you offset your 12 hour flight by reading the latest Monbiot smash then you're on the side of right. There's a prenicious, facile, and above all counterprodictive dishonesty afoot. I think, to digress slightly from god v no god (which I hoped this wouldn't collapse into), this is sort of the same thing, but with different implications of course. x
|
|||
|
handofdave 3515 posts |
Jun 29, 2009, 15:01
|
||
|
Dogma is dogma. Atheism is the underdog of dogmatic beliefs in the larger scheme of things, but it's still dogmatic when it claims to know the truth without being able to present any evidence. I'm no more invested in criticizing atheists than I am in criticizing the religious, mind you, but I do get annoyed when someone claiming the mantle of 'scientist' decides to smugly make absolute claims regarding this, that nobody can prove or disprove with any reasonable degree of accuracy. Not to mention that its real motive isn't scientific, it's sociopolitical. It's really just a pissing match with the God crowd, and designed to whip up anger and build walls.
|
| Pages: 5 – [ 1 2 3 4 5 | Next ] | Add a reply to this topic |
|
|
|
| U-Know! Forum Index | |
