Richard Dawkins is a scientist and intellectual FIRST before he is an 'atheist'

By -
The world is far bigger than the world humans perceive and, as such, modelled in our very limited minds. And that, in a sense, is what would be consistent to an assertion once made by a commentator on Get Real Post: "I want to grow as a person not only intellectually but morally and spiritually as well, if that requires believing in God then so be it". In that sense, the concept of "God" is a label we put in a thing or a world that is bigger than our persons that we seek to explore and come to terms with.

Some people choose to call the thing or world they seek a "God". And with that, atheists come around and present themselves as the anti-thesis to that approach chosen by some to come to terms with their world. Atheists therefore exist because there is a subset of humanity with a very specific approach to regarding their world.

I noticed that celebrity intellectuals like Richard Dawkins are held up as the posterboys of atheism. But, see, Dawkins is an intellectual and accomplished scientist first before he is an atheist. His being an atheist is but a tiny aspect of his character -- a tiny byproduct of his vast intellect. Ironically, his book The God Delusion had been latched onto as the "bible" of atheism. Uh oh -- bible of atheism. Alarm bells are starting to sound...

Dawkins frames his atheism by his being an evolutionary scientist. Therefore he does not wear it as a fashion label. He wears it more like most of us wear underwear.

Indeed, his follow-up book The Greatest Show on Earth sees him going back to his bread-and-butter: exhibiting to humanity the wondrous beauty of the process of evolution and how it resulted in this "great show" that is life unaided by the designs of some "being".

I'm sure many who see themselves as "atheists" got there in a similar way -- perhaps kind of like how the first Christians became Christians because through a similarly lucid journey (compared to most of us who were simply raised to be such).

The trouble comes when encapsulation sets in on "atheism" much the same way that Christianity had been reduced to a quaint set of rituals and symbols.

Comments

  1. AnonymousAugust 9, 2011 at 4:10 PM

    ‎"His being an atheist is but a tiny aspect of his character -- a tiny byproduct of his vast intellect." ~ This sounds like your mere opinion and not based from Dawkins opinion. Looks like you haven't done much research about him.

    ReplyDelete
  2. benign0August 9, 2011 at 4:24 PM

    Here's what I responded in your comment on the GRP Facebook page, Mr Anonymous, a.k.a. Jojo Pad: When equipped with a broad and profound grasp of science, the decision to believe or not to believe in the gods of organised religion is but a pygmy of an intellectual putsuit in comparison. That's what I meant, @Jojo Pad. And, yes, it is my opinion. Any schmoe can do "research" but only a rare few can form insightful opinions.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. AnonymousJune 21, 2014 at 2:50 AM

      Eh? I think you got that backwards. An opinion formed not because of information or facts is what we call bullshit. Any SCHMOE can form insightful opinions but only a handful of people can ever be bothered to do research to make sure their opinion is right especially when making claims like the ones you are making here.

      Delete
  3. AnonymousAugust 9, 2011 at 5:18 PM

    And your opinion is a shallow view of Dawkins background. You need to do more research before forming such premature opinions about him, or better yet interview him.

    ReplyDelete
  4. AnonymousAugust 9, 2011 at 5:20 PM

    And any schmoe can form insightful opinions, like those you see at the newspaper.

    That's a narrow view of other people, putting them into boxes and labeling. I'm disturbed with such way of thinking, no different from the irrational and rabid fundamentalists.

    ReplyDelete
  5. benign0August 9, 2011 at 5:50 PM

    Sorry to hear about your being "disturbed". I'll be sure to remember you in my prayers. :-D

    ReplyDelete
  6. AnonymousAugust 9, 2011 at 6:24 PM

    Thanks to your religious chauvinism, but no thanks.

    ReplyDelete
  7. benign0August 9, 2011 at 10:05 PM

    Suit yourself.

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular this week

Outrage over Leni Robredo's fraudulent Vice Presidency prevails among ordinary Filipinos!

By -
Image
To those who say Leni Robredo is the legally recognized VP, please think about this — legally recognized by whom? By the yellow officials who installed her through illicit means? By the dwindling band of yellow fanatics who turned up at Luneta last weekend? Go out to the streets. Talk to the jeepney drivers, taxi drivers, vendors, commuters, etc. Talk to the real people expressing their disgust and disbelief in forums, facebook, etc. The outrage is everywhere, expressed several times a day, everyday, in the Philippines and among the OFWs. Robredo can be sworn in a thousand times by Drilon and Belmonte, declared "winner" a million times by Andres Bautista, "legalized" a billion times by Sereno, and congratulated a trillion times by the US and other ambassadors, but majority of the Filipino people STILL won't believe she's legit. Also, think about this: had Escudero or Cayetano been declared winner for VP, do you think there would be this kind of outrage? No
Read more

Poor people in the Philippines seem to prefer poverty over aspiring to be not poor

By -
Image
Sadly, a MAJORITY of the poor people here are bad people. That is WHY they are poor. They disrespect others, they disrespect themselves, and they disrespect God’s creation. Exactly how do they think they’ll be rewarded for that? If you genuinely had empathy, you would be able to get inside their heads and understand why they do these things, and perhaps know how to fix it. However, you are confusing “empathy” with “sympathy”. I have yet to meet a poor person who actually WANTS to do the things necessary to escape poverty. The funny thing is, everyone can see that I’m more successful than they are. They think this is because I’m “rich”. I’m sure a lot of them are full of jealousy (as benign0 describes) and sit around thinking “ha, it’s not fair, that foreigner is so rich and I’m so poor. I guess it’s OK if I steal his stuff”. Which they do. Regularly. I grew up poor. I know how it feels to be hungry, all the time, every day. I decided I didn’t like feeling like that. I’m successf
Read more

Reporters Karen Lema and Manuel Mogato of @Reuters LIED about the Duterte "Hitler" quote

By -
Image
The oh-so-noble journalists are at it again, this time, with Duterte’s Hitler comment. I am no Duterte fanatic. I criticize him more scathingly than anyone when his mouth is out of line. But this time, Duterte really didn’t say anything wrong. The real culprits behind the fuss over his Hitler comment are Karen Lema and Manuel Mogato, two Filipino reporters of the Reuters news agency, who wrote this article: “ Philippines’ Duterte likens himself to Hitler, wants to kill millions of drug addicts ”. Lema and Mogato are Filipinos. There’s no way they could have misunderstood what Duterte really meant in his speech. I watched the video and this is what the President said: “Hitler massacred 3 million Jews. There are 3 million drug addicts. I’d be happy to slaughter them. At least, if Germany had Hitler, the Philippines would have ….. my victims, all criminals, to finish a problem of my country, and save the next generation.” (See for yourself here . The Hitler part is at 14:40.
Read more