| Line 1: |
Line 1: |
| − | {{For|the archaeologist|Richard MacGillivray Dawkins}}
| + | [[File:Richard Dawkins - March 2005.jpg|alt=Richard Dawkins|thumbnail|260px|right|Richard Dawkins]] |
| − | {{pp-pc1}}
| + | Clinton '''Richard Dawkins''', [[Royal_Society|FRS]], FRSL, born March 26, 1941 (age {{age|1941|3|26}}), is a British [[biologist|biologist]], [[evolution|evolutionist]], [[agnosticism|agnostic]] and [[leftist]]/[[liberal]].<ref> |
| − | {{good article}}
| + | *[http://voxday.blogspot.com/2012/02/mailvox-richard-dawkins-is-not-atheist.html Mailvox: Richard Dawkins is not an atheist!] |
| − | {{Use dmy dates|date=July 2011}}
| + | *[http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/timstanley/100139859/id-go-to-church-just-to-reduce-the-probability-of-spending-eternity-in-hell-with-richard-dawkins/ ''I'd go to church just to reduce the probability of spending eternity in Hell with Richard Dawkins'' by Dr. Tim Stanley, ''The Daily Telegraph'', February 27, 2012] |
| − | {{Use British English|date=July 2011}}
| + | *[http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T3_rGbiT_3c Richard Dawkins Says He's Agnostic -- NOT atheist - video testimony of Richard Dawkins saying he is not an atheist, but an agnostic]</ref> |
| − | {{Infobox scientist
| + | Relative to Richard Dawkins' agnosticism, Dawkins said, "A serious case could be made for a [[deism|deistic]] God." <ref>[http://www.firstthings.com/blogs/firstthoughts/2008/11/richard-dawkins-clear-thinking-oasis-is-getting-a-bit-muddy Richard Dawkins’ "Clear Thinking Oasis" is Getting a Bit Muddy] by Wesley J. Smith, ''First Things'', November 7, 2008</ref><ref>[http://billmuehlenberg.com/2008/10/30/dawkins-deism-and-jesus/ Dawkins' deism and Jesus]</ref> See also: [[Richard Dawkins and agnosticism]] |
| − | | name=Richard Dawkins | |
| − | | image = Richard Dawkins Cooper Union Shankbone.jpg
| |
| − | | caption = Dawkins at [[Cooper Union]], [[New York City]] (2010)
| |
| − | | birth_name=Clinton Richard Dawkins
| |
| − | | birth_date = {{Birth date and age|1941|3|26|df=y}}
| |
| − | | birth_place = [[Nairobi]], [[Kenya Colony|British Kenya]]
| |
| − | | death_date =
| |
| − | | death_place =
| |
| − | | education = [[Oundle School]]
| |
| − | | alma_mater = [[Balliol College, Oxford]]<br />(BA, DPhil)
| |
| − | | doctoral_advisor = [[Nikolaas Tinbergen]]
| |
| − | | thesis_title = Selective pecking in the domestic chick
| |
| − | | thesis_url =/primo_library/libweb/action/display.do?doc=oxfaleph015020478
| |
| − | | thesis_year = 1967
| |
| − | | doctoral_students = {{Plainlist|
| |
| − | * [[Alan Grafen]]
| |
| − | * [[Mark Ridley (zoologist)|Mark Ridley]]<ref name=bw>{{cite book|last1=Dawkins|first1=Richard|title=The Blind Watchmaker}}</ref>}} | |
| − | | years_active = 1967–present
| |
| − | | employer = {{Plainlist|
| |
| − | * [[University of California, Berkeley]]
| |
| − | * [[New College, Oxford]]}}
| |
| − | | organization = Fellow of the [[Royal Society]]<br>Fellow of the [[Royal Society of Literature]]
| |
| − | | known_for = {{Plainlist|
| |
| − | * [[Gene-centred view of evolution]]
| |
| − | * Concept of the [[meme]]
| |
| − | * "[[Middle World]]"
| |
| − | * Advocacy of [[atheism]] and science}}
| |
| − | | notable_works = {{Plainlist|
| |
| − | * [[The Selfish Gene]]'' (1976)
| |
| − | * ''[[The Extended Phenotype]]'' (1982)
| |
| − | * ''[[The Blind Watchmaker]]'' (1986) | |
| − | * ''[[The God Delusion]]'' (2006)}}
| |
| − | | influences = [[Charles Darwin]], [[Ronald Fisher]],<ref>Dawkins, R. (2010). WHO IS THE GREATEST BIOLOGIST SINCE DARWIN? WHY? [http://www.edge.org/3rd_culture/leroi11/leroi11_index.html#dawkins Edge] "Who is the greatest biologist since Darwin? That's far less obvious, and no doubt many good candidates will be put forward. My own nominee would be Ronald Fisher. Not only was he the most original and constructive of the architects of the neo-Darwinian synthesis. Fisher also was the father of modern statistics and experimental design. He therefore could be said to have provided researchers in biology and medicine with their most important research tools, as well as with the modern version of biology's central theorem."</ref> [[George C. Williams]], [[W. D. Hamilton]], [[Daniel Dennett]], [[Bertrand Russell]], [[Nikolaas Tinbergen]], [[John Maynard Smith]], [[Robert Trivers]]{{citation needed|date=January 2015}} | |
| − | |spouse = {{marriage|[[Marian Stamp Dawkins|Marian Stamp]]|19 August 1967|1974|end=divorced}}<br>Eve Barham (m. 1984, div. ?)<br>{{marriage|[[Lalla Ward]]|1992}}
| |
| − | | children = Juliet Emma
| |
| − | | awards = {{Plainlist|
| |
| − | * [[Zoological Society of London|ZSL]] Silver Medal (1989)
| |
| − | * [[Michael Faraday Prize]] (1990)
| |
| − | * [[International Cosmos Prize]] (1997)
| |
| − | * [[Nierenberg Prize]] (2009)
| |
| − | * [[Fellow of the Royal Society|FRS]] (2001)<ref name=frs>{{cite web|archiveurl=/web/20150316060617/https://royalsociety.org/about-us/fellowship/fellows/|archivedate=2015-03-16|url=/about-us/fellowship/fellows/|publisher=[[Royal Society]]|location=London|title=Fellows of the Royal Society}}</ref>}}
| |
| − | | signature = Richard Dawkins signature.svg
| |
| − | | website = {{URL|http://richarddawkins.net}}
| |
| − | | module = {{Listen| embed=yes | pos=center |filename=Richard Dawkins BBC Radio4 Start the Week 17 Oct 2011 b015yr4h.flac |title = Richard Dawkins's voice speech from the BBC programme "Start the Week", 17 October 2011}}
| |
| − | }}
| |
| | | | |
| − | '''Clinton Richard Dawkins''' {{postnominals|country=GBR|FRS|FRSL}} (born 26 March 1941) is a British [[ethology|ethologist]], [[evolutionary biology|evolutionary biologist]],<ref>{{cite book| title = Richard Dawkins: How a Scientist Changed the Way We Think : Reflections by Scientists, Writers, and Philosophers| url =/books?id=lH4sh2436rEC&q=%22evolutionary+biologist%22#v=snippet&q=%22evolutionary%20biologist%22&f=false| year = 2007| publisher = Oxford University Press| isbn = 0-19-921466-2| page = 228| first1 = Mark| last1 = Ridley }}, [http://books.google.com/books?id=gPL7LqY8NSsC&pg=PA228 Extract of page 228]</ref> and writer. He is an [[Oxford fellow|emeritus fellow]] of [[New College, Oxford]],<ref>[http://www.new.ox.ac.uk/emeritus-honorary-and-wykeham-fellows Emeritus, Honorary and Wykeham Fellows] of [[New College, Oxford]]</ref> and was the [[University of Oxford]]'s [[Simonyi Professorship for the Public Understanding of Science|Professor for Public Understanding of Science]] from 1995 until 2008.<ref>{{cite web |url=/previous-holders-simonyi-professorship|title=Previous holders of The Simonyi Professorship |accessdate=23 September 2010 |publisher=The University of Oxford}}</ref>
| + | Most of Richard Dawkins' popular books have [[Richard Dawkins and pseudoscience|promoted evolutionary pseudoscience.]] Dawkins is also the former holder of the Charles Simonyi Chair of the Public Understanding of Science at [[Oxford University]]. |
| | | | |
| − | Dawkins is a noted [[atheist]]<!-- Please do not change this to 'agnostic' without first consulting the "atheist-consensus" as established on the talk page and its archives - thank you. -->, a patron of the [[British Humanist Association]], and a supporter of the [[Brights movement]],<ref>{{cite web |url=/talks/lang/en/richard_dawkins_on_militant_atheism.html|title=Richard Dawkins on militant atheism|accessdate=14 December 2011 |publisher=TED Conferences, LLC}}</ref> and is well known for his criticism of [[creationism]] and [[intelligent design]]. In his 1986 book ''[[The Blind Watchmaker]]'', he argues against the [[watchmaker analogy]], an argument for the existence of a [[God|supernatural creator]] based upon the complexity of living organisms. Instead, he describes evolutionary processes as analogous to a ''blind'' watchmaker. Dawkins first came to prominence with his 1976 book ''[[The Selfish Gene]]'', which popularised the [[gene-centred view of evolution]] and introduced the term ''[[meme]]''. In 1982, he introduced into [[evolutionary biology]] the influential concept that the [[phenotype|phenotypic]] effects of a gene are not necessarily limited to an organism's body, but can stretch far into the environment, including the bodies of other organisms. This concept is presented in his book ''[[The Extended Phenotype]]''.<ref name="esf">{{cite web|url=/releases/2009/01/090119081333.htm |title=European Evolutionary Biologists Rally Behind Richard Dawkins's Extended Phenotype |publisher=Sciencedaily.com |date=20 January 2009 |accessdate=28 June 2011}}</ref>
| + | He is an ardent opponent of religion, which he dismisses as mere [[superstition]].<ref>Richard Dawkins is a man with a mission – the eradication of religion and superstition, and their total replacement with science and reason. [http://www.sheldrake.org/D&C/controversies/Dawkins.html "Richard Dawkins comes to call"]</ref> However, Dawkins has offered no effective rebuttal to studies which show that the irreligious [[Irreligion and superstition|are more likely]] to be superstitious than [[evangelicalism|evangelical]] [[Christianity|Christians]].<ref>http://online.wsj.com/article/SB122178219865054585.html</ref> |
| | | | |
| − | He has since written several popular science books, and makes regular television and radio appearances, predominantly discussing these topics. In his 2006 book ''[[The God Delusion]]'', Dawkins contends that a supernatural creator almost certainly does not exist and that religious faith is a delusion—"a fixed false belief".<ref name="goddelusion">{{cite book| last = Dawkins| first = Richard| title = The God Delusion| year = 2006| publisher = Transworld Publishers| isbn = 0-593-05548-9}}</ref>{{rp|5}} As of January 2010, the English-language version had sold more than two million copies and had been translated into 31 languages.<ref>{{cite web |url=/articles/5000#455619 | publisher= Richard Dawkins at RichardDawkins.net | title= The God Delusion – back on the Times extended list at #24 |accessdate=6 February 2010 | date = 27 January 2010 }}
| + | Moreover, in terms of the [[theism]] vs. [[agnosticism]]/[[atheism]] issue, Dawkins has shown himself to be rather ignorant in matters of [[theology]] and [[philosophy]]. For example, atheist philosopher Dr. [[Michael Ruse]] declared concerning Dawkins' book ''The God Delusion'': "''The God Delusion'' makes me embarrassed to be an atheist."<ref>http://www.alternet.org/media/47052?page=entire</ref> |
| − | * {{cite web |url=/media/pointofinquiry/POI_2007_12_7_Richard_Dawkins.mp3 | publisher= Richard Dawkins at Point of Inquiry | title= Richard Dawkins — Science and the New Atheism | accessdate=14 March 2008 | date=8 December 2007}}</ref> Dawkins founded the [[Richard Dawkins Foundation for Reason and Science]] to promote the teaching of evolution and to counteract those who advocate classroom programmes that teach against evolution. In 2014 he joined the global awareness movement [[Asteroid Day]] as a "100x Signatory".<ref name="Telegrapharticle">{{cite web|url=/news/11272393/Asteroids-could-wipe-out-humanity-warn-Richard-Dawkins-and-Brian-Cox.html |title=Asteroids could wipe out humanity, warn Richard Dawkins and Brian Cox |publisher=The Telegraph |date=4 December 2014 |accessdate=4 December 2014}}</ref>
| |
| | | | |
| − | == Background == | + | == Biography of Richard Dawkins == |
| | + | [[Image:Intelligent design.jpg|thumbnail|300px|left|When Richard Dawkins was a young man, he recognized the [[Intelligent design|that the complexity of life indicates a designer]]. ]] |
| | + | Richard Dawkins was born in Kenya.<ref>http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/2004/jul/25/research.science</ref> He was a child of a family of colonial forest officers.<ref>http://www.telegraph.co.uk/culture/3657215/Preaching-to-the-converted.html</ref> |
| | + | Dawkins was raised to have religious values, and confesses that when he was young, he acknowledged the complexity of life and believed that it indicated a designer. However, during his teens, he chose to abandon this faith and embrace Darwinism instead, despite admitting that he hadn’t actually read [[Charles Darwin]]’s works.<ref>http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2003/feb/10/religion.scienceandnature</ref><ref>http://www.bbc.co.uk/religion/religions/atheism/people/dawkins.shtml</ref> See also: [[British atheism]] |
| | | | |
| − | ===Kenya===
| + | The atheist philosopher [[John Gray (philosopher)|John Gray]] says of Dawkins' time spent in [[Kenya]]: "Unlike the best of the colonial administrators, some of whom were deeply versed in the languages and histories of the peoples they ruled, Dawkins displays no interest in the cultures of the [[Africa]]n countries where he lived as a boy. It is the obedient devotion of those who served his family that has remained in his memory."<ref>[http://www.newrepublic.com/article/119596/appetite-wonder-review-closed-mind-richard-dawkins ''The Closed Mind of Richard Dawkins''], New Republic by John Gray</ref> See also: [[Richard Dawkins' family fortune and the slave trade]] |
| − | Dawkins was born in [[Nairobi]], [[British Kenya]], on 26 March 1941.<ref name=whoswho>{{Who's Who | surname=DAWKINS | othernames = Prof. (Clinton) Richard | id = U13225 | volume = 2015 | edition = online [[Oxford University Press]]}} {{subscription required}}</ref><ref name="cv">{{cite web |url=/archivos/usuarios/cv_521.pdf |title=Curriculum vitae of Richard Dawkins |accessdate=13 March 2008 |publisher=The University of Oxford|archiveurl =/web/20080423211133/http://www.simonyi.ox.ac.uk/dawkins/CV.shtml |archivedate =23 April 2008|deadurl=no}}</ref> He is the son of Jean Mary Vyvyan (née Ladner) and Clinton John Dawkins (1915–2010), who was an agricultural civil servant in the British [[Colonial Service]] in [[Nyasaland]] (now Malawi).<ref name="father%27s%20obit"/><ref>{{cite web|url=/article-1G2-3449200042/dawkins-richard-1941.html |title=Dawkins, Richard 1941- - Contemporary Authors, New Revision Series |publisher=Encyclopedia.com |accessdate=2014-05-16}}</ref> Dawkins considers himself English and lives in Oxford, England.<ref>{{cite web|url=/RichardDawkins/status/308215177373954049 |title=A twitter status update by Dawkins saying that he identifies as English| publisher=Twitter.com |accessdate=2014-05-16}}</ref><ref>{{cite web| title=Richard Dawkins: 'I don't think I am strident or aggressive'| author= Andrew Anthony| date=15 September 2013| url=/science/2013/sep/15/richard-dawkins-interview-appetite-wonder| publisher=The Guardian| accessdate=21 September 2014}}</ref>
| |
| | | | |
| − | Dawkins has a younger sister.<ref name="Darwin%27s%20child"/> His father was called up into the [[King's African Rifles]] during the Second World War<ref>{{cite book| author = Richard Dawkins| title = The Ancestor's Tale| url =/?id=Tub-X6wydKgC| date = October 2004| publisher = Houghton Mifflin Harcourt| isbn = 978-0-618-00583-3| page = 317 }}</ref><ref name="Brief%20Scientific%20Autobiography">{{cite web |url=/articles/4757-brief-scientific-autobiography |title=Brief Scientific Autobiography |accessdate=17 July 2010 |publisher=RichardDawkins.net |last=Dawkins |first=Richard}}</ref> and returned to England in 1949, when Dawkins was eight. His father had inherited a country estate, [[Over Norton Park]] in Oxfordshire, which he farmed commercially.<ref name="father%27s%20obit">{{Cite news | + | Dawkins studied zoology at Oxford University, and graduated in 1962. As a undergraduate at Oxford, he studied zoology under the Dutch ethologist Niko Tinbergen and the two developed a strong student/teacher relationship.<ref>http://www.muskingum.edu/~psych/psycweb/history/dawkins.htm</ref> He remained at [[Oxford]] for his doctoral work, receiving his Ph.D in 1966. From 1967-1969, Dawkins served as Assistant Professor of [[Zoology]] at [[Berkeley]]. During this time, he was, in his own words, “heavily involved” in the unrest and liberal activism for which Berkeley is notorious.<ref>http://www.bbc.co.uk/religion/religions/atheism/people/dawkins.shtml</ref> He returned to Oxford in 1970 and served as a Lecturer in Animal Behaviour and a Fellow of New College. In 1995, Dawkins became the Simonyi Professor of the Public Understanding of Science which was a post created by an endowment of £1.5m from Dr. Charles Simonyi. In September 2008, Richard Dawkins retired from his post as Simonyi Professor of the Public Understanding of Science. |
| − | |last=Dawkins
| |
| − | |first=Richard
| |
| − | |title=Lives Remembered: John Dawkins
| |
| − | |newspaper=[[The Independent]]
| |
| − | |date=11 December 2010
| |
| − | |url=/news/obituaries/lives-remembered-john-dawkins-2157459.html
| |
| − | |accessdate=12 December 2010
| |
| − | |location=London}}</ref> Both his parents were interested in [[natural science]]s; they answered Dawkins's questions in scientific terms.<ref>{{cite news |url=/1/hi/in_depth/uk/2000/newsmakers/1595744.stm |title=Richard Dawkins: The foibles of faith |accessdate=13 March 2008 |date=12 October 2001 |publisher=BBC News}}</ref>
| |
| | | | |
| − | Dawkins describes his childhood as "a normal [[Anglican]] upbringing".<ref>{{cite journal| last = Pollard| first = Nick| title = High Profile| url =/?id=17rzvh_Ve0IC| volume = 18| date = April 1995| publisher = Hymns Ancient & Modern Ltd| location = Harrow, England| page = 15| issn = 0309-3492| issue = 3| journal = [[Third Way Magazine|Third Way]] }}</ref> He was a Christian until halfway through his teenage years, at which point he concluded that the [[modern evolutionary synthesis|theory of evolution]] was a better explanation for life's complexity, and ceased believing in a god.<ref name="Darwin%27s%20child">{{cite news |url=/world/2003/feb/10/religion.scienceandnature |author=Hattenstone, Simon |title=Darwin's child |accessdate=22 April 2008 |date=10 February 2003 |publisher=The Guardian |location=London}}</ref> Dawkins states: "the main residual reason why I was religious was from being so impressed with the complexity of life and feeling that it had to have a designer, and I think it was when I realised that Darwinism was a far superior explanation that pulled the rug out from under the argument of design. And that left me with nothing."<ref name="Darwin%27s%20child"/> | + | Despite this, Richard Dawkins might have remained a relatively obscure professor if not for the publication of his first book, ''The Selfish Gene'', in 1976. This book became a bestseller, and brought Dawkins a celebrity which he has worked to maintain with further books and lectures. |
| | | | |
| − | ===Education===
| + | In 1984, Dawkins divorced his wife of 17 years, Marian Stamp; later that same year, he married Eve Barham. Dawkins also divorced Barham, though the precise circumstances of this divorce are unclear.<ref>http://www.richarddawkins.com/</ref> He married science fiction actress Lalla Ward in 1992; at present, the two are still married. |
| − | [[File:Oundlegreathall.jpg|thumb|right|The Great Hall, Oundle School]]
| |
| − | From 1954 to 1959 Dawkins attended [[Oundle School]] in Northamptonshire, an English [[Public school (United Kingdom)|public school]] with a distinct Church of England flavour,<ref name="Darwin%27s%20child"/> where he was in [[Oundle School#Boys' houses|Laundimer house]].<ref name="Oundle2012b">{{cite web|ref=CITEREFOundle2012b|url=/extracurric/lectures.php|title=The Oundle Lecture Series|publisher=[[Oundle School]]|year=2012b|accessdate=12 June 2012}}</ref> While at Oundle Dawkins read [[Bertrand Russell]]'s ''[[Why I Am Not a Christian]]'' for the first time.<ref>Richard Dawkins, ''[[Brief Candle in the Dark: My Life in Science]]'', [[Bantam Press]], 2015, page 175 (ISBN 978-0-59307-256-1).</ref> He studied [[zoology]] at [[Balliol College, Oxford]], graduating in 1962; while there, he was tutored by [[Nobel Prize]]-winning ethologist [[Nikolaas Tinbergen]]. He continued as a research student under Tinbergen's supervision, receiving his [[Master of Arts (Oxbridge and Dublin)|MA]] and [[Doctor of Philosophy|DPhil]] degrees by 1966, and remained a research assistant for another year.<ref name=cv%2F> Tinbergen was a pioneer in the study of animal behaviour, particularly in the areas of instinct, learning and choice;<ref name="Shrage">{{cite news| first=Michael |last=Schrage |title=Revolutionary Evolutionist |date=July 1995 |url=/wired/archive/3.07/dawkins_pr.html |publisher=Wired |accessdate=21 April 2008}}</ref> Dawkins's research in this period concerned models of animal decision-making.<ref>{{cite journal |first=Richard |last=Dawkins |title=A threshold model of choice behaviour |journal=Animal Behaviour |volume=17 |year=1969 |doi=10.1016/0003-3472(69)90120-1 |page=120 |issue=1}}</ref>
| |
| | | | |
| − | ===Teaching=== | + | == Richard Dawkins and the women and minority population == |
| − | From 1967 to 1969, he was an assistant professor of zoology at the [[University of California, Berkeley]]. During this period, the students and faculty at UC Berkeley were largely opposed to the ongoing [[Vietnam War]], and Dawkins became involved in the [[Opposition to the Vietnam War|anti-war]] demonstrations and activities.<ref name="belief%20interview">{{cite web |url=/religion/religions/atheism/people/dawkins.shtml |title="Belief" interview |accessdate=8 April 2008 |date=5 April 2004 |publisher=BBC}}</ref> He returned to the University of Oxford in 1970 as a lecturer. In 1990, he became a [[reader (academic rank)|reader]] in zoology. In 1995, he was appointed [[Simonyi Professorship for the Public Understanding of Science|Simonyi Professor for the Public Understanding of Science]] at Oxford, a position that had been endowed by [[Charles Simonyi]] with the express intention that the holder "be expected to make important contributions to the public understanding of some scientific field",<ref>{{cite web |url=/aims/manifesto.shtml |title=Manifesto for the Simonyi Professorship |accessdate=13 March 2008 |author=Simonyi, Charles |authorlink=Charles Simonyi |date=15 May 1995 |publisher=The University of Oxford|archiveurl =/web/20080423211123/http://www.simonyi.ox.ac.uk/aims/manifesto.shtml |archivedate =23 April 2008|deadurl=yes}}</ref> and that its first holder should be Richard Dawkins.<ref>{{cite web|url=/aims/index.shtml |title= Aims of the Simonyi Professorship|date=23 April 2008 |accessdate=28 June 2011 |archiveurl=/web/20080423211118/www.simonyi.ox.ac.uk/aims/index.shtml |archivedate=23 April 2008}}</ref>
| + | [[File:2404429188 ea8f1fc48b.jpg|thumb|250px|Survey data and website tracking data of prominent atheist websites indicate that in the Western World, [[Atheism and women|atheism is significantly less appealing to women]]. |
| | + | <br /><br /> |
| | + | According to the website tracking firms [[Alexa]] and Quantcast women frequent the website of richarddawkins.net significantly less than men.<ref>http://www.alexa.com/siteinfo/richarddawkins.net</ref><ref>http://www.quantcast.com/richarddawkins.net#demographics</ref> |
| | + | <br /> |
| | + | <br /> |
| | + | <small>([http://www.flickr.com/photos/constantweader/2404429188/ Flickr] photo, see [http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/2.0/deed.en license agreement])</small> ]] |
| | + | === Women's views of Richard Dawkins === |
| | | | |
| − | Since 1970, he has been a fellow of [[New College, Oxford]].<ref>{{cite web |url=/dawkins/index.shtml |title=The Current Simonyi Professor: Richard Dawkins |accessdate=13 March 2008 |publisher=The University of Oxford|archiveurl =/web/20080423211128/http://www.simonyi.ox.ac.uk/dawkins/index.shtml |archivedate =23 April 2008|deadurl=yes}}</ref> He has delivered many lectures, including the [[Henry Sidgwick]] Memorial Lecture (1989), the first [[Erasmus Darwin]] Memorial Lecture (1990), the [[Michael Faraday]] Lecture (1991), the [[Thomas Henry Huxley|T. H. Huxley]] Memorial Lecture (1992), the Irvine Memorial Lecture (1997), the Sheldon Doyle Lecture (1999), the Tinbergen Lecture (2004) and the [[Tanner Lectures]] (2003).<ref name=cv%2F> In 1991, he gave the [[Royal Institution Christmas Lectures|Royal Institution Christmas Lectures for Children]] on ''[[Growing Up in the Universe]]''. He has also edited several journals, and has acted as editorial advisor to the ''Encarta Encyclopedia'' and the ''[[Encyclopedia of Evolution]]''. He is listed as a senior editor and a columnist of the [[Council for Secular Humanism]]'s ''Free Inquiry'' magazine, and has been a member of the editorial board of ''[[Skeptic (U.S. magazine)|Skeptic]]'' magazine since its foundation.<ref>{{cite web |url=/the_magazine/editorial_board.html |title= Editorial Board |accessdate=22 April 2008 |publisher=The Skeptics' Society}}</ref>
| + | See also: [[Richard Dawkins and women]] and [[Elevatorgate]] and [[Feminist quotes about Richard Dawkins]] and [[Atheism and rape]] |
| | | | |
| − | He has sat on judging panels for awards as diverse as the Royal Society's [[Faraday Award]] and the [[British Academy Television Awards]],<ref name=autogenerated1>Richard Dawkins, 2006. [http://www.simonyi.ox.ac.uk/dawkins/CV.shtml Curriculum Vitae]. {{Wayback|url=/dawkins/CV.shtml|date =20080423211133|bot=DASHBot}}</ref> and has been president of the Biological Sciences section of the [[British Association for the Advancement of Science]]. In 2004, [[Balliol College, Oxford]], instituted the Dawkins Prize, awarded for "outstanding research into the ecology and behaviour of animals whose welfare and survival may be endangered by human activities".<ref>{{cite web |url=/official/miscellany/dawkins/index.asp |title=The Dawkins Prize for Animal Conservation and Welfare |accessdate=30 March 2008 |date=9 November 2007 |publisher=Balliol College, Oxford|archiveurl =/web/20070912192317/http://www.balliol.ox.ac.uk/official/miscellany/dawkins/index.asp |archivedate =12 September 2007|deadurl=yes}}</ref> In September 2008, he retired from his professorship, announcing plans to "write a book aimed at youngsters in which he will warn them against believing in 'anti-scientific' fairytales."<ref name="telegraph2008">{{cite news| title=Harry Potter fails to cast spell over Professor Richard Dawkins| url=/news/3255972/Harry-Potter-fails-to-cast-spell-over-Professor-Richard-Dawkins.html| publisher=The Daily Telegraph| accessdate=1 November 2008| author=Martin Beckford and Urmee Khan| location=London| date=24 October 2008}}</ref>
| + | ==== Majority of web visitor's to Dawkins' website are men ==== |
| | | | |
| − | === Personal life ===
| + | Survey data and website tracking data of prominent atheist websites indicate that in the Western World, [[Atheism and women|atheism is significantly less appealing to women]]. According to the website tracking firms [[Alexa]] and Quantcast women frequent the website of richarddawkins.net significantly less than men.<ref>http://www.alexa.com/siteinfo/richarddawkins.net</ref><ref>http://www.quantcast.com/richarddawkins.net#demographics</ref> One possible explanation of many women's lack of interest in the message of Richard Dawkins is the [[abrasiveness of Richard Dawkins]]. For example, in September of 2010, Richard Dawkins became nasty towards a woman in an audience he spoke before.<ref>[http://www.independent.co.uk/arts-entertainment/books/news/richard-dawkins-i-never-meet-people-who-disagree-with-me-2080451.html Richard Dawkins: 'I never meet people who disagree with me', ''The Independent'' by reporter Andy McSmith, Thursday 16 September 2010]</ref> |
| − | Dawkins has been married three times, and has one daughter. On 19 August 1967, Dawkins married fellow ethologist [[Marian Stamp Dawkins|Marian Stamp]] in [[Annestown]], [[County Waterford]], Ireland;<ref name="MStamp">{{cite news|title=Marriage|newspaper=The Times|location=London|date=23 August 1967|page=8|url=/doc/LT/WrapPDF=contentSet=LT=recordID=0FFO-1967-AUG23-008-F.pdf}}{{dead link|date=October 2011}}</ref> they divorced in 1984. On 1 June 1984, he married Eve Barham (19 August 1951–28 February 1999) in Oxford. They had a daughter, Juliet Emma Dawkins (born 1984, Oxford). Dawkins and Barham also divorced.<ref name=McKie%2F> In 1992, he married actress [[Lalla Ward]]<ref name="McKie">{{cite news |first=Robin |last=McKie |title=Doctor Zoo |url=/comment/story/0,6903,1268687,00.html |publisher=The Guardian |location=London |date=25 July 2004 |accessdate=17 March 2008 }}</ref> in [[Royal Borough of Kensington and Chelsea|Kensington and Chelsea]], London. Dawkins met her through their mutual friend [[Douglas Adams]],<ref>{{cite book| title = Hitchhiker: A Biography of Douglas Adams| url =/?id=K-E2cAzsxwUC| year = 2005| publisher = Justin, Charles & Co| isbn = 1-932112-35-9| page = 129| first1 = M. J.| last1 = Simpson }}, [http://books.google.com/books?id=K-E2cAzsxwUC&pg=PA129 Chapter 15, p. 129]</ref> who had worked with her on the BBC's ''[[Doctor Who]]''.
| |
| | | | |
| − | == Work == | + | ==== Elevatorgate scandal ==== |
| | | | |
| − | === Evolutionary biology ===
| + | ''See also:'' [[Elevatorgate]] and [[Richard Dawkins quotes]] |
| − | [[File:Dawkins at UT Austin.jpg|thumb|right|upright|Dawkins at the [[University of Texas at Austin]], March 2008]]
| |
| − | {{Further2|[[Gene-centered view of evolution|Gene-centred view of evolution]]}}
| |
| − | In his scientific works, Dawkins is best known for his popularisation of the [[gene]] as the principal [[unit of selection]] in [[evolution]]; this view is most clearly set out in his books:<ref>{{cite book| last = Lloyd| first = Elisabeth Anne| title = The structure and confirmation of evolutionary theory| url =/?id=hO8vHTSiBkAC| year = 1994| publisher = Princeton University Press| isbn = 978-0-691-00046-6 }}</ref>
| |
| − | * ''[[The Selfish Gene]]'' (1976), in which he notes that "all life evolves by the differential survival of replicating entities".
| |
| − | * ''[[The Extended Phenotype]]'' (1982), in which he describes [[natural selection]] as "the process whereby [[DNA replication|replicators]] out-propagate each other".
| |
| | | | |
| − | Dawkins has consistently been <!-- PLEASE NOTE: 'sceptical' is the correct British spelling, and Dawkins is British -->sceptical about non-adaptive processes in evolution (such as [[spandrel (biology)|spandrels]], described by [[Steven Jay Gould|Gould]] and [[Richard Lewontin|Lewontin]])<ref name="gould-lewontin">{{cite journal|last=Gould|first=Stephen Jay|author2=Lewontin, Richard C. |year=1979|title=The Spandrels of San Marco and the Panglossian Paradigm: A Critique of the Adaptationist Programme |journal=Proceedings of the Royal Society of London|location=London|volume= 205|issue=1161|series=B|pages=581–598|url=/content/205/1161/581.short | doi = 10.1098/rspb.1979.0086 | pmid= 42062|accessdate=14 August 2009}}</ref> and about selection at levels "above" that of the gene.<ref name=Extended_Phenotype>{{cite book|last=Dawkins|first=Richard|title=The extended phenotype: the long reach of the gene|year=1999|publisher=Oxford Univ. Press|location=Oxford [u.a.]|isbn=0192880519|edition=Rev. ed. with new afterword and further reading.}}</ref> He is particularly <!-- PLEASE NOTE: 'sceptical' is the correct British spelling, and Dawkins is British -->sceptical about the practical possibility or importance of [[group selection]] as a basis for understanding [[altruism]].<ref name="goddelusion" />{{rp|169–172}} | + | In July of 2011, Richard Dawkins was widely criticized within the atheist community and in various press outlets for his insensitive comments made to atheist [[Rebecca Watson]] about an incident which occurred in an elevator (see: [[Elevatorgate]]).<ref> |
| − | This behaviour appears at first to be an evolutionary paradox, since helping others costs precious resources and decreases one's own [[fitness (biology)|fitness]]. Previously, many had interpreted this as an aspect of group selection: individuals are doing what is best for the survival of the population or species as a whole. British evolutionary biologist [[W. D. Hamilton]] had used the gene-centred view to explain altruism in terms of [[inclusive fitness]] and [[kin selection]]—that individuals behave altruistically toward their close relatives, who share many of their own genes.<ref>{{cite journal |author=Hamilton, W.D. |authorlink=W. D. Hamilton |title=The genetical evolution of social behaviour I and II |journal=Journal of Theoretical Biology |volume=7 |issue= 1|pages=1–16, 17–52 |year=1964|doi=10.1016/0022-5193(64)90038-4 |pmid=5875341}}</ref>{{Ref label|a|a|none}} Similarly, [[Robert Trivers]], thinking in terms of the gene-centred model, developed the theory of [[reciprocal altruism]], whereby one organism provides a benefit to another in the expectation of future reciprocation.<ref>{{cite journal |author=Trivers, Robert |title=The evolution of reciprocal altruism |journal=Quarterly Review of Biology |volume=46 |issue= 1|pages=35–57 |year=1971|url= |doi=10.1086/406755}}</ref> Dawkins popularised these ideas in ''The Selfish Gene'', and developed them in his own work.<ref name="dawkins79">{{cite journal |author=Dawkins, Richard |authorlink= |title=Twelve Misunderstandings of Kin Selection |journal=Zeitschrift fur Tierpsychologie |volume=51 |issue= |pages=184–200 |year=1979|url=/dawkins/writings/Twelve%20Misunderstandings%20of%20Kin%20Selection.pdf|archiveurl=/web/20080529180009/http://www.simonyi.ox.ac.uk/dawkins/writings/Twelve%20Misunderstandings%20of%20Kin%20Selection.pdf |archivedate= 29 May 2008 |doi=10.1111/j.1439-0310.1979.tb00682.x}}{{dead link|date=October 2011}}</ref>
| + | *[http://www.salon.com/life/feature/2011/07/08/atheist_flirting Richard Dawkins: Skeptic of women? - Salon, July 8, 2011] |
| | + | *[http://www.newstatesman.com/blogs/david-allen-green/2011/07/richard-dawkins-chewing-gum Sharing a lift with Richard Dawkins by David Allen Green - New Stateman - 06 July 2011] |
| | + | *[http://gawker.com/5818993/richard-dawkins-torn-limb-from-limbby-atheists Richard Dawkins Torn Limb From Limb—By Atheists - Gawker] |
| | + | *[http://www.usatoday.com/news/religion/story/2011-09-15/atheist-sexism-women/50416454/1 Atheists address sexism issues - USA Today] |
| | + | *[http://www.theguardian.com/science/2015/jun/09/is-richard-dawkins-destroying-his-reputation Is Richard Dawkins destroying his reputation?] by Sophie Elmhirst, ''The Guardian'', June 9, 2015 |
| | + | </ref> |
| | | | |
| − | He has also been strongly critical of the [[Gaia hypothesis]] of the independent scientist [[James Lovelock]].<ref>{{cite book| title = The molecular biology of Gaia| url =/?id=84yKHDK3VEAC| year = 1996| publisher = Columbia University Press| isbn = 0-231-10512-6| page = 178| first1 = George Ronald| last1 = Williams }}, [http://books.google.com/books?id=84yKHDK3VEAC&pg=PA178 Extract of page 178]
| + | For more information, please see: |
| − | </ref><ref>{{cite book| title = Scientists debate gaia: the next century| url =/?id=TOi1Cyj9h1UC| year = 2004| publisher = MIT Press| isbn = 0-262-19498-8| page = 72| first1 = Stephen Henry| last1 = Schneider }}, [http://books.google.com/books?id=TOi1Cyj9h1UC&pg=PA72 Extract of page 72]
| |
| − | </ref><ref>{{cite book| title = Unweaving the Rainbow: Science, Delusion and the Appetite for Wonder| url =/?id=ZudTchiioUoC| year = 2000| publisher = Houghton Mifflin Harcourt| isbn = 0-618-05673-4| page = 223| first1 = Richard| last1 = Dawkins }}, [http://books.google.com/books?id=ZudTchiioUoC&pg=PA223 Extract of page 223]
| |
| − | </ref>
| |
| | | | |
| − | In June 2012 Dawkins was highly critical of fellow biologist [[E.O. Wilson]]'s 2012 book ''[[The Social Conquest of Earth]]''.<ref>{{cite news|last=Thorpe|first=Vanessa|title=Richard Dawkins in furious row with EO Wilson over theory of evolution. Book review sparks war of words between grand old man of biology and Oxford's most high-profile Darwinist|url=/science/2012/jun/24/battle-of-the-professors|accessdate=3 October 2012|newspaper=The Guardian|date=24 June 2012|location=London}}</ref>
| + | *[[Elevatorgate news stories - Chronological order]] |
| | | | |
| − | Dawkins's book ''[[The Greatest Show on Earth: The Evidence for Evolution]]'' expounds the [[evidence of common descent|evidence for biological evolution]],<ref>{{cite news |url=/news/52925-transworld-signs-new-book-from-dawkins.html |title=Transworld signs new book from Dawkins |accessdate=12 January 2009 |date=15 February 2008 |publisher=The Bookseller}}</ref> and coincided with [[Charles Darwin|Darwin]]'s [[anniversary|bicentennial]] year.<ref>{{cite book| last = Dawkins| first = Richard| title = The Greatest Show on Earth: The Evidence for Evolution| year = 2009| publisher = Transworld Publishers| location = London| isbn = 0-593-06173-X| pages = xii }}</ref>
| + | *[[Research on atheist conferences]] |
| | | | |
| − | === Fathering the meme ===
| + | *[[Atheist conferences]] |
| − | {{Main|Meme}}
| |
| − | Dawkins [[neologism|coined]] the word ''meme'' (the behavioural equivalent of a gene) as a way to encourage readers to think about how Darwinian principles might be extended beyond the realm of genes.<ref name="selfishgene">{{cite book| author = Dawkins, Richard| title = [[The Selfish Gene]]| edition = 2nd| year = 1989| publisher = Oxford University Press| location = United Kingdom| isbn = 0-19-286092-5}}</ref>{{rp|11}} It was intended as an extension of his "replicators" argument, but it took on a life of its own in the hands of other authors such as [[Daniel Dennett]] and [[Susan Blackmore]]. These popularisations then led to the emergence of [[memetics]], a field from which Dawkins has distanced himself.<ref name="misunderstanding">{{cite journal | last1 = Burman | first1 = J. T. | year = 2012 | title = The misunderstanding of memes: Biography of an unscientific object, 1976–1999 | url = | journal = [[Perspectives on Science]] | volume = 20 | issue = 1| pages = 75–104 | doi = 10.1162/POSC_a_00057 }}{{open access}}</ref>
| |
| | | | |
| − | Dawkins's ''meme'' refers to any cultural entity that an observer might consider a replicator of a certain idea or complex of ideas. He hypothesised that people could view many cultural entities as capable of such replication, generally through exposure to humans, who have evolved as efficient (although not perfect) copiers of information and behaviour. Because memes are not always copied perfectly, they might become refined, combined, or otherwise modified with other ideas; this results in new memes, which may themselves prove more or less efficient replicators than their predecessors, thus providing a framework for a hypothesis of [[cultural evolution]] based on memes, a notion that is analogous to the theory of biological evolution based on genes.<ref>{{cite book| author = Kelly, Kevin| title = [[Out of Control: The New Biology of Machines, Social Systems, and the Economic World]]| year = 1994| publisher = Addison-Wesley| location = United States| isbn = 0-201-48340-8| page = 360 }}</ref> | + | ===== Dawkins stands by Elevatorgate remarks. Says Elevatorgate incident was rather trivial ===== |
| | | | |
| − | Although Dawkins invented the term ''meme'', he has not claimed that the idea was entirely novel,<ref>
| + | On November 18, 2014, Richard Dawkins indicated that: he stands by his recent remarks about women/men relations, he feels muzzled by "thought police" and that [[Rebecca Watson]]'s experience in the elevator was "rather trivial" compared to events some Muslim women experience.<ref>[http://www.washingtonpost.com/national/religion/richard-dawkins-stands-by-remarks-on-sexism-pedophilia-down-syndrome/2014/11/18/a2915cd8-6f64-11e4-a2c2-478179fd0489_story.html Richard Dawkins stands by remarks on sexism, pedophilia, Down syndrome], by Kimberly Winston | Religion News Service November 18, 2014</ref> |
| − | {{cite web
| |
| − | |url=/~crshalizi/formerly-hyper-weird/memetics.html
| |
| − | |title=Memes|work=Center for the Study of Complex Systems
| |
| − | |publisher=University of Michigan
| |
| − | |accessdate=14 August 2009
| |
| − | |last= Shalizi
| |
| − | |first= Cosma Rohilla
| |
| − | }}
| |
| − | </ref> and there have been other expressions for similar ideas in the past. For instance, John Laurent has suggested that the term may have derived from the work of the little-known German biologist [[Richard Semon]].<ref name="mneme">{{Cite book
| |
| − | | last =Laurent| first =John
| |
| − | | year =1999
| |
| − | | title =A Note on the Origin of 'Memes'/'Mnemes'
| |
| − | | periodical =| series =| publication-place =| place =
| |
| − | | publisher =Journal of Memetics
| |
| − | | volume =3 | issue =1| pages =14–19
| |
| − | | url =/jom-emit/1999/vol3/laurent_j.html
| |
| − | | issn =| doi =| oclc =
| |
| − | | accessdate = 17 March 2008
| |
| − | }}</ref> In 1904, Semon published ''Die Mneme'' (which appeared in English in 1924 as ''The Mneme''). This book discusses the cultural transmission of experiences, with insights parallel to those of Dawkins. Laurent also found the term ''mneme'' used in [[Maurice Maeterlinck]]'s ''The Life of the White Ant'' (1926), and has highlighted the similarities to Dawkins's concept.<ref name=mneme%2F>
| |
| − | [[James Gleick]] describes Dawkins's concept of the meme as "his most famous memorable invention, far more influential than his selfish genes or his later proselytising against religiosity".<ref>{{cite book| author = James Gleick| title = The Information: A History, a Theory, a Flood| date = 15 February 2011| publisher = Pantheon| isbn = 978-0-375-42372-7| page = 269 }}</ref>
| |
| | | | |
| − | === Criticism of creationism ===
| + | Specifically, the ''Washington Post'' reported on November 18, 2014: |
| − | Dawkins is a prominent critic of [[creationism]], the religious belief that [[human]]ity, [[life]], and the [[universe]] were created by a [[deity]]<ref>{{cite web|url=/entries/creationism/|title=Creationism|last=Ruse|first=Michael |authorlink=Michael Ruse|work=Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy|publisher=Metaphysics Research Laboratory, [[Stanford University]]|quote=a Creationist is someone who believes in a god who is absolute creator of heaven and earth.|accessdate=9 September 2009}}</ref> without recourse to evolution.<ref>{{cite book| last = Scott| first = Eugenie C| authorlink = Eugenie Scott| title = Evolution vs. creationism: an introduction| date = 3 August 2009| publisher = University of California Press| location = Berkeley, CA| isbn = 978-0-520-26187-7| page = 51| chapter = Creationism| quote = The term 'creationism' to many people connotes the theological doctrine of special creationism: that God created the universe essentially as we see it today, and that this universe has not changed appreciably since that creation event. Special creationism includes the idea that God created living things in their present forms... }}</ref> He has described the [[Young Earth creationism|Young Earth creationist]] view that the Earth is only a few thousand years old as "a preposterous, mind-shrinking falsehood",<ref>{{cite news |url=/uk/2002/mar/09/religion.schools1 |title=A scientist's view |last=Dawkins |first=Richard |date=9 March 2002 |work=[[The Guardian]] |accessdate=7 November 2009 |location=London}}</ref> and his 1986 book, ''[[The Blind Watchmaker]]'', contains a sustained critique of the [[Teleological argument|argument from design]], an important creationist argument. In the book, Dawkins argues against the [[watchmaker analogy]] made famous by the 18th-century English [[theology|theologian]] [[William Paley]] via his book ''Natural Theology'', in which Paley argues that just as a watch is too complicated and too functional to have sprung into existence merely by accident, so too must all living things—with their far greater complexity—be purposefully designed. Dawkins shares the view generally held by scientists that natural selection is sufficient to explain the apparent functionality and non-random complexity of the biological world, and can be said to play the role of watchmaker in nature, albeit as an automatic, nonintelligent, ''blind'' watchmaker.<ref>{{cite web |url=/dawkins/WorldOfDawkins-archive/Dawkins/Work/Books/blind.shtml |title=Book: The Blind Watchmaker |accessdate=28 February 2008 |author=Catalano, John |publisher=The University of Oxford|archiveurl =/web/20080415140851/http://www.simonyi.ox.ac.uk/dawkins/WorldOfDawkins-archive/Dawkins/Work/Books/blind.shtml |archivedate =15 April 2008|deadurl=yes}}</ref>
| + | {{cquote|“I don’t take back anything that I’ve said,” Dawkins said from a shady spot in the leafy backyard of one of his Bay Area supporters. “I would not say it again, however, because I am now accustomed to being misunderstood and so I will . “ |
| | | | |
| − | [[File:Dawkins aaconf.jpg|thumb|Dawkins, wearing a [[scarlet 'A']] lapel pin, at the 34th annual conference of [[American Atheists]] (2008).]]
| + | He trailed off momentarily, gazing at his hands resting on a patio table. |
| | | | |
| − | In 1986, Dawkins and biologist [[John Maynard Smith]] participated in an [[Oxford Union]] debate against [[A. E. Wilder-Smith]] (a [[Young Earth creationism|Young Earth creationist]]) and [[Edgar Andrews]] (president of the [[Biblical Creation Society]]).{{Ref label|b|b|none}} In general, however, Dawkins has followed the advice of his late colleague [[Stephen Jay Gould]] and refused to participate in formal debates with creationists because "what they seek is the oxygen of respectability", and doing so would "give them this oxygen by the mere act of ''engaging'' with them at all". He suggests that creationists "don't mind being beaten in an argument. What matters is that we give them recognition by bothering to argue with them in public."<ref>{{cite book| last = Dawkins| first = Richard| title = A Devil's Chaplain: Reflections on Hope, Lies, Science, and Love| url =/?id=loVMMlxC1XoC| year = 2004| publisher = Houghton Mifflin Harcourt| isbn = 0-618-48539-2| page = 218 }}, [http://books.google.be/books?id=DwD4bjQozgYC&pg=PA218 Chapter 5, p 218]</ref>
| + | “I feel muzzled, and a lot of other people do as well,” he continued. “There is a climate of bullying, a climate of intransigent thought police which is highly influential in the sense that it suppresses people like me.” |
| | | | |
| − | In a December 2004 interview with American journalist [[Bill Moyers]], Dawkins said that "among the things that science does know, evolution is about as certain as anything we know." When Moyers questioned him on the [[Evolution as theory and fact|use of the word ''theory'']], Dawkins stated that "evolution has been observed. It's just that it hasn't been observed while it's happening." He added that "it is rather like a detective coming on a murder after the scene... the detective hasn't actually seen the murder take place, of course. But what you do see is a massive clue... Huge quantities of circumstantial evidence. It might as well be spelled out in words of English."<ref>{{cite web |url=/now/transcript/transcript349_full.html#dawkins |title=''Now'' with Bill Moyers |accessdate=29 January 2006 |author=Moyers, Bill |date=3 December 2004 |publisher=Public Broadcasting Service}}</ref>
| + | Recent criticism of Dawkins has come from women, many of them within the [[atheist movement]], which has long drawn more men to its ranks. His online remarks, some women say, contribute to a climate they see as unwelcoming to female atheists... |
| | | | |
| − | Dawkins has ardently opposed the inclusion of [[intelligent design]] in science education, describing it as "not a scientific argument at all, but a religious one".<ref>{{cite news |url=/science/2005/sep/01/schools.research |title=One side can be wrong |accessdate=21 December 2006 |date=1 September 2005 |author=Dawkins, Richard and Coyne, Jerry |publisher=The Guardian |location=London}}</ref> He has been referred to in the media as "Darwin's [[Rottweiler]]",<ref name="discover">{{cite web |url=/2005/sep/darwins-rottweiler |title=Darwin's Rottweiler |accessdate=22 March 2008 |author=Hall, Stephen S. |date=9 August 2005 |publisher=''[[Discover (magazine)|Discover]]'' magazine}}</ref><ref name=mcgrath>{{cite book|last1=McGrath|first1=Alister|title=Dawkins' God : genes, memes, and the meaning of life|date=2007|publisher=Blackwell|location=Malden, Mass.|isbn=1405125381|page=i|edition=Reprinted}}</ref> a reference to English biologist [[Thomas Henry Huxley|T. H. Huxley]], who was known as "Darwin's [[Bulldog]]" for his advocacy of [[Charles Darwin]]'s evolutionary ideas. The contrasting sobriquet of "God's Rottweiler" was given to [[Pope Benedict XVI]] while he was a cardinal working for the [[Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith]].<ref name=godsrottweiler>{{cite news|last1=Petre|first1=Jonathan|last2=Johnston|first2=Bruce|title='God's Rottweiler' is the new Pope|url=/news/worldnews/europe/italy/1488264/Gods-rottweiler-is-the-new-Pope.html|accessdate=30 September 2015|work=The Telegraph|date=April 20, 2005|ref=godsrottweiler}}</ref> He has been a strong critic of the British organisation [[Truth in Science]], which promotes the teaching of creationism in state schools, and he plans through the [[Richard Dawkins Foundation for Reason and Science]] to subsidise schools with the delivery of books, DVDs, and pamphlets that counteract their (Truth in Science's) work, which Dawkins has described as an "educational scandal".<ref>{{cite news |url=/tol/life_and_style/education/student/news/article641971.ece |title=Godless Dawkins challenges schools |accessdate=3 April 2008 |date=19 November 2006 |author=Swinford, Steven |publisher=The Times | location=London}}</ref>
| + | “I concentrate my attention on that menace and I confess I occasionally get a little impatient with American women who complain of being inappropriately touched by the water cooler or invited for coffee or something which I think is, by comparison, relatively trivial,” he said.<ref>[http://www.washingtonpost.com/national/religion/richard-dawkins-stands-by-remarks-on-sexism-pedophilia-down-syndrome/2014/11/18/a2915cd8-6f64-11e4-a2c2-478179fd0489_story.html Richard Dawkins stands by remarks on sexism, pedophilia, Down syndrome], by Kimberly Winston | Religion News Service November 18, 2014 and syndicated to the ''Washington Post''</ref>}} |
| | | | |
| − | === Advocacy of atheism === | + | ==== Other reasons why many women hold unfavorable views of Richard Dawkins ==== |
| − | [[File:Richard dawkins lecture.jpg|thumb|upright|Dawkins lecturing on his book ''[[The God Delusion]]'', 24 June 2006]]
| |
| − | Dawkins is an outspoken [[atheism|atheist]]<ref>{{cite book| last = Bass| first = Thomas A.| title = Reinventing the future: Conversations with the World's Leading Scientists| url =/?id=yRZYc-LPz1oC| year = 1994| publisher = Addison Wesley| isbn = 978-0-201-62642-1| page = 118 }} [http://books.google.com/books?id=yRZYc-LPz1oC&hl=nl&pg=PA118 Extract of page 118]</ref> and a supporter of various atheist, secular, and humanistic organisations.<ref name="cv" /><ref>{{cite web | publisher = National Secular Society | url =/honoraryassociates.html | title = Our Honorary Associates | year =2005 |accessdate =21 April 2007}}</ref><ref>{{cite web | publisher = The Humanist Society of Scotland | url =/about-us/the-hss-today.html | title = The HSS Today | year =2007 | accessdate =3 April 2008 |archiveurl=/web/20080418122008/http://www.humanism-scotland.org.uk/about-us/the-hss-today.html |archivedate= 18 April 2008}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|url=/bios/Richard_Dawkins.html |title=Secular Coalition for America Advisory Board Biography |publisher=Secular.org |accessdate=29 July 2010}}</ref><ref>{{cite web |url=/index.php?section=iah&page=index |title=The International Academy Of Humanism — Humanist Laureates |accessdate=7 April 2008 |publisher=[[Council for Secular Humanism]]}}</ref><ref>{{cite web |url=/about/fellows.html |title=The Committee for Skeptical Inquiry — Fellows |accessdate=7 April 2008 |publisher=[[The Committee for Skeptical Inquiry]]|archiveurl =/web/20080615215501/http://www.csicop.org/about/fellows.html |archivedate =15 June 2008|deadurl=yes}}</ref><ref>{{cite web |url=/Who_We_Are/About_Humanism/Humanist_Manifesto_III/Notable_Signers |title=Humanism and Its Aspirations — Notable Signers |accessdate=9 February 2010 |publisher=[[American Humanist Association]]}}</ref> Although he was confirmed into the Church of England at the age of thirteen, he started to lose his religious faith when he discovered Darwin.<ref>{{cite web |url=/story/46566/atheist_richard_dawkins_on_'the_god_delusion' |title=Atheist Richard Dawkins on 'The God Delusion' |accessdate=30 December 2012 |author=McNally, Terrence |date=17 January 2007 |publisher=alternet.org}}</ref> He revealed that his understanding of evolution led him to atheism<ref>{{cite web |url=/story/178/story_17889_2.html |title=The Problem with God: Interview with Richard Dawkins (2) |accessdate=11 April 2008 |author=Sheahen, Laura |date=October 2005 |publisher=Beliefnet.com}}</ref> and is puzzled by belief in God among individuals who are sophisticated in science.<ref>{{cite web |url=/faithandreason/transcript/dawk-frame.html |title=Interview with Richard Dawkins |accessdate=12 April 2008 |publisher=PBS}}</ref> He disagrees with [[Stephen Jay Gould]]'s principle of [[Non-overlapping magisteria|nonoverlapping magisteria]]<ref>{{cite news |url=/time/magazine/article/0,9171,1555132-3,00.html |title=God vs. Science (3) |accessdate=3 April 2008 |date=5 November 2006 |last=Van Biema |first=David |publisher=[[Time (Magazine)|Time]]}}</ref> and considers the [[existence of God]] to be a scientific hypothesis like any other.<ref name="goddelusion" />{{rp|50}}
| |
| | | | |
| − | Dawkins became a prominent [[criticism of religion|critic of religion]] and has stated his [[Antireligion|opposition to religion]] is twofold: Religion is both a source of conflict and a justification for belief without evidence.<ref name="goddelusion" />{{rp|282–286}} He considers faith—belief that is not based on evidence—as "one of the world's great evils".<ref>{{cite web|url=/humanist/articles/dawkins.html|title=Is Science A Religion?|publisher=The Humanist|first=Richard|last=Dawkins|accessdate=31 December 2012}}</ref> He rose to prominence in public debates relating science and religion since the publication of his book ''The God Delusion'' in 2006, which became an international best seller.<ref name="michaelpowell">{{cite news|url=/2011/09/20/science/20dawkins.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0|title=A Knack for Bashing Orthodoxy|publisher=New York Times|first=Michael|last=Powell|accessdate=31 December 2012|date=19 September 2011}}</ref> Its success has been seen by many as indicative of a change in the contemporary cultural [[zeitgeist]] and has also been identified with the rise of [[New Atheism]].<ref>{{cite news|url=/2006/WORLD/europe/11/08/atheism.feature/index.html|title=The rise of the New Atheists|publisher=CNN|first=Simon|last=Hooper|accessdate=16 March 2010}}</ref>
| + | Another plausible explanation for many women having a lack of enthusiasm for Richard Dawkins's message is that many women who attend religious services and hold traditional beliefs and values find Richard Dawkins' [[atheism and morality|atheistic values]] repugnant. In terms of traditional values, in 2007, when asked in an interview, "If we do not acknowledge some sort of external [standard], what is to prevent us from saying that the [[Muslim]] [extremists] aren’t right?", Dawkins replied, "What’s to prevent us from saying [[Adolf Hitler|Hitler]] wasn’t right? I mean, that is a genuinely difficult question, but whatever [defines morality], it’s not the [[Bible]]. If it was, we’d be stoning people for breaking the [[Sabbath]]."<ref name=Hitler>http://byfaithonline.com/page/in-the-world/richard-dawkins-the-atheist-evangelist</ref> |
| | | | |
| − | Dawkins sees education and [[consciousness raising|consciousness-raising]] as the primary tools in opposing what he considers to be religious dogma and indoctrination.<ref name="belief%20interview"/><ref name="education">{{cite news |last=Smith |first=Alexandra |url=/schools/story/0,,1958138,00.html |title=Dawkins campaigns to keep God out of classroom |accessdate=15 January 2007 |date=27 November 2006 |publisher=The Guardian |location=London}}</ref><ref name="bright">{{cite news |url=/review/story/0,12084,981412,00.html |title=The future looks bright |accessdate=13 March 2008 |author=Dawkins, Richard |date=21 June 2003 |publisher=The Guardian |location=London}}</ref> These tools include the fight against certain stereotypes, and he has adopted the term ''[[brights movement|bright]]'' as a way of associating positive public connotations with those who possess a [[naturalism (philosophy)|naturalistic]] worldview.<ref name="bright"/> He has given support to the idea of a free thinking school,<ref name="Powell">{{cite news|author=Powell, Michael|title=A Knack for Bashing Orthodoxy|url=/2011/09/20/science/20dawkins.html|date=19 September 2011|work=The New York Times|page=4|accessdate=20 September 2011}}</ref> which would not indoctrinate children in atheism or in any religion but would instead teach children to be critical and open-minded.<ref name="telegraph1">{{cite news|last=Beckford |first=Martin |url=/news/newstopics/religion/7849563/Richard-Dawkins-interested-in-setting-up-atheist-free-school.html |title=Richard Dawkins interested in setting up 'atheist free school' |publisher=Telegraph |date=24 June 2010 |accessdate=29 July 2010 | location=London}}</ref><ref>{{cite news|url=/news/education/education-news/gove-welcomes-atheist-schools-2037990.html |title=Gove welcomes atheist schools – Education News, Education |publisher=The Independent |date= 29 July 2010|accessdate=29 July 2010 | location=London | first=Richard | last=Garner}}</ref> Inspired by the consciousness-raising successes of [[Feminism|feminists]] in arousing widespread embarrassment at the routine use of "he" instead of "she", Dawkins similarly suggests that phrases such as "Catholic child" and "Muslim child" should be considered as socially absurd as, for instance, "Marxist child", as he believes that children should not be classified based on their parents' ideological or religious beliefs.<ref name="bright"/>
| + | (See also: [[Richard Dawkins' commentary on Adolf Hitler]] and [[Atheism and rape]]) |
| − | [[File:Ariane Sherine and Richard Dawkins at the Atheist Bus Campaign launch.jpg|thumb|right|Dawkins with [[Ariane Sherine]] at the [[Atheist Bus Campaign]] launch in London]] | |
| | | | |
| − | Dawkins suggests that atheists should be proud, not apologetic, stressing that atheism is evidence of a healthy, independent mind.<ref name="goddelusion" />{{rp|3}} He hopes that the more atheists identify themselves, the more the public will become aware of just how many people actually hold these views, thereby reducing the negative opinion of atheism among the religious majority.<ref name="suntimes">{{cite news |last=Chittenden |first=Maurice |author2=Waite, Roger |url=/tol/news/uk/science/article3087486.ece |title=Dawkins to preach atheism to US |accessdate=1 April 2008 |date=23 December 2007 |publisher=The Sunday Times |location=London}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|title=Richard Dawkins speech at Atheist Alliance International Convention 2007 |url=/videoplay?docid=2936455252329399558&hl=en |work=The Richard Dawkins Foundation for Reason and Science |author=Dawkins, Richard |publisher=RichardDawkins.net |date=24 October 2007 |accessdate=1 April 2008 |deadurl=yes |archiveurl=/20071128131901/http://video.google.com:80/videoplay?docid=2936455252329399558&hl=en |archivedate=28 November 2007 }}</ref> Inspired by the [[Gay Liberation|gay rights movement]], he founded the [[Out Campaign]] to encourage atheists worldwide to declare their stance publicly and proudly.<ref name="rd-out-annouce">{{cite web |url=/article,1471,The-Out-Campaign,Richard-Dawkins |title=The Out Campaign (original announcement) |accessdate=1 April 2008 |date=30 July 2007 |publisher=RichardDawkins.net |archiveurl =/web/20080430213003/http://richarddawkins.net/article,1471,The-Out-Campaign,Richard-Dawkins |archivedate =30 April 2008|deadurl=yes}}</ref> He supported the UK's first atheist advertising initiative, the [[Atheist Bus Campaign]] in 2008, which aimed to raise funds to place atheist advertisements on buses in the London area.
| + | ==== Feminist quotes about Richard Dawkins ==== |
| | | | |
| − | === Foundation ===
| + | *[[Feminist quotes about Richard Dawkins]] |
| − | {{Main|Richard Dawkins Foundation for Reason and Science}}
| |
| | | | |
| − | In 2006, Dawkins founded the ''Richard Dawkins Foundation for Reason and Science'' (''RDFRS''), a [[non-profit organisation]]. The foundation is in a developmental phase. It has been granted charitable status in the United Kingdom and the United States. RDFRS plans to finance research on the [[psychology of religion|psychology of belief and religion]], finance scientific education programs and materials, and publicise and support [[charitable organisation]]s that are [[secularity|secular]] in nature. The foundation also offers [[humanism|humanist]], [[rationalism|rationalist]], and [[science|scientific]] materials through its website.<ref>{{cite web |url=/foundation,ourMission |title=Our Mission |accessdate=17 November 2006 |publisher=The Richard Dawkins Foundation for Reason and Science|archiveurl =/web/20061117150429/http://www.richarddawkins.net/foundation,ourMission |archivedate =17 November 2006|deadurl=yes}}</ref>
| + | ==== Richard Dawkins commentary on Mary the Mother of Jesus ==== |
| | | | |
| − | Dawkins has said the "trend toward theocratic thinking in the United States is a danger not only for America but for the entire world."<ref name="RDFfaircloth" /> Connected to this concern, Dawkins invited [[Sean Faircloth]] to serve as opening speaker on Dawkins's 2011 US book tour. Faircloth is author of the book ''Attack of the Theocrats, How the Religious Right Harms Us All and What We Can Do About It''. The Richard Dawkins Foundation (United States branch) later hired Faircloth, who has ten years experience as a state legislator, as Director of Strategy and Policy.<ref name="RDFfaircloth">{{cite web |url=/articles/643044-sean-faircloth-joins-rdfrs-us-as-director-of-strategy-and-policy |title=Sean Faircloth joins RDFRS (US) as Director of Strategy and Policy |accessdate=1 October 2011 |publisher=The Richard Dawkins Foundation for Reason and Science}}</ref>
| + | In 2010, the [[Christian apologetics]] website [[True Free Thinker]] wrote: |
| | + | {{cquote|The atheist and evolutionist Richard Dawkins just referred to Mary, the mother of Jesus, as a ‘submissive cosmic doormat’... |
| | | | |
| − | === Other fields ===
| + | If Richard Dawkins had a better grasp of womanhood [[Essay: Does Richard Dawkins have machismo?|and a greater grasp of manhood]], he would still be married to his first wife and not his third.<ref>http://www.truefreethinker.com/articles/richard-dawkins-immaculate-and-mary-cosmic-doormat</ref>}} |
| − | {{see also|Political views of Richard Dawkins}}
| |
| − | [[File:Richard Dawkin Kepler Talk.jpg|thumb|upright|Dawkins speaking at [[Kepler's Books]], [[Menlo Park, California|Menlo Park]], [[California]], 29 October 2006]] | |
| − | In his role as professor for public understanding of science, Dawkins has been a critic of [[pseudoscience]] and [[alternative medicine]]. His 1998 book ''[[Unweaving the Rainbow]]'' considers [[John Keats]]'s accusation that by explaining the [[rainbow]], [[Isaac Newton]] diminished its beauty; Dawkins argues for the opposite conclusion. He suggests that deep space, the billions of years of life's evolution, and the microscopic workings of biology and heredity contain more beauty and wonder than do "myths" and "pseudoscience".<ref>{{cite book| last = Dawkins| first = Richard| title = Unweaving The Rainbow| year = 1998| publisher = Penguin| location = United Kingdom| isbn = 0-618-05673-4| pages = 4–7 }}</ref> For [[John Diamond (journalist)|John Diamond]]'s posthumously published ''Snake Oil'', a book devoted to debunking alternative medicine, Dawkins wrote a foreword in which he asserts that alternative medicine is harmful, if only because it distracts patients from more successful conventional treatments and gives people false hopes.<ref>{{cite book| last = Diamond| first = John| title = Snake Oil and Other Preoccupations| year = 2001| publisher = Vintage| location = United Kingdom| isbn = 0-09-942833-4 }}</ref> Dawkins states that "there is no alternative medicine. There is only medicine that works and medicine that doesn't work."<ref>{{cite book |title=A Devil's Chaplain |last=Dawkins |first=Richard |year=2003 |publisher=Houghton Mifflin |location=United States |isbn=0-618-33540-4 |page=58}}</ref>
| |
| | | | |
| − | Dawkins has expressed concern about the growth of the planet's human population and about the matter of [[Human overpopulation|overpopulation]].<ref>{{cite web |title=The Selfish Green |url=/article,829,The-Selfish-Green,Jonathan-Dimbleby-David-Attenborough-Richard-Dawkins-Jane-Goodall-Richard-Leakey |publisher=RichardDawkins.net |date=2 April 2007 |accessdate=22 April 2008|archiveurl =/web/20080501094048/http://richarddawkins.net/article,829,The-Selfish-Green,Jonathan-Dimbleby-David-Attenborough-Richard-Dawkins-Jane-Goodall-Richard-Leakey |archivedate =1 May 2008|deadurl=yes}}</ref> In ''The Selfish Gene'', he briefly mentions population growth, giving the example of [[Latin America]], whose population, at the time the book was written, was doubling every 40 years. He is critical of [[Roman Catholic Church|Roman Catholic]] attitudes to [[family planning]] and [[population control]], stating that leaders who forbid [[birth control|contraception]] and "express a preference for 'natural' methods of population limitation" will get just such a method in the form of [[starvation]].<ref name="selfishgene" />{{rp|213}}
| + | === Atheist PZ Myers comment about Dawkins' attitude towards women === |
| | + | [[File:Rebecca-watson.jpg|thumbnail|180px|The atheist [[Rebecca Watson]] and Richard Dawkins were central figures in the [[Elevatorgate]] scandal. ]] |
| | + | ''See also:'' [[Atheism and women]] and [[Richard Dawkins and women]] |
| | | | |
| − | As a supporter of the ''[[Great Ape Project]]''—a movement to extend certain moral and legal [[rights]] to all [[Hominidae|great apes]]—Dawkins contributed the article "Gaps in the Mind" to the ''Great Ape Project'' book edited by [[Paola Cavalieri]] and [[Peter Singer]]. In this essay, he criticises contemporary society's moral attitudes as being based on a "discontinuous, [[speciesism|speciesist]] imperative".<ref>{{cite book| editor-first1= Paola | editor-last1= Cavalieri | editor-first2= Peter | editor-last2= Singer | title = The Great Ape Project| year = 1993| publisher = Fourth Estate| location = United Kingdom| isbn = 0-312-11818-X }}</ref>
| + | In 2014, the prominent [[New Atheism|New Atheist]] [[PZ Myers]] said of Richard Dawkins' attitude towards women: "At a time when our movement needs to expand its reach, it’s a tragedy that our most eminent spokesman has so enthusiastically expressed such a regressive attitude.”<ref>[http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/sep/18/richard-dawkins-sexist-atheists-bad-name Richard Dawkins has lost it: ignorant sexism gives atheists a bad name] by Adam Lee, ''The Guardian'', September 18, 2014</ref> |
| | | | |
| − | Dawkins also regularly comments in newspapers and [[blog]]s on contemporary political questions and is a frequent contributor to the online science and culture digest [[3 Quarks Daily]].<ref>[http://www.3quarksdaily.com/3quarksdaily/2010/06/the-winners-of-the-3-quarks-daily-2010-prize-in-science.html 3 Quarks Daily 2010 Prize in Science: Richard Dawkins has picked the three winners]</ref> His opinions include opposition to the [[2003 invasion of Iraq]],<ref>{{cite news |first=Richard |last=Dawkins |title=Bin Laden's victory |url=/world/2003/mar/22/iraq.usa |publisher=The Guardian |location=London |date=22 March 2003 |accessdate=15 March 2008}}</ref> the [[UK Trident programme|British nuclear deterrent]], the actions of then-US President [[George W. Bush]],<ref>{{cite news |first=Richard |last=Dawkins |title=While we have your attention, Mr President... |url=/world/2003/nov/18/usa.politics1 |work=The Guardian |location=London |date=18 November 2003 |accessdate=16 March 2008 }}</ref> and the ethics of [[designer babies]].<ref>{{cite web|date=20 November 2006 |url=/from-the-afterword-1.836155 |title=From the Afterword |work=Herald Scotland |accessdate=2014-06-09}}</ref> Several such articles were included in ''[[A Devil's Chaplain]]'', an anthology of writings about science, religion, and politics. He is also a supporter of the [[Republic (political organisation)|Republic]]'s campaign to replace the [[British monarchy]] with a democratically elected [[president]].<ref>{{cite web|url=/Who%20we%20are/Our%20Supporters%20Include/index.php |title=Our supporters |publisher=Republic |date=24 April 2010 |accessdate=29 April 2010}}</ref> Dawkins has described himself as a [[Labour Party (UK)|Labour]] voter in the 1970s<ref>{{cite book| last = Dawkins| first = Richard| title = The Selfish Gene ''(1st extra chapter)''| edition = 2nd| year = 1989| publisher = Oxford University Press| location = United Kingdom| isbn = 0-19-286092-5| chapter = Endnotes. Chapter 1. Why are people? }}</ref> and voter for the [[Liberal Democrats]] since the party's creation.<ref>{{cite web|url=/watch?v=OqVm-WmFzyU |title=Richard Dawkins: Keep Libel Laws OUT of Science |publisher=[[YouTube]] |accessdate=12 December 2009 |deadurl=yes |archiveurl=/20110613223953/http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OqVm-WmFzyU |archivedate=13 June 2011 }}</ref>
| + | Myers also said in 2014 concerning Dawkins: |
| | + | {{cquote|Richard Dawkins: you’re wrong. Deeply, profoundly, fundamentally wrong. Your understanding of [[feminism]] is flawed and misinformed, and further, you keep returning to the same poisonous wells of misinformation. |
| | | | |
| − | In 2009, he spoke at the party's conference in opposition to blasphemy laws, alternative medicine, and faith schools. In the [[United Kingdom general election, 2010|UK general election of 2010]], Dawkins officially endorsed the Liberal Democrats, in support of their campaign for electoral reform and for their "refusal to pander to 'faith'."<ref>{{cite web| url=/latest_news_detail.aspx?title=Show_your_support_-_vote_for_the_Liberal_Democrats_on_May_6th&pPK=9dd43be1-d11a-40b1-8ede-3acab3666d48 |title=Show your support – vote for the Liberal Democrats on May 6th |date= 3 May 2010 |publisher=Libdems.org.uk |accessdate=29 July 2010}}</ref> In August 2014, Dawkins was one of 200 public figures who were signatories to a letter to ''[[The Guardian]]'' opposing [[Scottish independence]] in the run-up to September's [[Scottish independence referendum, 2014|referendum on that issue]].<ref>{{cite web|url=/politics/2014/aug/07/celebrities-open-letter-scotland-independence-full-text |title=Celebrities' open letter to Scotland – full text and list of signatories| work= The Guardian |date=2014-08-07 |accessdate=2014-08-26}}</ref>
| + | ...you persist in presenting these anti-feminist caricatures as reasonable. You say you are a feminist, and even find feminism an undeniable virtue, but at the same time you parrot absurd anti-feminist remarks.<ref>[http://freethoughtblogs.com/pharyngula/2014/09/12/dear-richard-dawkins/ Dear Richard Dawkins] by PZ Myers at Pharyngula blog, September 12, 2014</ref>}} |
| | | | |
| − | In the 2007 TV documentary ''[[The Enemies of Reason]]'',<ref>{{cite web |url=/culture/microsites/E/enemies_of_reason/ |title=The Enemies of Reason |accessdate=13 April 2008 |date=August 2007 |publisher=Channel 4}}</ref> Dawkins discusses what he sees as the dangers of abandoning critical thought and rationale based upon scientific evidence. He specifically cites [[astrology]], [[spiritualism]], [[dowsing]], alternative faiths, [[alternative medicine]], and [[homoeopathy]]. He also discusses how the [[Internet]] can be used to spread religious hatred and conspiracy theories with scant attention to evidence-based reasoning.
| + | === Racial Minority population views' of Richard Dawkins and Sam Harris === |
| | | | |
| − | Continuing a long-standing partnership with [[Channel 4]], Dawkins participated in a five-part television series ''[[Genius of Britain]]'', along with fellow scientists [[Stephen Hawking]], [[James Dyson]], [[Paul Nurse]], and [[Jim Al-Khalili]]. The series was first broadcast in June 2010. The series focuses on major British scientific achievements throughout history.<ref>{{cite web |url=/news/2009/01/dawkins_to_front_c4_science_series.html |title=C4 lines up Genius science series |accessdate=31 January 2009 | year= 2009 |publisher=[[Broadcast (magazine)|Broadcast]]}}</ref>
| + | ''For more information please see:'' [[Racial demographics of the Richard Dawkins' audience]] |
| | | | |
| − | In a [[More4]] documentary ''[[Faith School Menace?]]'' presented by Dawkins, he argues "for us to reconsider the consequences of faith education, which... bamboozles parents, and indoctrinates and divides children."<ref>{{cite web|url=/programmes/faith-school-menace/episode-guide/series-1/episode-1 |title=Faith School Menace? – Faith School Menace? |publisher=Channel 4 |date=18 August 2010 |accessdate=17 September 2010}}</ref><ref>{{cite news|url=/arts-entertainment/tv/reviews/last-nights-tv-faith-schools-menacemore-4-2056104.html |title=Last Night's TV: Faith Schools Menace? |publisher=The Independent |date=19 August 2010 |accessdate=17 September 2010 | location=London | first=Tom | last=Sutcliffe}}</ref>
| + | Both Richard Dawkins and Sam Harris were key founders of the [[New Atheism]] movement. |
| | | | |
| − | In 1998, Dawkins expressed his appreciation for two books connected with the [[Sokal affair]], ''[[Higher Superstition: The Academic Left and Its Quarrels with Science]]'' by [[Paul R. Gross]] and [[Norman Levitt]] and ''[[Fashionable Nonsense|Intellectual Impostures]]'' by [[Alan Sokal|Sokal]] and [[Jean Bricmont]]. These books are famous for their criticism of [[postmodernism]] in US universities (namely in the departments of literary studies, anthropology, and other cultural studies).<ref name="postmodernism">{{cite web|url=/faculty/sokal/dawkins.html|last= Dawkins |first= Richard|title=Postmodernism Disrobed|publisher= Dept. of Physics, [[New York University]] |accessdate= 24 September 2010}}</ref> He does identify as a feminist.<ref>{{Cite web|url =/richarddawkins/status/280427716010983424|title = Richard Dawkins|date = 16 December 2012|accessdate = 3 May 2015|website = Twitter|publisher = |last = Dawkins|first = Richard}}</ref>
| + | According to the web traffic tracking firm Quantcast, the following racial groups have below average interest in the website richarddawkins.net: Asians, Hispanics, and African Americans.<ref>http://www.quantcast.com/richarddawkins.net#demographics</ref> In addition, according to the web traffic tracking firm Quantcast, the following racial groups have below average interest in the website samharris.org: Asians, Hispanics, and African Americans.<ref>http://www.quantcast.com/samharris.org</ref> This suggest that the New Atheism movement may be significantly less appealing to racial minorities. |
| | | | |
| − | In 2011, Dawkins joined the professoriate of the [[New College of the Humanities]], a new private university in London, established by [[A. C. Grayling]], which opened in September 2012.<ref>[http://www.telegraph.co.uk/education/universityeducation/8557555/New-university-to-rival-Oxbridge-will-charge-18000-a-year.html "New university to rival Oxbridge will charge £18,000 a year"], ''[[Sunday Telegraph]]'', 5 June 2011.</ref>
| + | See also: [[Western atheism and race]] and [[Richard Dawkins' family fortune and the slave trade]] |
| | | | |
| − | ==Criticism== | + | === New Atheism and the white male audience === |
| | | | |
| − | ===Advocacy of atheism===
| + | ''For more information please see:'' [[Racial demographics of the Richard Dawkins' audience]] |
| − | Dawkins's advocacy of atheism has been controversial, amongst atheists and theists alike. While some, such as writer [[Christopher Hitchens]], Nobel laureates Sir [[Harold Kroto]] and [[James D. Watson]], and psychologist [[Steven Pinker]] have defended the perceived stridency of Dawkins's stance towards religion and praised his work,<ref>{{cite web |url=/godDelusionReviews |title=The God Delusion — Reviews |accessdate=8 April 2008 |author= |work= |publisher=RichardDawkins.net |archiveurl =/web/20080702000504/http://richarddawkins.net/godDelusionReviews |archivedate =2 July 2008|deadurl=yes}}</ref><ref>{{cite news |url=/articles/644822-in-defense-of-richard-dawkins |title=In Defense of Richard Dawkins |accessdate=1 January 2013 |author=Hitchens, Christopher |date=3 February 2012 |publisher=Free Inquiry |location=London}}</ref> various others, including [[Nobel Prize in Physics|Nobel Prize]]-winning [[theoretical physicist]] [[Peter Higgs]], [[astrophysicist]] [[Martin Rees, Baron Rees of Ludlow|Martin Rees]], philosopher of science [[Michael Ruse]], literary critic [[Terry Eagleton]], and theologian [[Alister McGrath]],<ref>{{cite book| last = McGrath| first = Alister| authorlink = Alister McGrath| title = Dawkins' God: Genes, Memes, and the Meaning of Life| year = 2004| publisher = Blackwell Publishing| location = Oxford, England| isbn = 1-4051-2538-1| page = 81 }}</ref><ref>{{cite news| url=/commentisfree/belief/2009/nov/02/atheism-dawkins-ruse | location=London | work=The Guardian | first=Michael | last=Ruse | title=Religion (News),Atheism (News),Richard Dawkins,Creationism (News),Philosophy (News) | date=2 November 2009}}</ref><ref>{{cite news| url=/commentisfree/belief/2012/oct/02/richard-dawkins-humanists-religion-atheists | location=London | work=The Guardian | first=Michael | last=Ruse | title=Atheism (News),Religion (News),World news, Richard Dawkins | date=2 October 2012}}</ref> have criticised Dawkins on various grounds, including the assertion that his work simply serves as an atheist counterpart to religious fundamentalism rather than productive critique of it, and that he has fundamentally misapprehended the foundations of the [[theological]] positions he claims to refute. Rees and Higgs, in particular, have both rejected Dawkins's confrontational stance towards religion as narrow and "embarrassing," with Higgs going as far as to equate Dawkins with the religious fundamentalists he criticises.<ref>{{cite web|url=/v28/n20/terry-eagleton/lunging-flailing-mispunching |title=London Review of books, Vol. 28 No. 20 · 19 October 2006 pages 32-34 |publisher=Lrb.co.uk |accessdate=2014-05-16}}</ref><ref>{{cite web |url=/articleComments,1647,Do-you-have-to-read-up-on-leprechology-before-disbelieving-in-them,Richard-Dawkins-The-Independent,page27 |title=Do you have to read up on leprechology before disbelieving in them? |accessdate=14 November 2007 |author=Dawkins, Richard |date=17 September 2007 |publisher=RichardDawkins.net |archiveurl=/web/20071214014838/http://richarddawkins.net/articleComments,1647,Do-you-have-to-read-up-on-leprechology-before-disbelieving-in-them,Richard-Dawkins-The-Independent,page27 |archivedate= 14 December 2007 }}</ref><ref>{{cite news |url=/hay2007/story/0,,2089947,00.html |title=Scientists divided over alliance with religion |accessdate=17 March 2008 |author=Jha, Alok |date=29 May 2007 |publisher=The Guardian |location=London}}</ref><ref>[http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/2012/dec/26/peter-higgs-richard-dawkins-fundamentalism Peter Higgs criticises Richard Dawkins over anti-religious 'fundamentalism'] [[The Guardian]] 26 December 2012</ref> Atheist philosopher [[John Gray (philosopher)|John Gray]] has denounced Dawkins as an "anti-religious missionary" whose assertions are "in no sense novel or original," suggesting that, "transfixed in wonderment at the workings of his own mind, Dawkins misses much that is of importance in human beings." Gray has also criticised Dawkins's perceived allegiance to Darwin, stating that if "science, for Darwin, was a method of inquiry that enabled him to edge tentatively and humbly toward the truth, for Dawkins, science is an unquestioned view of the world."<ref>[http://www.newrepublic.com/article/119596/appetite-wonder-review-closed-mind-richard-dawkins ''New Republic'']</ref>
| |
| | | | |
| − | In response to his critics, Dawkins maintains that theologians are no better than scientists in addressing deep [[cosmological]] questions and that he himself is not a fundamentalist as he is willing to change his mind in the face of new evidence.<ref name="goddelusion" />{{rp|55–56}}<ref>{{cite web |url=/library/fi/dawkins_18_2.html |title=When Religion Steps on Science's Turf |accessdate=3 April 2008 |author=Dawkins, Richard |year=2006 |publisher=Free Inquiry magazine}}</ref><ref name=rdf-fundamentalist>{{cite web|last=Dawkins|first=Richard|title=How dare you call me a fundamentalist|url=/articles/1071-how-dare-you-call-me-a-fundamentalist|work=Richard Dawkins Foundation|accessdate=28 December 2012}}</ref> Recently, in May 2014, at the [[Hay Festival]] in Wales, Dawkins was quoted as saying, "I would describe myself as a secular Christian in the same sense as secular Jews have a feeling for nostalgia and ceremonies."<ref>{{cite web|author=Hay Festival |url=/culture/hay-festival/10853648/Richard-Dawkins-I-am-a-secular-Christian.html |title=Richard Dawkins: 'I am a secular Christian' |publisher=Telegraph |accessdate=2014-06-09}}</ref>
| + | According to the Quantcast data, white males appear to be the group of individuals who are most receptive to Richard Dawkins' and atheist [[Sam Harris]]' message.<ref>http://www.quantcast.com/richarddawkins.net#demographics</ref><ref>http://www.quantcast.com/samharris.org</ref> This finding suggest that [[New Atheism]] movement is significant more appealing to white males. |
| | | | |
| − | ===Biological theories=== | + | == Reason Rally related incident involving David Silverman and Richard Dawkins == |
| − | Critics of Dawkins's biological approach suggest that taking the [[gene]] as the unit of ''selection'' (a single event in which an individual either succeeds or fails to reproduce) is misleading; the gene could be better described, they say, as a unit of ''evolution'' (the long-term changes in [[allele]] frequencies in a population).<ref>{{cite book| last = Dover| first = Gabriel| title = Dear Mr Darwin| year = 2000| publisher = London: Weidenfeld & Nicolson| isbn = 0-7538-1127-8 }}</ref> In ''The Selfish Gene'', Dawkins explains that he is using [[George C. Williams]]'s definition of the gene as "that which segregates and recombines with appreciable frequency."<ref>{{cite book| last = Williams| first = George C.| title = Adaptation and Natural Selection| url =/?id=wWZEq87CqO0C| year = 1966| publisher = Princeton University Press| location = United States| isbn = 0-691-02615-7 }}</ref> Another common objection is that a gene cannot survive alone, but must cooperate with other genes to build an individual, and therefore a gene cannot be an independent "unit".<ref>{{cite book| last = Mayr| first = Ernst| authorlink = Ernst Mayr| title = What Evolution Is| year = 2000| publisher = Basic Books| isbn = 0-465-04426-3 }}</ref> In ''The Extended Phenotype'', Dawkins suggests that from an individual gene's viewpoint, all other genes are part of the environment to which it is adapted.
| |
| | | | |
| − | Advocates for higher levels of selection (such as [[Richard Lewontin]], [[David Sloan Wilson]], and [[Elliott Sober]]) suggest that there are many phenomena (including altruism) that gene-based selection cannot satisfactorily explain. The philosopher [[Mary Midgley]], with whom Dawkins clashed in print concerning ''The Selfish Gene'',<ref>{{Cite news |last =Midgley| first =Mary| author-link = |publication-date =| year =1979 |title =Gene-Juggling |periodical =Philosophy| publisher = | volume =54| issue =210 | pages =439–458 |url =/action/displayAbstract?fromPage=online&aid=3520652| doi =10.1017/S0031819100063488| oclc = |accessdate = 18 March 2008 }}</ref><ref>{{Cite news |last =Dawkins | first =Richard |publication-date =| year =1981 |title =In Defence of Selfish Genes |periodical =Philosophy |series =| publication-place =| place =| publisher =| volume =56| issue =| pages =556–573 |url =/action/displayAbstract?fromPage=online&aid=3512724| doi =10.1017/S0031819100050580| oclc = |accessdate = 17 March 2008}}</ref> has criticised gene selection, memetics, and sociobiology as being excessively [[reductionism|reductionist]];<ref>{{cite book| last = Midgley| first = Mary| title = Science and Poetry| year = 2000| publisher = Routledge| isbn = 0-415-27632-2 }}</ref> she has suggested that the popularity of Dawkins's work is due to factors in the [[Zeitgeist]] such as the increased individualism of the Thatcher/Reagan decades.<ref>{{cite book| first=Mary |last=Midgley| title = The solitary self: Darwin and the selfish gene| year=2010| publisher = McGill-Queen's University Press| isbn = 978-1-84465-253-2 }}</ref>
| + | ''See also:'' [[Feminist quotes about Richard Dawkins]] |
| | + | [[File:David Silverman.JPG|thumbnail|left|150px|[[David Silverman]] ]] |
| | + | An article by Sarah posted at [[Skepchick]] about a conversation between Richard Dawkins and [[David Silverman]], the president of the [[American Atheists]] organization, which took place during the planning phase of the [[Reason Rally]]: |
| | + | {{cquote|Richard was standing behind the podium, and he asked Dave something along the lines of, “What exactly is the Reason Rally?” Dave started explaining it, and as he did, someone who was waiting in the line outside opened the door to peek inside and we could all hear a lot of noise. I rushed up the aisle and made frantic “shut the door” gestures at the people peeking inside, and they did. As I walked the ten feet back, I couldn’t hear everything Dave was saying, but I heard the name “Rebecca Watson.” Richard suddenly had a very angry look on his face and I heard him almost shout, “No, absolutely not! If she’s going to be there, I won’t be there. I don’t want her speaking.” and then Dave immediately replied, “You’re absolutely right, we’ll take her off the roster. It’s done.” Richard huffed for a moment, Dave continued to placate him, and then he made the video. |
| | | | |
| − | In a set of controversies over the mechanisms and interpretation of evolution (what has been called 'The Darwin Wars'),<ref>{{cite book| last = Brown| first = Andrew| authorlink = Andrew Brown (writer)| title = The Darwin Wars: How stupid genes became selfish genes| year = 1999| publisher = London: Simon and Schuster| isbn = 0-684-85144-X }}</ref><ref name="AndrewBrown2000">{{cite book| last = Brown| first = Andrew| title = The Darwin Wars: The Scientific Battle for the Soul of Man| year = 2000| publisher = Touchstone| location = London| isbn = 0-684-85145-8 }}</ref> one faction is often named after Dawkins, while the other faction is named after the American palaeontologist [[Stephen Jay Gould]], reflecting the pre-eminence of each as a populariser of the pertinent ideas.<ref name="Brockman">{{cite book| author = Brockman, J.| title = The Third Culture: Beyond the Scientific Revolution| year = 1995| publisher = Simon & Schuster| location = New York| isbn = 0-684-80359-3 }}</ref><ref name="Sterelny">{{cite book| author = Sterelny, K.| authorlink = Kim Sterelny| title = [[Dawkins vs. Gould|Dawkins vs. Gould: Survival of the Fittest]]| year = 2007| publisher = Icon Books| location = Cambridge, UK| isbn = 1-84046-780-0 }} Also ISBN 978-1-84046-780-2</ref> In particular, Dawkins and Gould have been prominent commentators in the controversy over [[sociobiology]] and [[evolutionary psychology]], with Dawkins generally approving and Gould generally being critical.<ref>{{cite book| last = Morris| first = Richard| title = The Evolutionists| year = 2001| publisher = W. H. Freeman| isbn = 0-7167-4094-X }}</ref> A typical example of Dawkins's position is his scathing review of ''[[Not in Our Genes]]'' by [[Steven Rose]], [[Leon J. Kamin]], and Richard C. Lewontin.<ref>{{Cite news | last=Dawkins | first=Richard | publication-date=24 January 1985 | title=Sociobiology: the debate continues | periodical=New Scientist | url=/dawkins/WorldOfDawkins-archive/Dawkins/Work/Reviews/1985-01-24notinourgenes.shtml | accessdate=3 April 2008|archiveurl =/web/20080501043602/http://www.simonyi.ox.ac.uk/dawkins/WorldOfDawkins-archive/Dawkins/Work/Reviews/1985-01-24notinourgenes.shtml |archivedate =1 May 2008|deadurl=yes}}</ref> Two other thinkers who are often considered to be allied with Dawkins on the subject are [[Steven Pinker]] and [[Daniel Dennett]]; Dennett has promoted a gene-centred view of evolution and defended [[reductionism]] in biology.<ref>{{cite book| last = Dennett| first = Daniel| authorlink = Daniel Dennett| title = Darwin's Dangerous Idea| year = 1995| publisher = Simon & Schuster| location = United States| isbn = 0-684-80290-2 }}</ref> Despite their academic disagreements, Dawkins and Gould did not have a hostile personal relationship, and Dawkins dedicated a large portion of his 2003 book ''[[A Devil's Chaplain]]'' posthumously to Gould, who had died the previous year.
| + | I was crushed.<ref>[http://skepchick.org/2013/09/my-time-with-richard-dawkins-or-why-you-should-never-meet-your-idols/ My Time With Richard Dawkins (Or, Why You Should Never Meet Your Idols)] by Sarah at [[Skepchick]], September 5, 2013</ref>}} |
| | | | |
| − | == Awards and recognition ==
| + | For more information, please see: [[Elevatorgate]] |
| − | [[File:Deschner Dawkins.jpg|thumb|upright|right|Dawkins receiving the [[Giordano Bruno Foundation|Deschner Prize]] in [[Frankfurt]], 12 October 2007, from [[Karlheinz Deschner]]]]
| |
| − | Dawkins was awarded a [[Doctor of Science]] degree by the University of Oxford in 1989. He holds [[honorary degree|honorary doctorates]] in science from the [[University of Huddersfield]], [[University of Westminster]], [[Durham University]],<ref>{{cite news |title=Durham salutes science, Shakespeare and social inclusion |url=/news/allnews/?itemno=3972 |publisher=Durham News & Events Service |date=26 August 2005 |accessdate=11 April 2006}}</ref> the [[University of Hull]], the [[University of Antwerp]], and the [[University of Oslo]],<ref>{{cite web|url=/om/tall-og-fakta/aresdoktorer/eresdoktorer-2011.html |title=Æresdoktorer i 2011 - Universitetet i Oslo |language=no |publisher=Uio.no |accessdate=22 October 2011}} {{Dead link|date=April 2012|bot=H3llBot}}</ref> and honorary doctorates from the [[University of Aberdeen]],<ref>[https://web.archive.org/web/20110901041512/http://vcs.abdn.ac.uk/news/details-4924.php Best-selling biologist and outspoken atheist among those honoured by University], University of Aberdeen. (archived verstion).</ref> [[Open University]], the [[Vrije Universiteit Brussel]],<ref name=cv%2F> and the [[University of Valencia]].<ref>{{cite news |title=Richard Dawkins, doctor 'honoris causa' per la Universitat de València |url=/~webuv/noticies/noticia.php?idnoticia=7165 |date=31 March 2009 |accessdate=2 April 2009}}</ref> He also holds honorary doctorates of letters from the [[University of St Andrews]] and the [[Australian National University]] (HonLittD, 1996), and was elected Fellow of the [[Royal Society of Literature]] in 1997 and a [[List of Fellows of the Royal Society elected in 2001|Fellow of the Royal Society (FRS) in 2001]].<ref name=frs%2F><ref name=cv%2F> He is one of the patrons of the [[Oxford University Scientific Society]].
| |
| | | | |
| − | In 1987, Dawkins received a [[Royal Society of Literature]] award and a ''[[Los Angeles Times]]'' Literary Prize for his book ''The Blind Watchmaker''. In the same year, he received a Sci. Tech Prize for Best Television Documentary Science Programme of the Year for his work on the BBC's ''[[Horizon (BBC TV series)|Horizon]]'' episode ''The Blind Watchmaker''.<ref name=cv%2F>
| + | == The day Elevatorgate occurred has been called the day the atheist movement died == |
| | | | |
| − | His other awards include the [[Zoological Society of London]]'s Silver Medal (1989), the Finlay Innovation Award (1990), the [[Michael Faraday Award]] (1990), the Nakayama Prize (1994), the [[American Humanist Association]]'s Humanist of the Year Award (1996), the fifth [[International Cosmos Prize]] (1997), the [[Kistler Prize]] (2001), the [[Medal of the Presidency of the Italian Republic]] (2001), the 2001 and 2012 Emperor Has No Clothes Award from the [[Freedom From Religion Foundation]], the Bicentennial Kelvin Medal of [[The Royal Philosophical Society of Glasgow]] (2002),<ref name=cv%2F> and the [[Nierenberg Prize]] for Science in the Public Interest (2009).<ref>{{cite web |url=/Releases/?releaseID=967 |title=Scripps Institution of Oceanography Honors Evolutionary Biologist, Richard Dawkins, in Public Ceremony and Lecture |accessdate=7 April 2009 |author=Scripps Institution of Oceanography|date=7 April 2009 |publisher=Scripps Institution of Oceanography}}</ref>
| + | ''See also:'' [[Atheist movement]] and [[Atheism and leadership]] |
| | | | |
| − | Dawkins topped ''[[Prospect (magazine)|Prospect]]'' magazine's 2004 list of the top 100 public British intellectuals, as decided by the readers, receiving twice as many votes as the runner-up.<ref>{{cite news |title=Q&A: Richard Dawkins |url=/1/hi/sci/tech/3935757.stm |publisher=BBC News |date=29 July 2004 |accessdate=9 March 2008 }}</ref><ref>{{cite web |url=/2004/08/publicintellectualspoll/ |title=Public Intellectuals Poll |accessdate=9 March 2008 |author=Herman, David |year=2004 |work= |publisher=''Prospect'' magazine}}</ref> He was short-listed as a candidate in their 2008 follow-up poll.<ref>{{cite web |url=/story/cms.php?story_id=4262 |title=The Top 100 Public Intellectuals |accessdate=22 April 2008 |publisher=''Prospect'' magazine}}</ref> In 2005, the [[Hamburg]]-based [[Alfred Toepfer Stiftung F.V.S.|Alfred Toepfer Foundation]] awarded him its [[Shakespeare Prize]] in recognition of his "concise and accessible presentation of scientific knowledge". He won the [[Lewis Thomas Prize|Lewis Thomas Prize for Writing about Science]] for 2006, as well as the [[Galaxy British Book Awards]]'s Author of the Year Award for 2007.<ref>{{cite web | publisher = Publishing News | url =/pnbb_winners2007.asp?#3 | title = Galaxy British Book Awards — Winners & Shortlists 2007 | year = 2007 | accessdate = 21 April 2007|archiveurl =/web/20070927130727/http://www.britishbookawards.co.uk/pnbb_winners2007.asp?#3 |archivedate =27 September 2007|deadurl=yes}}</ref> In the same year, he was listed by ''Time'' magazine as one of the 100 most influential people in the world in 2007,<ref>{{cite news |url=/time/specials/2007/time100/article/0,28804,1595326_1595329_1616137,00.html |title=Time Top 100 |accessdate=2 March 2008 |author=Behe, Michael |publisher=[[Time (magazine)|TIME]] | date=3 May 2007}}</ref> and he was ranked 20th in ''[[The Daily Telegraph]]'''s 2007 list of 100 greatest living geniuses.<ref>{{cite news |title=Top 100 living geniuses |newspaper=[[The Daily Telegraph]] |date=28 October 2007 |url=/news/uknews/1567544/Top-100-living-geniuses.html |accessdate=4 October 2010 |location=London}}</ref> | + | Richard Dawkins is still widely criticized for igniting deep fractures in the [[atheist movement]] through his Elevatorgate scandal. For example, on November 26, 2013, the atheist activist and blogger [[Jen McCreight]] posted at Twitter the message: "Did anyone on Dawkins AMA ask how he feels about singlehandedly destroying the atheist movement with the Dear Muslima yet?"<ref>[https://twitter.com/jennifurret/status/405391218273554433 Jennifer McCreight on the Twitter about the Elevatorgate scandal]</ref> In December of 2013, atheist Jack Vance at Atheist Revolution called July 2, 2011, which is the day that Elevatorgate occurred, "The day the atheist movement died."<ref>[http://www.atheistrev.com/2013/12/the-day-atheist-movement-died.html The Day the Atheist Movement Died] by Jack Vance at Atheist Revolution</ref> |
| − | He was awarded the [[Giordano Bruno Foundation#Deschner Award|Deschner Award]], named after German anti-clerical author [[Karlheinz Deschner]].<ref>{{cite web |url=/node/2010 |title=Deschner-Preis an Richard Dawkins |accessdate=4 April 2008 |author=Giordano Bruno Stiftung|date=28 May 2007 |publisher=Humanistischer Pressedienst}}</ref>
| |
| | | | |
| − | Since 2003, the [[Atheist Alliance International]] has awarded a prize during its annual conference, honouring an outstanding atheist whose work has done the most to raise public awareness of atheism during that year; it is known as the [[Richard Dawkins Award]], in honour of Dawkins's own efforts.<ref>{{cite web|url=/story/news/feature/2005/04/30/dawkins/index.html|title=The atheist|publisher=Salon|date=30 April 2005|first=Gordy|last=Slack|accessdate=3 August 2007}}</ref>
| + | A blogger at the popular Christian YouTube video maker [[Shockofgod]]'s blog quipped: |
| | + | {{cquote|Yes, my atheist friends, July 2, 2011 is the day that the atheist movement died on the information superhighway. I did not come to honor the atheism movement in this blog post, but to bury it. Those whose movement's come alive by the information superhighway, die by the information superhighway.<ref>[http://shockawenow.blogspot.com/2014/09/july-2-2011-day-atheism-died-on.html July 2, 2011: The day the atheism movement died on the information superhighway], Shockawenow blog, September 30, 2014</ref>}} |
| | | | |
| − | In February 2010, Dawkins was named to the [[Freedom From Religion Foundation]]'s Honorary Board of distinguished achievers.<ref>{{cite web |url=/news/releases/honorary-ffrf-board-announced/ |title= Honorary FFRF Board Announced |accessdate=20 August 2008 |archiveurl=/web/20101217052917/http://ffrf.org/news/releases/honorary-ffrf-board-announced/ |archivedate= 17 December 2010}}</ref>
| + | [[File:StarCresent.png|thumbnail|125px|right|Assuming patterns of net immigration do not change significantly, the Pew Forum thinks that there will be just over 5.5 million British Muslims, representing 8.2 per cent of the UK population, by 2030.<ref>[http://blogs.channel4.com/factcheck/factcheck-will-britain-have-a-muslim-majority-by-2050/13690 FactCheck: will Britain have a Muslim majority by 2050?</ref> See: [[Atheism vs. Islam]] ]] |
| | + | See also: [[Atheism and the internet]] |
| | | | |
| − | In 2012, [[ichthyology|ichthyologists]] in [[Sri Lanka]] honored Dawkins by creating ''[[Dawkinsia]]'' as a new genus name (members of this genus were formerly members of the genus ''[[Puntius]]''). Explaining the reasoning behind the genus name, lead researcher [[Rohan Pethiyagoda]] was quoted as stating that "Richard Dawkins has, through his writings, helped us understand that the [[universe]] is far more beautiful and awe-inspiring than any [[religion]] has imagined [...] We hope that ''Dawkinsia'' will serve as a reminder of the elegance and simplicity of [[evolution]], the only rational explanation there is for the unimaginable diversity of life on [[Earth]]."<ref>{{cite news |url=/hostednews/afp/article/ALeqM5hEvNbHt8O7e3jB5HlC2uwNrSQvpQ?docId=CNG.2417bf61f21b75ec00dacc78e05295ae.341 |title=Sri Lankans name new fish genus after atheist Dawkins |accessdate=16 July 2012|work=Google News|agency=[[Agence France-Presse]] |date=15 July 2012}}</ref>
| + | == Richard Dawkins and Islamophobia accusations == |
| | | | |
| − | In a poll held by ''[[Prospect (magazine)|Prospect]]'' magazine in 2013, Dawkins was voted the world's top thinker based on 65 names chosen by a largely US- and UK-based expert panel.<ref>[http://www.guardian.co.uk/books/booksblog/2013/apr/25/richard-dawkins-named-top-thinker Richard Dawkins named world's top thinker in poll] ''The Guardian'', 25 April 2013. Retrieved 26 April 2013.</ref>
| + | ''See also:'' [[Richard Dawkins and Islamophobia accusations]] and [[Atheism vs. Islam]] |
| | | | |
| − | == Media ==
| + | The [[New Atheism|New Atheists]] Richard Dawkins, [[Sam Harris]] and the late [[Christopher Hitchens]] have received multiple accusations of engaging in [[Islamophobia|Islamophobic]] behavior.<ref> |
| | + | *[http://www.salon.com/2013/03/30/dawkins_harris_hitchens_new_atheists_flirt_with_islamophobia/ Dawkins, Harris, Hitchens: New Atheists flirt with Islamophobia] by Nathan Lean, ''Salon'', March 30, 2013 |
| | + | *[http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2013/apr/03/sam-harris-muslim-animus Sam Harris, the New Atheists, and anti-Muslim animus] by Glenn Greenwald, ''The Guardian'', April 3, 2013</ref> Dawkins is dismissive of the concept of Islamophobia and declared: "I’m always being accused of Islamophobia, that’s a non-word."<ref>[http://www.independent.co.uk/news/people/richard-dawkins-defends-ahmed-mohamed-comments-and-dismisses-islamophobia-as-a-non-word-10515389.html Richard Dawkins defends Ahmed Mohamed comments and dismisses Islamophobia as a 'non-word'], ''Independent'', 24 September 2015</ref> |
| | | | |
| − | === Selected publications ===
| + | On the other hand, defenders of atheist criticisms of [[Islam]]/Muslims indicated that New Atheists should be able to criticize Islam without being accused of Islamophobia.<ref>[http://www.newstatesman.com/religion/2013/04/new-atheism-should-be-able-criticise-islam-without-being-accused-islamophobia New Atheism should be able to criticise Islam without being accused of Islamophobia] by Andrew Zak Williams, ''New Statesman'', Published 19 April, 2013</ref> |
| − | {{Main|Richard Dawkins bibliography}}
| |
| − | * {{cite book| title = [[The Selfish Gene]]| year = 1976| publisher = [[Oxford University Press]]| location = Oxford| isbn = 0-19-286092-5 }}
| |
| − | * {{cite book| title = [[The Extended Phenotype]]| year = 1982| publisher = Oxford University Press| location = Oxford| isbn = 0-19-288051-9 }}
| |
| − | * {{cite book| title = [[The Blind Watchmaker]]| year = 1986| publisher = [[W. W. Norton & Company]]| location = New York| isbn = 0-393-31570-3 }}
| |
| − | * {{cite book| title = [[River Out of Eden]]| year = 1995| publisher = [[Basic Books]]| location = New York| isbn = 0-465-06990-8 }}
| |
| − | * {{cite book| title = [[Climbing Mount Improbable]]| year = 1996| publisher = W. W. Norton & Company| location = New York| isbn = 0-393-31682-3 }}
| |
| − | * {{cite book| title = [[Unweaving the Rainbow]]| year = 1998| publisher = [[Houghton Mifflin]]| location = Boston| isbn = 0-618-05673-4 }}
| |
| − | * {{cite book| title = [[A Devil's Chaplain]] |year=2003 |publisher=Houghton Mifflin |location=Boston |isbn=0-618-33540-4 |pages= }}
| |
| − | * {{cite book| title = [[The Ancestor's Tale]]| year = 2004| publisher = Houghton Mifflin| location = Boston| isbn = 0-618-00583-8 }}
| |
| − | * {{cite book| title = [[The God Delusion]]| year = 2006| publisher = Houghton Mifflin| location = Boston| isbn = 0-618-68000-4 }}
| |
| − | * {{cite book| title = [[The Greatest Show on Earth: The Evidence for Evolution]]| year = 2009| publisher = [[Free Press (publisher)|Free Press]] (United States), [[Transworld (company)|Transworld]] (United Kingdom and [[Commonwealth of Nations|Commonwealth]])| isbn = 0-593-06173-X }}
| |
| − | * {{cite book| title = [[The Magic of Reality: How We Know What's Really True]]| year = 2011| publisher = Free Press (United States), [[Bantam Press]] (United Kingdom)| isbn = 978-1-4391-9281-8| oclc = 709673132 }}<ref>{{cite web|url=/articles/625578 |title="The Magic of Reality - new book by Richard Dawkins this Fall" 10 May 2011 |publisher=Richarddawkins.net |date=10 May 2011 |accessdate=28 June 2011}}</ref>
| |
| − | * {{cite book| title = [[An Appetite for Wonder: The Making of a Scientist]]| year = 2013| publisher = [[Ecco Press]] (United Kingdom and United States)| isbn =978-0-06-228715-1 }}
| |
| − | * {{cite book| title=[[Brief Candle in the Dark: My Life in Science]]| year=2015| publisher=[[Ecco Press]] ([[United States]] and [[United Kingdom]])| isbn=978-0062288431}}
| |
| | | | |
| − | === Documentary films === | + | == Richard Dawkins and the encouragement of atheist mockery == |
| − | * ''[[Nice Guys Finish First]]'' (1986)
| |
| − | * ''[[The Blind Watchmaker (film)|The Blind Watchmaker]]'' (1987)<ref>{{cite web|url=/BroadCastLearning/asp/catalogue/productdetail.asp?productcode=207|title=BBC Educational and Documentary: Blind Watchmaker|last=Staff|publisher=BBC|accessdate=2 December 2008 |archiveurl=/web/20070616012920/http://www.bbcactive.com/BroadCastLearning/asp/catalogue/productdetail.asp?productcode=207 |archivedate= 16 June 2007}}</ref>
| |
| − | * ''[[Growing Up in the Universe]]'' (1991)
| |
| − | * ''[[Break the Science Barrier]]'' (1996)
| |
| − | * ''[[The Big Question (TV series)|The Big Question]]'' (2005) - Part 3 of the TV series, titled "Why Are We Here?"
| |
| − | * ''[[The Root of All Evil?]]'' (2006)
| |
| − | * ''[[The Enemies of Reason]]'' (2007)
| |
| − | * ''[[The Genius of Charles Darwin]]'' (2008)
| |
| − | * ''The Purpose of Purpose'' (2009) – Lecture tour among American universities
| |
| − | * ''[[Faith School Menace?]]'' (2010)
| |
| − | * ''[[Beautiful Minds (documentary series)|Beautiful Minds]]'' (April 2012) – BBC4 documentary
| |
| − | * ''[[Sex, Death and the Meaning of Life]]'' (2012)<ref>{{cite web | url=/programmes/sex-death-and-the-meaning-of-life/episode-guide/series-1 | title=Sex, Death and the Meaning of Life | publisher=Channel 4 | accessdate=16 October 2012}}</ref>
| |
| − | *''[[The Unbelievers]]'' (2013)
| |
| | | | |
| − | === Other appearances ===
| + | ''See also:'' [[Atheism and mockery]] |
| − | *''[[Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed]]'' (2008) – as himself, presented as a leading scientific opponent of intelligent design in a film that contends that the mainstream science establishment suppresses academics who believe they see evidence of intelligent design in nature and who criticise evidence supporting Darwinian evolution.
| |
| − | * ''[[Doctor Who]]'': "[[The Stolen Earth]]" (2008) – as himself
| |
| − | * ''[[The Simpsons]]'': "[[Black Eyed, Please]]" (2013) – appears in Ned Flanders' dream of Hell; provided voice as a demon version of himself<ref>[http://www.patheos.com/blogs/friendlyatheist/2013/03/10/richard-dawkins-appears-in-ned-flanders-nightmare-on-the-simpsons/ "Richard Dawkins Appears in Ned Flanders' Nightmare on The Simpsons"] Patheos.com, 10 March 2013 By Hemant Mehta</ref>
| |
| − | * ''[[Endless Forms Most Beautiful (album)|Endless Forms Most Beautiful]]'' (2015) by [[Nightwish]]: Finnish [[symphonic metal]] band Nightwish had Dawkins as a guest star on their 2015 album. Nightwish keyboardist and songwriter [[Tuomas Holopainen]] has stated about Dawkins' works: "I have been so enthusiastic about this kind of literature for the past few months, and will be for the upcoming months, that it's going to come out somehow... something has happened say during the past five, six, seven years, and a lot of it has to do with the books that I've read, mainly Whitman, Hitchens and Dawkins."<ref>{{cite web |url=/news/nightwishs-next-album-to-feature-guest-appearance-by-atheist-writerleader-richard-dawkins/ |title=Nightwish's Next Album To Feature Guest Appearance By British Professor Richard Dawkins |publisher=''[[Blabbermouth.net]]'' |date=October 16, 2014 |accessdate=January 19, 2015}}</ref>
| |
| | | | |
| − | ==Notes==
| + | The new atheist Richard Dawkins has encouraged his supporters to go beyond humorous ridicule.<ref>[https://shadowtolight.wordpress.com/2012/03/25/dawkins-mock-them-ridicule-them-in-public/ Dawkins: Mock them. Ridicule them! In public]</ref> He wrote, "I lately started to think that we need to go further: go beyond humorous ridicule, sharpen our barbs to a point where they really hurt."<ref>[https://shadowtolight.wordpress.com/2012/03/25/dawkins-mock-them-ridicule-them-in-public/ Dawkins: Mock them. Ridicule them! In public]</ref> For more information please see: [[Atheism and mockery]] and [[Abrasiveness of Richard Dawkins]] |
| − | {{refbegin}}
| |
| | | | |
| − | '''a.''' {{Note label|a|a|none}} [[W. D. Hamilton]] hugely influenced Dawkins and the influence can be seen throughout Dawkins's book ''The Selfish Gene''.<ref name="belief%20interview"/> They became friends at Oxford and following Hamilton's death in 2000, Dawkins wrote his obituary and organised a [[secularity|secular]] memorial service.<ref>{{cite news |first=Richard |last=Dawkins |title=Obituary by Richard Dawkins |url=/biol/ecology/hamilton/hamilton.html#Dawkins |publisher=The Independent |date=3 October 2000 |accessdate=22 March 2008 |archiveurl =/web/20080318185801/http://www.unifr.ch/biol/ecology/hamilton/hamilton.html#Dawkins |archivedate =18 March 2008|deadurl=yes}}</ref>
| + | == Richard Dawkins on the dissemination of pornography videos to theocratic societies == |
| | | | |
| − | '''b.''' {{Note label|b|b|none}} The debate ended with the motion "That the doctrine of creation is more valid than the theory of evolution" being defeated by 198 votes to 115.<ref>Critical-Historical Perspective on the Argument about Evolution and Creation, John Durant, in "From Evolution to Creation: A European Perspective (Eds. Sven Anderson, Arthus Peacocke), Aarhus Univ. Press, Aarhus, Denmark</ref><ref>{{cite web | title = 1986 Oxford Union Debate: Richard Dawkins, John Maynard Smith | publisher = RichardDawkins.net | url =/article,721,1986-Oxford-Union-Debate,Richard-Dawkins-John-Maynard-Smith | accessdate = 10 May 2007|archiveurl =/web/20071013161954/http://richarddawkins.net/article,721,1986-Oxford-Union-Debate,Richard-Dawkins-John-Maynard-Smith |archivedate =13 October 2007|deadurl=yes}} Debate downloadable as MP3 files.</ref> | + | ''See also:'' [[Richard Dawkins on child molestation and so called "gentle pedophiles"]] and [[Atheism and pornography]] |
| | | | |
| − | {{refend}} | + | On January 1, 2015, ''The Telegraph'' reported: |
| | + | {{cquote|Richard Dawkins’ insanity has now become an English institution – like warm beer and rain. On Saturday morning, a tweet from his account asked why we don’t send lots of "erotic videos" to theocracies, adding that it should be “loving, gentle, woman-respecting” (I guess this involves the pizza delivery boy calling the next day). If we’re going down this road, I also hear that [[Islam]]ists aren’t very keen on bacon, so perhaps we should bombard the [[Iran]]ian countryside with pig carcasses? Also, miniature bottles of gin. And photos of hot guys making out – in a “men-respecting” and “gentle” sort of way. |
| | | | |
| − | == References ==
| + | After a few minutes of mockery, the tweet was deleted. Perhaps even he realised how utterly mad it was. Which suggests a degree of self-awareness that I didn’t think possible in Britain’s nuttiest professor.<ref>[http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/religion/11381529/Richard-Dawkins-wants-to-fight-Islamism-with-erotica.-Celebrity-atheism-has-lost-it.html Richard Dawkins wants to fight Islamism with erotica. Celebrity atheism has lost it] By Tim Stanley, ''The Telegraph'', January 1, 2015</ref>}} |
| − | {{Reflist|30em}}
| |
| | | | |
| − | == External links ==
| + | See also: [[Atheism and pornography]] |
| − | {{Wikipedia books|Richard Dawkins}}
| |
| − | {{Wikiquote}}
| |
| − | {{Commons}}
| |
| − | * {{worldcat id|id=lccn-n81-74298}}
| |
| − | * [https://richarddawkins.net/ The Richard Dawkins Foundation for Reason and Science (Official Website)]
| |
| − | * {{IMDb name|1468026}}
| |
| − | * [http://natgeotv.com/uk/dawkins-darwin-evolution National Geographic Interviews] – A series of video interviews with [[National Geographic Channel]] with Richard Dawkins on Darwin, Evolution and God.
| |
| − | * [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=euMi5Akf8Kc Video interview] with [[Riz Khan]] for [[Al Jazeera English]]<!--Video is from AlJazeeraEnglish - official sourcing, so no copyright issues with linking-->
| |
| − | * [http://richannel.org/an-appetite-for-wonder-richard-dawkins-in-conversation An Appetite for Wonder: Richard Dawkins in Conversation] at the [[Royal Institution]]
| |
| − | * [http://www.independent.co.uk/opinion/the-real-romance-in-the-stars-1527970.html The Real Romance in the Stars] (1995) – A critical view of [[astrology]].
| |
| − | * [http://books.guardian.co.uk/review/story/0,,1416876,00.html The giant tortoise's tale], [http://books.guardian.co.uk/review/story/0,,1425412,00.html The turtle's tale] and [http://books.guardian.co.uk/review/story/0,,1429962,00.html The lava lizard's tale] (2005) – A series of three articles written after a visit to the [[Galápagos Islands]].
| |
| − | * {{TED speaker|richard_dawkins}}
| |
| − | ** [http://www.ted.com/talks/richard_dawkins_on_militant_atheism Richard Dawkins: Militant atheism (TED2002)]
| |
| − | ** [http://www.ted.com/talks/richard_dawkins_on_our_queer_universe Richard Dawkins: Why the universe seems so strange (TEDGlobal 2005)]
| |
| − | * {{C-SPAN|Richard Dawkins}}
| |
| | | | |
| − | {{Richard Dawkins}}
| + | == Atheists declaring that Richard Dawkins is now a liability to the atheist movement == |
| − | {{Evolutionary psychology}}
| |
| − | {{Ethology}}
| |
| − | {{Criticism of religion}}
| |
| − | {{Portal bar|Biology|Evolutionary biology|Atheism|United Kingdom|Biography}}
| |
| | | | |
| − | {{Authority control}}
| + | ''See also:'' [[Richard Dawkins' loss of influence]] |
| | | | |
| − | {{Persondata
| + | Although the [[New Atheism|New Atheist]] Richard Dawkins was always known for [[Abrasiveness of Richard Dawkins|his abrasiveness]] and [[Atheism and arrogance|arrogance]], post [[Elevatorgate]] and subsequent to his various embarrassing Twitter posts, many atheists are now asking if he is a liability to the [[atheist movement]].<ref> |
| − | | name=Dawkins%2C Richard | + | *[http://www.washingtonpost.com/national/religion/richard-dawkins-atheisms-asset-or-liability/2014/08/07/9f19a7a2-1e58-11e4-9b6c-12e30cbe86a3_story.html Richard Dawkins: Atheism’s asset or liability?] by Kimberly Winston, ''Washington Post'', source: ''Religion News Service'', August 7, 2014 |
| − | | ALTERNATIVE NAMES = Dawkins, Clinton Richard
| + | *[http://www.newrepublic.com/article/119596/appetite-wonder-review-closed-mind-richard-dawkins ''The Closed Mind of Richard Dawkins''], New Republic by John Gray |
| − | | SHORT DESCRIPTION = English evolutionary biologist, ethologist, atheist, humanist and sceptic | + | *[https://twitter.com/jennifurret/status/405391218273554433 Jennifer McCreight on the Twitter about the Elevatorgate scandal] |
| − | | DATE OF BIRTH = 26 March 1941 | + | *[http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/downs-syndrome-girl-passes-six-4095031 Down's Syndrome girl passes six GCSEs as dad calls Richard Dawkins 'an ignorant idiot'], Mirror by By Grace Macaskill, Aug 23, 2014 15:41 |
| − | | PLACE OF BIRTH = [[Nairobi]], [[Kenya]]
| + | *[http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/2014/08/21/the-12-stages-of-a-richard-dawkins-twitter-scandal_n_5698443.html The 12-Stage 'Evolution' Of A Richard Dawkins Twitter Scandal] by Paul Vale, The Huffington Post UK, Posted: 22/08/2014 02:06 BST</ref> |
| − | | DATE OF DEATH =
| + | |
| − | | PLACE OF DEATH =
| + | See also: |
| − | }}
| + | |
| − | {{DEFAULTSORT:Dawkins, Richard}}
| + | *[[Richard Dawkins' loss of influence]] |
| − | [[Category:Richard Dawkins| ]]
| + | |
| − | [[Category:Living people]] | + | *[[Richard Dawkins quotes]] |
| − | [[Category:1941 births]] | + | |
| − | [[Category:20th-century biologists]] | + | == Richard Dawkins' cult of personality == |
| − | [[Category:21st-century biologists]] | + | |
| − | [[Category:20th-century English writers]]
| + | ''See also:'' [[Richard Dawkins' cult of personality]] and [[Atheist cults]] and [[Atheism is a religion]] and [[Atheism and leadership]] |
| − | [[Category:21st-century English writers]]
| + | |
| − | [[Category:Alumni of Balliol College, Oxford]] | + | [[File:Vox Day.jpg|thumbnail|left|175px|[[Vox Day|Theodore Beale]] noted that the [[Richard Dawkins' cult of personality]] has some similarity to the cult of [[Scientology]].<ref>[http://voxday.blogspot.com/2014/08/the-cult-of-dicky-dawk.html The Cult of Dicky Dawkins]</ref> ]] |
| − | [[Category:Atheism activists]] | + | On August 16, 2014, Andrew Brown wrote an article for The Spectator entitled ''The bizarre – and costly – cult of Richard Dawkins'' which declared: |
| − | [[Category:Antitheists]] | + | {{cquote|...the [[Richard Dawkins Foundation for Reason and Science website|Richard Dawkins website]] offers followers the chance to join the ‘Reason Circle’, which, like [[Dante]]’s [[Hell]], is arranged in concentric circles. For $85 a month, you get discounts on his merchandise, and the chance to meet ‘[[Richard Dawkins Foundation for Reason and Science]] personalities’. Obviously that’s not enough to meet the man himself. For that you pay $210 a month — or $5,000 a year — for the chance to attend an event where he will speak... |
| − | [[Category:Atheism in the United Kingdom]] | + | |
| − | [[Category:Atheist feminists]] | + | But the $85 a month just touches the hem of rationality. After the neophyte passes through the successively more expensive ‘Darwin Circle’ and then the ‘Evolution Circle’, he attains the innermost circle, where for $100,000 a year or more he gets to have a private breakfast or lunch with Richard Dawkins, and a reserved table at an invitation-only circle event with ‘Richard’ as well as ‘all the benefits listed above’, so he still gets a discount on his Richard Dawkins T-shirt saying ‘Religion — together we can find a cure.’ |
| − | [[Category:Critics of alternative medicine]] | + | |
| − | [[Category:Critics of creationism]] | + | The website suggests that donations of up to $500,000 a year will be accepted for the privilege of eating with him once a year: at this level of contribution you become a member of something called ‘The Magic of Reality Circle’. I don’t think any irony is intended. |
| − | [[Category:Critics of postmodernism]] | + | |
| − | [[Category:Critics of religions]] | + | At this point it is obvious to everyone except the participants that what we have here [[Atheist cults|is a religion]] without the good bits.<ref>[http://www.spectator.co.uk/features/9286682/the-bizarre-and-costly-cult-of-richard-dawkins/ The bizarre – and costly – cult of Richard Dawkins], The Spectator, Andrew Brown 16 August 2014</ref>}} |
| − | [[Category:British activists]] | + | |
| − | [[Category:British atheists]] | + | According to ''The Richest'', "Richard Dawkins..has an estimated net worth of $135 million ($100 euro) according to the ''Sunday Times'' in 2012."<ref>[http://www.therichest.com/celebnetworth/celeb/authors/richard-dawkins-net-worth/ Richard Dawkins Net Worth]</ref> |
| − | [[Category:British biologists]] | + | |
| − | [[Category:British feminists]] | + | [[Vox Day|Theodore Beale]] noted that the Richard Dawkins cult has some similarity to the cult of [[Scientology]].<ref>[http://voxday.blogspot.com/2014/08/the-cult-of-dicky-dawk.html The Cult of Dicky Dawkins]</ref> |
| − | [[Category:British humanists]]
| + | Dawkins was one of the founders of the New Atheism movement. The [[New Atheism]] movement, which has waned in recent years, was called a cult by the [[agnosticism|agnostic]], journalist Bryan Appleyard in a 2012 article in the ''New Statesman'' in which he describes the abusive behavior of New Atheists.<ref>[http://www.newstatesman.com/religion/2012/02/neo-atheism-atheists-dawkins ''The God wars'' by Bryan Appleyard], ''New Statesman''</ref> Although the New Atheism movement does not perfectly fit the various characteristics of a cult, it does fit some of the characteristics.<ref>[http://shadowtolight.wordpress.com/2012/11/20/how-cultish-is-new-atheism/ How cultish is the New Atheism?]</ref> |
| − | [[Category:British memoirists]] | + | |
| − | [[Category:British republicans]]
| + | See also: [[Richard Dawkins Foundation for Reason and Science|Richard Dawkins's Foundation and an embezzlement allegation]] and [[Atheist nonprofit scandals]] |
| − | [[Category:British sceptics]] | + | |
| − | [[Category:British science writers]] | + | ==Abrasiveness of Richard Dawkins== |
| − | [[Category:British secularists]] | + | |
| − | [[Category:Education activists]]
| + | ''See also:'' [[Abrasiveness of Richard Dawkins]] and [[Richard Dawkins quotes]] and [[Atheism and leadership]] |
| − | [[Category:Ethologists]] | + | |
| − | [[Category:Evolutionary biologists]] | + | Atheist author and [[sociology]] professor Phil Zuckerman said of Dawkins: "He is smug, condescending and emits an unpleasant disdainfulness. He doesn’t ever seem to acknowledge the good aspects of religion, only the bad. In that sense, I think he doesn’t help atheism in the PR department."<ref>[http://www.sltrib.com/sltrib/lifestyle/58271839-80/dawkins-atheism-atheist-rape.html.csp Richard Dawkins: Atheism’s asset or liability?] By KIMBERLY WINSTON, ''Religion News Service''</ref> See also: [[Elevatorgate]] and [[Richard Dawkins quotes]] |
| − | [[Category:Evolutionary psychology]] | + | |
| − | [[Category:Fellows of New College, Oxford]]
| + | [[Gary Demar]] commenting on the abrasiveness and incivility of Richard Dawkins quotes Dawkins stating the following: |
| − | [[Category:Fellows of the Committee for Skeptical Inquiry]] | + | [[Image:Mohler.jpg|thumbnail|200px|right|Dr. R. Albert Mohler Jr.]] |
| − | [[Category:Fellows of the Royal Society]] | + | {{cquote|It is absolutely safe to say that if you meet somebody who claims not to believe in [[theory of evolution|evolution]], that person is ignorant, stupid or insane (or wicked, but I'd rather not consider that).}} |
| − | [[Category:Fellows of the Royal Society of Literature]] | + | |
| − | [[Category:Former Anglicans]] | + | Dr. R. Albert Mohler, Jr. has echoed Mr. Demar's estimation of Richard Dawkins and has stated regarding Richard Dawkins the following: |
| − | [[Category:Male feminists]] | + | {{cquote|His aggressiveness and abrasiveness have now prompted some of his fellow defenders of evolution to wonder if he is doing their cause more harm than good. |
| − | [[Category:Memes]] | + | |
| − | [[Category:New College of the Humanities]]
| + | The September 2005 issue of Discover magazine features an article that raises this very question. In "Darwin's Rottweiler," author Stephen S. Hall suggests that Dawkins is simply "far too fierce.".... |
| − | [[Category:People educated at Oundle School]]
| + | |
| − | [[Category:People from Nairobi]] | + | Dawkins admits that he just may be "a bit of a loose canon." In reality, that is a significant understatement.<ref>Mohler, R. Albert, Jr. (September 9, 2005). [http://www.christianpost.com/news/darwin-s-rottweiler-richard-dawkins-speaks-his-mind-6434/ "Darwin's rottweiler--Richard Dawkins speaks his mind"]. The Christian Post website. Retrieved on October 19, 2014.</ref>}} |
| − | [[Category:Psychology writers]] | + | |
| − | [[Category:Recipients of the Medal of the Presidency of the Italian Republic]] | + | In addition, Richard Dawkins appears to have had struggles maintaining marital harmony in his life and as noted earlier two of his marriages ended in divorce (see also: [[Women's views of Richard Dawkins]]). |
| − | [[Category:Science activists]] | + | |
| − | [[Category:Shakespeare Prize recipients]]
| + | == Dogmatic arrogance of Richard Dawkins == |
| − | [[Category:Simonyi Professors for the Public Understanding of Science]]
| + | |
| − | [[Category:University of California, Berkeley faculty]]
| + | ''See:'' [[Atheism is a religion]] and [[Atheism and arrogance]] and [[Atheism and intolerance]] |
| | + | |
| | + | Using special text analysis software, the social psychologist Jonathan Haidt found that [[New Atheism|New Atheists]], such as Richard Dawkins, very often wrote in dogmatic terms in their major works using words such as “always,” “never,” “certainly,” “every,” and “undeniable.”<ref>[http://www.thisviewoflife.com/index.php/magazine/articles/why-sam-harris-is-unlikely-to-change-his-mind10 Why Sam Harris is Unlikely to Change his Mind] by JONATHAN HAIDT, February 3, 2014 8:36 pm</ref> |
| | + | |
| | + | Yet, the works of New Atheists, including Richard Dawkins, often betray an amateurish knowledge of philosophy, religion and science. For example, [[Vox Day]]'s book ''[http://www.voxday.net/mart/TIA_free.pdf The Irrational atheist]'' found multiple errors in reasoning and factual errors when it came to the works of New Atheist authors.<ref>[http://creation.com/review-irrational-atheist-by-vox-day Excellent refutation of ‘new atheists’ flawed by heterodox open theism], A review of The Irrational Atheist: Dissecting the Unholy Trinity of Dawkins, Harris, and Hitchens by Vox Day, Benbella Books, Dallas, TX, 2008, reviewed by Lita Cosner</ref> See also: [[Richard Dawkins and pseudoscience]] |
| | + | |
| | + | === Atheist philosopher John Gray on the dogmatic arrogance of Richard Dawkins === |
| | + | |
| | + | [[File:John Gray.JPG|thumbnail|left|300px|The [[economist]] Tomáš Sedláček (left) and the [[atheism|atheist]] [[philosophy|philosopher]] [[John Gray (philosopher)|John Gray]] (right) at ZURICH.MINDS 2012]] |
| | + | In a 2014 New Republic article entitled ''The Closed Mind of Richard Dawkins: His atheism is its own kind of narrow religion'', the atheist philosopher [[John Gray (philosopher)|John Gray]] wrote: |
| | + | {{cquote|One might wager a decent sum of money that it has never occurred to Dawkins that to many people he appears as a comic figure. His default mode is one of rational indignation—a stance of withering patrician disdain for the untutored mind of a kind one might expect in a schoolmaster in a minor public school sometime in the 1930s. He seems to have no suspicion that any of those he despises could find his stilted pose of indignant rationality merely laughable. “I am not a good observer,” he writes modestly. He is referring to his observations of animals and plants, but his weakness applies more obviously in the case of humans. Transfixed in wonderment at the workings of his own mind, Dawkins misses much that is of importance in human beings—himself and others.<ref>[http://www.newrepublic.com/article/119596/appetite-wonder-review-closed-mind-richard-dawkins ''The Closed Mind of Richard Dawkins''], New Republic by John Gray</ref>}} |
| | + | |
| | + | === Theo Hobson on the angry dogmatism of Richard Dawkins === |
| | + | |
| | + | ''See also:'' [[Atheism and anger]] |
| | + | |
| | + | In a April 2013 article in ''The Spectator'' entitled ''Richard Dawkins has lost: meet the new [[New Atheism|new atheists]]'', [[Theo Hobson]] declared: |
| | + | {{cquote|The [[New Atheism|atheist spring]] that began just over a decade ago is over, thank God. Richard Dawkins is now seen by many, even many non-believers, as a joke figure, shaking his fist at sky fairies.<ref>[http://www.spectator.co.uk/features/8885481/after-the-new-atheism/ Richard Dawkins has lost: meet the new new atheists] by [[Theo Hobson]], The Spectator, April 13, 2013</ref>}} |
| | + | |
| | + | == Richard Dawkins' comment about aborting Down syndrome babies == |
| | + | |
| | + | ''See also:'' [[Abortion and atheism]] and [[Atheism and social/interpersonal intelligence|Atheism and social intelligence]] and [[Eugenics]] |
| | + | |
| | + | In August of 2014, Richard Dawkins caused a firestorm by claiming an unborn baby with [[Down's Syndrome|Down’s syndrome]] should be aborted and that it would be “immoral to bring it into the world.”<ref>[http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government/2014/08/20/Atheist-Richard-Dawkins-Abort-Down-s-Syndrome-Baby-Immoral-To-Bring-It-Into-The-World Atheist Richard Dawkins: 'Abort' Down's Syndrome Baby, 'Immoral To Bring It Into The World'] by by Dr. Susan Berry, Breitbart News 20 Aug 2014</ref> Dr. Michael Brown wrote in the ''Christian Post'' about this matter: "It is becoming increasingly clear that Dawkins is something of an embarrassment, even to other atheists (although he is still revered by many). The only question that remains is this: Are his irrational and immoral positions unique to him, or are they the logical outcome of his Darwinian evolutionism?"<ref>[http://www.christianpost.com/news/richard-dawkins-exposes-the-immorality-of-his-atheism-125159/ Richard Dawkins Exposes the Immorality of His Atheism By Michael Brown, ''Christian Post'', August 21, 2014|10:15 am</ref> See also: [[Social effects of the theory of evolution]] |
| | + | |
| | + | A British father whose Down's syndrome daughter passed six General Certificate of Secondary Education (GCSE) tests called Richard Dawkins an "ignorant idiot".<ref>[http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/downs-syndrome-girl-passes-six-4095031 Down's Syndrome girl passes six GCSEs as dad calls Richard Dawkins 'an ignorant idiot'], Mirror by By Grace Macaskill, Aug 23, 2014 15:41</ref> |
| | + | |
| | + | == Martin Robbins at ''New Statesman'': Dawkins grasping for attention and relevance == |
| | + | |
| | + | In 2013, Martin Robbins wrote in the ''New Statesman'' concerning the public persona of Dawkins: "Increasingly though, his public output resembles that of a man desperately grasping for attention and relevance..."<ref>[http://www.newstatesman.com/religion/2013/08/atheism-maturing-and-it-will-leave-richard-dawkins-behind Atheism is maturing, and it will leave Richard Dawkins behind]</ref> |
| | + | |
| | + | Recently, Richard Dawkins has been reduced to Tweeting provocative Twitter posts in order to gain attention. After the predictable ensuing uproar, Dawkins half-heartedly apologizes for the provocative Tweets.<ref>[http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/2014/08/21/the-12-stages-of-a-richard-dawkins-twitter-scandal_n_5698443.html The 12-Stage 'Evolution' Of A Richard Dawkins Twitter Scandal], By Paul Vale, The Huffington Post UK, Posted: 22/08/2014 02:06 BST</ref> |
| | + | == Richard Dawkins' loss of influence post Elevatatorgate: Online web traffic graphs == |
| | + | |
| | + | ''See also:'' [[Richard Dawkins' loss of influence]] and [[Internet atheism]] |
| | + | |
| | + | As can be seen by the graph below, by means of embedded code on his website from Quantcast, Quantcast directly measures the web traffic of Richard Dawkins' website. Traffic to Dawkins website is significantly down post-[[Elevatorgate]]. See also: [[Internet atheism]] |
| | + | |
| | + | Although his following of Dawkian atheist has significantly waned post-Elevatorgate and due to his generally [[Abrasiveness of Richard Dawkins|abrasive manner]], he does retain a small cult following (See: [[Richard Dawkins' loss of influence]] and [[Richard Dawkins' cult of personality]] and [[Atheist cults]]). |
| | + | [[File:Richard Dawkins web traffic 12-23-12.png|thumbnail|center|750px|According to the web traffic tracking company [[Quantcast]], the web traffic of Richard Dawkins's website fell in 2012.<ref>[http://questionevolution.blogspot.com/2012/12/2012-has-been-bad-year-for-richard.html 2012 has been a very BAD year for Richard Dawkins's website according to Quantcast]</ref> By October of 2014, the web traffic for his website fell to a lower level according to Quantcast.<ref>[http://shockawenow.blogspot.com/2014/10/richard-dawkins-loss-of-influence.html Richard Dawkins' loss of influence]</ref> |
| | + | <br /><br /> |
| | + | The website traffic is measured via [[Quantcast]] which directly measures Dawkins' website traffic via embedded code on his website.<ref>[https://www.quantcast.com/measure/ Quantcast - Quantcast Measure]</ref>]] |
| | + | |
| | + | === Present web traffic according to Quantcast which directly measures Dawkins' website traffic === |
| | + | |
| | + | [[File:Richard Dawkins' website traffic.jpg|500px|thumbnail|center|The above graph shows the monthly website traffic to Richard Dawkins' website as of June 22, 2015 in terms of unique monthly web visitors.<ref>[http://questionevolution.blogspot.com/2015/06/web-traffic-of-richard-dawkins-main.html Web traffic of Richard Dawkins' main website]</ref> As you can see above, in 2012, Richard Dawkins saw a very large decrease in web traffic. |
| | + | <br /><br /> |
| | + | The website traffic is measured via [[Quantcast]] which directly measures Dawkins' website traffic via embedded code on his website.<ref>[https://www.quantcast.com/measure/ Quantcast - Quantcast Measure]</ref>]] |
| | + | |
| | + | == Richard Dawkins' battle with online fans over their use of profanity and gossip == |
| | + | |
| | + | ''See also:'' [[Atheism and profanity]] and [[Richard Dawkins' battle with online fans]] and [[Atheism and the internet]] |
| | + | |
| | + | In February of 2010, the news organization ''The Telegraph'' reported Richard Dawkins was "embroiled in a bitter online battle over plans to rid his popular internet forum for atheists of foul language, insults and 'frivolous gossip'."<ref>http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/religion/7322177/Richard-Dawkins-in-bitter-web-censorship-row-with-fellow-atheists.html</ref> Richard Dawkins [[Abrasiveness of Richard Dawkins|has a reputation for being abrasive]] so the behavior of his fans is not entirely surprising. See: [[Atheism and profanity]] |
| | + | |
| | + | It is commonly thought that some individuals who commonly use profanity have limited vocabularies and imaginations.<ref>''Handbook for New Converts'' By William J. (Bill) Morgan ThD, page 77</ref><ref>[http://www.contrarianconsulting.com/the-etiquette-of-profanity/ The Etiquette of Profanity] by Alan Weiss, Posted on October 31, 2010</ref> |
| | + | |
| | + | == Richard Dawkins, pseudoscience, and other errors == |
| | + | |
| | + | ''See also:'' [[Richard Dawkins and pseudoscience]] and [[Irreligion and superstition]] |
| | + | |
| | + | Within the [[evolution|evolutionary]] science community and the [[creation science]] community, Richard Dawkins has faced charges of engaging in [[pseudoscience]] and also has faced charges of committing elementary errors.<ref>http://www.truefreethinker.com/articles/send-clowns-–-richard-dawkins-obliges</ref><ref>http://creation.com/the-greatest-hoax-on-earth/main.php</ref> |
| | + | |
| | + | The website [[True Free Thinker]] notes: |
| | + | {{cquote|Moreover, note that with regards to “assertions without adequate evidence” evolutionary biologist and geneticist, Prof. [[Richard Lewontin]], referenced [[Carl Sagan]]’s list of the “best contemporary science-popularizers” which includes Richard Dawkins. These authors have, as Lewontin puts it, “put unsubstantiated assertions or counterfactual claims at the very center of the stories they have retailed in the market.” Lewontin specifically mentions “Dawkins’s vulgarizations of Darwinism” (find details [http://www.truefreethinker.com/articles/how-billions-demons-haunted-baloney-while-avoiding-detection here]). |
| | + | |
| | + | Even renowned evolutionary biologists H. Allen Orr, David Sloan Wilson, and Massimo Pigliucci have called into question the power that Dawkins once had as an intellectual, since he has made elementary errors in ''[[The God Delusion]]''.<ref>http://www.truefreethinker.com/articles/send-clowns-–-richard-dawkins-obliges</ref>}} |
| | + | [[Image:2384975035_230a0eac30.jpg|thumb|right|160px|A Baylor University study found that the irreligious are more likely to be [[superstitious]] than evangelical [[Christians]].<ref>http://online.wsj.com/article/SB122178219865054585.html</ref>]] |
| | + | |
| | + | In 2010, a new discovery relating to the [[eye]] further discredited the [[evolution|evolutionary]] quackery of Richard Dawkins.<ref>http://creation.com/mueller-cells-backwardly-wired-retina-v-dawkins</ref> In addition, in 2010, the journal ''Nature'' featured an interview with the evolutionist, biologist, and atheist David Sloan Wilson who criticized Richard Dawkins for denying the evidence for the societal benefits of religion (see also: [[Atheism and Mental and Physical Health]]).<ref>http://www.huffingtonpost.com/david-sloan-wilson/atheism-as-a-stealth-reli_3_b_83605.html</ref> |
| | + | |
| | + | As far as the the social science of [[history]], Richard Dawkins has [[Richard Dawkins, atheist atrocities, and historical revisionism|engaged in historical revisionism when it comes to the mass murders committed by atheists]]. |
| | + | |
| | + | Many of Richard Dawkins detractors are [[conservative]] [[Christianity|Christians]] which is not surprising. As alluded to earlier, the [[Wall Street Journal]] reported: "A comprehensive new study released by Baylor University yesterday, shows that [[Conservative Christianity|traditional Christian religion]] greatly decreases belief in everything from the efficacy of palm readers to the usefulness of [[astrology]]. It also shows that the irreligious and the members of more liberal Protestant denominations, far from being resistant to [[superstition]], tend to be much more likely to believe in the paranormal and in [[pseudoscience]] than evangelical Christians."<ref>http://online.wsj.com/article/SB122178219865054585.html</ref> In the [[United States]], CBS News reported in October of 2005 that the [[Theory of evolution and liberalism|Americans most likely to believe only in the theory of evolution are liberals]].<ref>http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2005/10/22/opinion/polls/main965223.shtml</ref> |
| | + | |
| | + | == Agnosticism of Richard Dawkins == |
| | + | |
| | + | ''See also:'' [[Richard Dawkins and agnosticism]] and [[Atheism, agnosticism and flip-flopping]] and [[Atheists doubting the validity of atheism]] |
| | + | |
| | + | Although Dawkins declared himself an agnostic in his 2006 book ''The God Delusion'', he declared that atheist evangelism is important.<ref>[http://voxday.blogspot.com/2012/02/mailvox-richard-dawkins-is-not-atheist.html Mailvox: Richard Dawkins is not an atheist!]</ref> Author [[Vox Day]] wrote concerning this matter, "While the fact that Dawkins declared himself a literal agnostic in the very book in which he declared the importance of atheist evangelism is both ironic and incoherent, it will surprise no one who has read the chapter of ''The Irrational Atheist'' entitled "Darwin's Judas".<ref>[http://voxday.blogspot.com/2012/02/mailvox-richard-dawkins-is-not-atheist.html Mailvox: Richard Dawkins is not an atheist!]</ref> Also, despite being an elderly self-declared agnostic, in his book ''The God Delusion'', Dawkins said that "permanent agnosticism in principle" is "fence-sitting, intellectual cowardice". <ref>''The God Delusion'', page 70</ref> In February of 2012, Dawkins declared that he believed that there is a 6.9 out of 7 probability of [[God]]'s non-existence (approximately a 1 percent probability that God exist).<ref>[http://voxday.blogspot.com/2012/02/mailvox-richard-dawkins-is-not-atheist.html Mailvox: Richard Dawkins is not an atheist!]</ref><ref>[http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/timstanley/100139859/id-go-to-church-just-to-reduce-the-probability-of-spending-eternity-in-hell-with-richard-dawkins/ ''I'd go to church just to reduce the probability of spending eternity in Hell with Richard Dawkins'' by Dr. Tim Stanley, ''The Daily Telegraph'', February 27, 2012]</ref> |
| | + | |
| | + | Although Dawkins declared that he was an [[agnosticism|agnostic]] in 2006 and 2012, in 2002 Richard Dawkins publicly argued for the position of [[militant atheism]] and claimed that he will not feel anything after death (see also: [[Ex-atheists]]).<ref>[http://voxday.blogspot.com/2012/02/mailvox-richard-dawkins-is-not-atheist.html Mailvox: Richard Dawkins is not an atheist!]</ref><ref>[http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T3_rGbiT_3c Richard Dawkins Says He's Agnostic -- NOT atheist - video testimony of Richard Dawkins saying he is not an atheist, but an agnostic]</ref><ref> |
| | + | *[http://www.ted.com/talks/richard_dawkins_on_militant_atheism.html Richard Dawkins on militant atheism]</ref> Despite arguing for the position of militant atheism previously, Dawkins deceptively gave the Archbishop Dr. [[Rowan Williams]] the impression that he never was an atheist.<ref>[http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2105834/Career-atheist-Richard-Dawkins-admits-fact-agnostic.html 'I can't be sure God DOES NOT exist': World's most notorious atheist Richard Dawkins admits he is in fact agnostic], ''Daily Mail'', 24 February 2012</ref><ref>[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dfk7tW429E4 Richard Dawkins: I can't be sure God does not exist]</ref><ref>[http://www.ted.com/talks/richard_dawkins_on_militant_atheism.html Richard Dawkins on militant atheism]</ref> See also: [[Richard Dawkins and agnosticism]] and [[Atheism and historical revisionism]] |
| | + | |
| | + | The historian Dr. Tim Stanley wrote that he believed Dawkins is taking a foolish gamble and Dawkins is risking spending an eternity in [[hell]].<ref>[http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/timstanley/100139859/id-go-to-church-just-to-reduce-the-probability-of-spending-eternity-in-hell-with-richard-dawkins/ ''I'd go to church just to reduce the probability of spending eternity in Hell with Richard Dawkins'' by Dr. Tim Stanley, ''The Daily Telegraph'', February 27, 2012]</ref> Dr. Don Batten, a scientist at [[Creation Ministries International]], wrote that despite Richard Dawkins' skeptical protestations, Dawkins appears to be a [[God]]-hater.<ref>[http://creation.com/is-richard-dawkins-an-atheist Is Richard Dawkins an atheist? by Dr. Don Batten</ref> |
| | + | |
| | + | === Criticism of fairies at the bottom of the garden analogy === |
| | + | [[File:Fairy-md.png|thumbnail|250px|left|On July 18, 2012, a supporter of the [[Question evolution! campaign]] showed the folly of Richard Dawkins' comparison of fairies at the bottom of the garden to the issue of God's existence. According to Dawkins' faulty and irrational analogy, there is about a 1% chance that fairies are at the bottom of the garden.<ref>[http://questionevolution.blogspot.com/2012/07/why-does-richard-dawkins-have-such-high.html Why does Richard Dawkins have such a high belief in the possibility of fairies being at the bottom of the garden?]</ref>]] |
| | + | A supporter of the [[Question evolution! campaign]] wrote: |
| | + | {{cquote|Richard Dawkins wrote in his book the God Delusion: "I am agnostic only to the extent that I am agnostic about fairies at the bottom of the garden" (God Delusion, page 74). In addition, Dawkins said in his book the God Delusion that on a 7 point scale of being sure that God does not exists: "I count myself in category 6, but leaning towards 7." |
| | + | |
| | + | In 2012, in video recorded discussion with Rowan Williams Archbishop of Canterbury, Richard Dawkins said he was 6.9 out of 7 of sure that God does not exist and counted himself as an agnostic. |
| | + | |
| | + | A 6.9 out of 7 would mean that Richard Dawkins believes there is about a .986 percent chance that God exists. In short, according to Dawkins, there is about a 1% chance that God exists. |
| | + | |
| | + | Since Richard Dawkins likened God's existence to fairies being at the bottom of the garden, why does Dawkins believe there is about a 1% chance that fairies are at the bottom of the garden? |
| | + | |
| | + | Dawkins is either being disingenuous or he is being irrational or a combination of both is occurring. Anyone who gives weight to Dawkins' views on the existence of God or his views on the creation vs. evolution controversy is obviously displaying bad judgement. |
| | + | |
| | + | Sin is very irrational. Dr. Don Batten, a scientist at Creation Ministries International, wrote that despite Richard Dawkins' skeptical protestations, Dawkins appears to be a God-hater. This seems to be the best description of Dawkins' behavior. |
| | + | |
| | + | It really comes as no surprise that Dawkins has been noticeably quiet about the |
| | + | [http://creation.com/15-questions 15 questions] for evolutionists of the [[Question Evolution! Campaign]]. He obviously cannot satisfactorily answer the 15 questions.<ref>[http://questionevolution.blogspot.com/2012/07/why-does-richard-dawkins-have-such-high.html Why does Richard Dawkins have such a high belief in the possibility of fairies being at the bottom of the garden?]</ref>}} |
| | + | |
| | + | === Publisher's notice of his upcoming book and the issue of inconsistency and flip-flopping === |
| | + | |
| | + | On June 5, 2012, the ''Christian'' Post reported: |
| | + | {{cquote|Famed atheist and scientist Richard Dawkins has set out to write a new book that will focus on his own evolution toward the path of atheism. |
| | + | |
| | + | "Dawkins will tell the story of his own intellectual evolution, explaining how his groundbreaking work as a scientist led to his work as an atheist," states Dawkins' new publisher HarperCollins' Ecco. The book has not yet been given a title, but is expected to be on bookshelves by 2014.<ref>[http://www.christianpost.com/news/richard-dawkins-next-book-to-focus-on-personal-path-toward-atheism-76099/ Richard Dawkins' Next Book to Focus on Personal Path Toward Atheism]</ref>}} |
| | + | |
| | + | In response a supporter of the Question evolution! campaign wrote in an article entitled ''Atheism is rudderless and unseaworthy'': |
| | + | [[File:Flip-flops.png|thumbnail|The article ''Atheism is rudderless and unseaworthy'' written by a supporter of the [[Question evolution! campaign]] wrote: "Christians should call Dawkins on his disingenuous [[Flip-flop (politics)|flip-flopping]] if his publisher continues to promote the book as a book focusing on his journey to atheism without mentioning the fact that Dawkins is presently an agnostic who has rejected atheism."<ref>[http://questionevolution.blogspot.com/2012/07/atheism-is-rudderless-and-unseaworthy.html Atheism is rudderless and unseaworthy]</ref>]] |
| | + | {{cquote|The publisher's notice of the upcoming book using the term "atheist" can be found on several other prominent internet properties besides the ''Christian Post'' such as ''Publishers Weekly'', ''The Blaze,'' ''Christianity Today'' and ''Galleycat'' (''Galleycat'' is on the Media Bistro domain). |
| | + | |
| | + | First, Richard Dawkins has gone from being [http://www.ted.com/talks/richard_dawkins_on_militant_atheism.html a militant atheist] to being [http://voxday.blogspot.com/2012/02/mailvox-richard-dawkins-is-not-atheist.html an agnostic]. |
| | + | |
| | + | Vox Day [http://voxday.blogspot.com/2012/02/mailvox-richard-dawkins-is-not-atheist.html wrote] about Dawkins' inconsistency when it comes to the issues of atheism and agnosticism... |
| | + | |
| | + | Christians should call Dawkins on his disingenuous [[Flip-flop (politics)|flip-flopping]] if his publisher continues to promote the book as a book focusing on his journey to atheism without mentioning the fact that Dawkins is presently an agnostic who has rejected atheism. |
| | + | |
| | + | An author calling himself an atheist or a publisher giving the impression that someone is an atheist may sell more books as it is more provocative, but it isn't intellectually honest if the author has rejected atheism and is an agnostic. If Dawkins claims to be an agnostic who is unsure if God exist or not, then he should clearly communicate this to the public and so should his publisher. Dawkins has been unreasonable as far as his alleged agnosticism and I recommend reading the article ''Why does Richard Dawkins have such a high belief in the possibility of fairies being at the bottom of the garden?'' |
| | + | |
| | + | Given the weakness of his argumentation and the vitriol which often accompanies it, I agree with Dr. Don Batten that the weight of the evidence points to Dawkins being a God-hater.<ref>[http://questionevolution.blogspot.com/2012/07/atheism-is-rudderless-and-unseaworthy.html Atheism is rudderless and unseaworthy]</ref>}} |
| | + | |
| | + | ==== Title of the book ''The God Delusion'' displayed odd and inconsistent behavior ==== |
| | + | |
| | + | A July 25, 2012 article entitled ''Is Richard Dawkins a flip-flopper'' declared: |
| | + | {{cquote|Another reason why Dawkins displays odd behavior in reference to the atheism and agnosticism issue is that he titled a recent book of his ''The God Delusion''. Obviously, this is an odd title for an agnostic author to name a book - especially one who asserts there is about a 1% chance that God exist in his estimation. This odd behavior leads me to the conclusion that the reason the book was titled ''The God Delusion'' was for crass marketing reasons as it is more provocative title which would grab more press headlines and sell more books. |
| | + | |
| | + | Think about it. If there was a 1% chance that something existed, would you call your neighbor delusional if he believed it existed? No, you would not. Sure, you would think the odds are against your neighbor in terms of his belief, but you would not think he is delusional. The term delusional is generally used in connection with ideas that are insane to believe due to there being overwhelming evidence to the contrary.<ref>[http://questionevolution.blogspot.com/2012/07/is-richard-dawkins-flipflopper.html Is Richard Dawkins a flip-flopper?]</ref>}} |
| | + | |
| | + | == Creationist Video Interview of Richard Dawkins Being Stumped== |
| | + | [[File:Richard Dawkins stumped.jpg|alt=Richard Dawkins stumped|thumbnail|250px|left|The video ''From a Frog to a Prince'', produced by [[Creation Ministries International]], features Richard Dawkins being stumped by the question of a creationist.<ref>http://creation.com/was-dawkins-stumped-frog-to-a-prince-critics-refuted-again</ref> The interviewer asked Dawkins for an example of [[genetics|genetic]] [[information]] arising from a [[mutation]].<ref>http://creation.com/was-dawkins-stumped-frog-to-a-prince-critics-refuted-again</ref> Recently, a creationist produced an excellent [[YouTube]] video demonstrating the Richard Dawkins still has not answered the question posed to him by the interviewer and he uses Richard Dawkins own words to demonstrate this fact.<ref>[http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9W4e4MwogLo YouTube video - Is Richard Dawkins Really Stumped? The Truth - In His Own Words - YES...he is!]</ref>]] |
| | + | ''See also:'' [[Richard Dawkins and Creation Ministries International]] and [[Richard Dawkins' public refusal to debate creationists]] and [[Instances of Richard Dawkins ducking debates]] |
| | + | |
| | + | In 2008, a video clip featuring Richard Dawkins became widely available to the public, showing Dawkins <ref name="stumped">[http://creationontheweb.com/content/view/5712/ Was Dawkins Stumped?] (Creation Ministries International) (The clip is viewable on this page).</ref> |
| | + | [http://creationontheweb.com/content/view/5712/ being stumped] by a question from the creationist interviewer. |
| | + | A shortened version has been translated into 10 languages. |
| | + | The clip was part of an interview included in the video and DVD ''From a Frog to Prince'', produced by [[Creation Ministries International]] about the genetic information required by evolution, and the interviewer is asking Dawkins for an example of genetic information arising from a mutation. |
| | + | |
| | + | In later interviews, Dawkins claims that he was not stumped, but instead shocked when he realized that the interviewer was a [[creationism|creationist]], and the video was edited in a way to make him look like he was unable to answer the question.<ref>[http://www.skeptics.com.au/articles/dawkins.htm]</ref> However, the question came after he had that realization, and after the creationists negotiated with Dawkins and he agreed to continue.<ref> [http://creationontheweb.com/images/feedback/2008/5712timeline_lge.jpg Interview Timeline]</ref> |
| | + | However, despite being given a free reign in a sceptic publication to respond, he still didn't provide any examples. Recently, a creationist produced an excellent [[YouTube]] video demonstrating the Richard Dawkins still has not answered the question posed to him by the interviewer and he uses Richard Dawkins own words to demonstrate this fact.<ref>[http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9W4e4MwogLo YouTube video - Is Richard Dawkins Really Stumped? The Truth - In His Own Words - YES...he is!]</ref> The [http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9W4e4MwogLo video] can be found at [[YouTube]] and is entitled ''Is Richard Dawkins Really Stumped? The Truth - In His Own Words - YES...he is!'' |
| | + | |
| | + | As noted earlier, Dr. Don Batten of [[Creation Ministries International]] theorizes that Richard Dawkins is a God hater and not a skeptic.<ref>http://creation.com/is-richard-dawkins-an-atheist</ref> The video in which Richard Dawkins [http://creationontheweb.com/content/view/5712/ clearly squirms] when asked for an example of genetic information arising from a mutation and dodges the question with an unrelated monologue, certainly gives some credence to Dr. Batten's postulate. Richard Dawkins inept response relating to the existence of God during his interview with Ben Stein further bolsters the view that Richard Dawkins is more motivated by hatred towards God than any inward assurance Dawkins has concerning the validity of his skeptical contentions.[http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=12rgtN0pCMQ VIDEO] There is certainly historical precedence for evolutionists/atheists having inward doubts about the validity of evolution and atheism. The evolutionist [[Charles Darwin]] wrote in a private notebook that he was a [[materialism|materialist]] (a type of atheist).<ref>http://creation.com/charles-darwins-real-message-have-you-missed-it</ref> Late in [[Charles Darwin|Charles Darwin's]] life, Darwin told the Duke of Argyll that he frequently had overwhelming thoughts that the natural world was the [[Intelligent design|result of design]].<ref>http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/teleological-arguments/notes.html</ref> |
| | + | |
| | + | Richard Dawkins [[Richard Dawkins' public refusal to debate creationists|has been inconsistent concerning his supposed refusal to debate creationists]] and his refusal is merely a ruse to avoid losing debates to creation scientists. Generally speaking, [[Creation scientists tend to win the creation vs. evolution debates|creation scientists tend to win the creation vs. evolution debates]]. |
| | + | [[File:Hitler.jpg|thumb|306px|right|The [[Evolution|evolutionist]] [[Richard Dawkins and agnosticism|and agnostic]] Richard Dawkins said in an interview: “What’s to prevent us from saying [[Adolf Hitler|Hitler]] wasn’t right? I mean, that is a genuinely difficult question."<ref name=Hitler />]] |
| | + | |
| | + | ==Dawkins' comment concerning Adolf Hitler== |
| | + | |
| | + | ''See also:'' [[Richard Dawkins' commentary on Adolf Hitler]] and [[Atheists and historical illiteracy]] |
| | + | |
| | + | As noted earlier, when asked in an interview, "If we do not acknowledge some sort of external [standard], what is to prevent us from saying that the [[Muslim]] [extremists] aren’t right?", Dawkins replied, "What’s to prevent us from saying [[Adolf Hitler|Hitler]] wasn’t right? I mean, that is a genuinely difficult question, but whatever [defines morality], it’s not the [[Bible]]. If it was, we’d be stoning people for breaking the [[Sabbath]]."<ref name=Hitler>http://byfaithonline.com/page/in-the-world/richard-dawkins-the-atheist-evangelist</ref> |
| | + | |
| | + | The interviewer wrote in response, "I was stupefied. He had readily conceded that his own [[philosophy|philosophical]] position [[Atheism and morality|did not offer a rational basis for moral judgments.]] His intellectual honesty was refreshing, if somewhat disturbing on this point."<ref name=Hitler /> |
| | + | |
| | + | For additional information, please see: |
| | + | |
| | + | *[[Richard Dawkins' commentary on Adolf Hitler]] |
| | + | |
| | + | *[[Atheists, Adolf Hitler and the no true Scottsman fallacy]] |
| | + | |
| | + | == Accusations of cowardice == |
| | + | |
| | + | ''See also:'' [[Richard Dawkins and debate]] and [[Atheism and cowardice]] |
| | + | [[Image:Billcraig_czvx.jpg|thumb|left|200px|Dr. [[William Lane Craig]] ]] |
| | + | Richard Dawkins has also established a reputation [[Richard Dawkins and debate|for avoiding debates]] with his strongest opponents. On May 14, 2011, the [[Great Britain|British]] newspaper ''[[The Daily Telegraph]]'' published a news story entitled ''Richard Dawkins accused of cowardice for refusing to debate existence of God''.<ref>[http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/religion/8511931/Richard-Dawkins-accused-of-cowardice-for-refusing-to-debate-existence-of-God.html Richard Dawkins accused of cowardice for refusing to debate existence of God], ''[[The Daily Telegraph]]'', May 14, 2011</ref> In ''The Daily Telegraph'' article Dr. [[Daniel Came]], a member of the Faculty of [[Philosophy]] at Oxford University, was quoted as writing to fellow atheist Richard Dawkins concerning his refusal to debate Dr. [[William Lane Craig]]: "The absence of a debate with the foremost [[Christian apologetics|apologist]] for [[Christianity|Christian]] [[theism]] is a glaring omission on your [[Curriculum vitae|CV]] and is of course apt to be interpreted as [[cowardice]] on your part."<ref>[http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/religion/8511931/Richard-Dawkins-accused-of-cowardice-for-refusing-to-debate-existence-of-God.html Richard Dawkins accused of [[cowardice]] for refusing to debate existence of God], ''[[The Daily Telegraph]]'', May 14, 2011</ref> |
| | + | |
| | + | In October of 2011, Dr. Craig went to England and the Daily Telegraph declared that Dawkins is either a fool or a coward for his refusal to debate William Lane Craig plus declared that Dawkins is a "proud man" and a "coward" who puts on an "illiterate, angry schtick" for the public.<ref>[http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/timstanley/100112626/richard-dawkins-is-either-a-fool-or-a-coward-for-refusing-to-debate-william-lane-craig/ Richard Dawkins is either a fool or a coward for refusing to debate William Lane Craig - October 21, 2011 - ''The Daily Telegraph'']</ref> In addition, [[Christian apologetics|Christian apologist]] [[True Free Thinker|Ken Ammi]] called Dawkins a "cowardly clown" because Dawkins and other prominent skeptics/atheists refused to debate [[Creation Ministries International]] at the 2010 Global Atheist Convention.<ref>[http://www.truefreethinker.com/articles/richard-dawkins-cowardly-clown Richard Dawkins, the Cowardly Clown]</ref> For more information please see: [[Atheism and cowardice]] |
| | + | |
| | + | Richard Dawkins is known for his vehement and sometimes vitriolic promotion of [[weak atheism]] and the evolutionary paradigm. Dawkins has repeatedly likened religious faith to a mental defect. Mr. Dawkins currently resides in the [[UK]]. He was an assistant professor of Zoology at the [[University of California, Berkeley]] for two years before becoming a zoology researcher at [[Oxford]]. |
| | + | |
| | + | == Richard Dawkins lost a debate to a rabbi and then denied the debate ever took place == |
| | + | [[Image:2402173645 c8e6168fe7.jpg|alt=Richard Dawkins|thumbnail|200px|right|Richard Dawkins, ]] |
| | + | ''See also:'' [[Richard Dawkins and Rabbi Shmuley Boteach]] and [[Atheism and Debate]] and [[Atheism and cowardice]] |
| | + | |
| | + | As briefly noted earlier Richard Dawkins had a debate with Rabbi [[Shmuley Boteach]]. Rabbi Shmuley Boteach was named the London Times Preacher of the Year 2000 and is the author of 20 books.<ref>http://www.beliefnet.com/Faiths/Judaism/2008/05/Richard-Dawkins-Shameful-Attack.aspx</ref> |
| | + | |
| | + | Recently Rabbi Shmuley Boteach wrote: |
| | + | {{cquote|...Dawkins attacked me on his website and denied that he and I had ever debated. My office quickly posted the full footage of a two hour debate which took place on October 23, 1996, a debate which Dawkins actually lost after a vote taken by the students as to which side, science or religion, caused more students to change their minds. In my article on the subject responding to his attack I was extremely respectful of Dr. Dawkins and was therefore shocked to receive a letter in return in which he accused me of speaking like Hitler. Had the noted scientist lost his mind? Hitler? Was this for real?<ref>http://www.beliefnet.com/Faiths/Judaism/2008/05/Richard-Dawkins-Shameful-Attack.aspx</ref>}} |
| | + | |
| | + | [[WorldNetDaily]] offers the following quotes of Rabbi Boteach about debate and the initial denial by Dawkins that the debate never took place: |
| | + | {{cquote|That is a particularly bold untruth. Our debate, which took place at St. Catherine's College, Oxford on Oct. 23, 1996, attracted hundreds of students and featured, on the atheist side, Prof. Dawkins and chemistry Prof. Peter Atkins, and on the religion side, me and Prof. Keith Ward, Oxford's Regius Professor of Divinity. Student president Josh Wine was in the chair," the rabbi explained. |
| | + | |
| | + | "In a vote at the end of the debate as to how many students had changed their minds after hearing the arguments, Dawkin's side was defeated and religion prevailed, which might account for his selective memory," he wrote.<ref>http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=61565</ref>}} |
| | + | [[File:Shmuley Boteach.jpg|thumbnail|150px|left|[[Shmuley Boteach]] ]] |
| | + | Rabbi Boteach reported at Beliefnet: |
| | + | {{cquote|I also gave Dr. Dawkins the opportunity to even score by accepting a further debate, at the time and place of his choosing (within reason, of course), to which he has yet to respond.<ref>http://www.beliefnet.com/Faiths/Judaism/2008/05/Richard-Dawkins-Shameful-Attack.aspx</ref>}} |
| | + | |
| | + | A video of the debate that Dawkins lost to Rabbi Shmuley Boteach is available at Rabbi Schely Boteach's website. |
| | + | |
| | + | A supporter of the [[Question evolution campaign]] wrote: |
| | + | {{cquote|We don't believe a word Richard Dawkins says and for good reason. For example, he claimed to have never debated Rabbi Schmuley Boteach, but then he had to admit a debate took place as it was videotaped. According to the student audience, the rabbi won the debate as he convinced more students of the validity of his position concerning the existence of God. |
| | + | |
| | + | Furthermore, an angry and embarrassed Dawkins then claimed the rabbi shrieked like Adolf Hitler. Now tell me, how do you forget a debate with a rabbi who supposedly shrieks like Adolf Hitler? Obviously, Dawkins exposed himself for the clown and fraud he is.<ref>[http://questionevolution.blogspot.com/2012/07/richard-dawkins-and-rabbi-shmuley.html Richard Dawkins and Rabbi Shmuley Boteach debate ]</ref>}} |
| | + | |
| | + | == Richard Dawkins' radio debate with Giles Fraser == |
| | + | [[File:Giles Frasier.jpg|thumbnail|250px|right|Giles Frasier]] |
| | + | ''See also:'' [[Richard Dawkins' debate with Giles Fraser]] and [[Richard Dawkins quotes]] |
| | + | |
| | + | On February 19, 2012 ''The Daily Telegraph'' reported: |
| | + | {{cquote|...some critics of Dawkins branded him "an embarrassment to atheism" after what many listeners considered a humiliation in a Radio 4 debate with Giles Fraser, formerly Canon Chancellor of St Paul's Cathedral, in which the professor boasted he could recite the full title of [[Charles Darwin]]'s "[[The Origin of Species]]", then when challenged, dithered and said: "Oh God."<ref>[http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/9091007/Slaves-at-the-root-of-the-fortune-that-created-Richard-Dawkins-family-estate.html Slaves at the root of the fortune that created Richard Dawkins' family estate, The Daily Telegragh, February 19, 2012]</ref>}} |
| | + | |
| | + | On February 14, 2012, ''The Daily Telegraph'' reported regarding the radio debate: |
| | + | {{cquote|Dr. Fraser skewered the atheist campaigner Richard Dawkins so fabulously, so stylishly, and so thoroughly that anti-religion’s high priest was reduced to incoherent mumbling and spluttering.<ref>[http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/religion/9082059/For-once-Richard-Dawkins-is-lost-for-words.html For once, Richard Dawkins is lost for words - Atheists’ arrogance is their Achilles’ heel, as a cringemaking radio performance has proved By Stephen Pollard, Feb 14, 2012]</ref>}} |
| | + | |
| | + | [[Vox Day]] wrote concerning the embarrassing incident for Dawkins: |
| | + | {{cquote|As I have said repeatedly, Richard Dawkins is a huge intellectual fraud, and perhaps those who previously expressed incredulity at the idea that I would quite easily trounce the old charlatan in a debate will find it just a bit more credible now. This behavior isn't an outlier or a momentary lapse of memory, it is entirely characteristic. The man quite frequently pretends to knowledge that he patently does not possess and assumes he knows things that he obviously does not, which is why he avoids debate with those who are aware of his intellectual pretensions and are capable of exposing them. |
| | + | |
| | + | It's bad enough that Dawkins couldn't come up with the name of what he considers to be the most important book ever written immediately after claiming he could do so, but in addition to stumbling a little on the subtitle, he even forgot the rather important part of the title that refers to the actual mechanism supposedly responsible!<ref>[http://voxday.blogspot.com/2012/02/richard-dawkins-sans-pants.html Richard Dawkins, sans pants, Wednesday, February 15, 2012]</ref>}} |
| | + | |
| | + | (The full title of Charles Darwin's book is ''On the [[The Origin of Species]] by Means of Natural Selection, or the Preservation of Favoured Races in the Struggle for Life'' and evolutionists rarely cite the book's full title which is racist. See: [[Evolutionary racism]]) |
| | + | |
| | + | == New Atheism == |
| | + | [[Image:Hitchens,_Stanford.jpg |right|thumb|200px|[[Christopher Hitchens]] ]] |
| | + | ''See also:'' [[New Atheism]] |
| | + | |
| | + | The term [[New Atheism]] which first appeared in the November 2006 edition of ''Wired'' magazine, is used to describe a new incarnation of [[militant atheism]] and also frequently applied to a series of six best-selling books by five authors that appeared in the period between 2004–2008. These authors include Richard Dawkins, [[Christopher Hitchens]], [[Sam Harris]], [[Daniel Dennett]] and [[Victor J. Stenger]].<ref>http://www.colorado.edu/philosophy/vstenger/battle.html</ref> The four most prominent writers of the New Atheist movement are Richard Dawkins, Christopher Hitchens, Sam Harris and Daniel Dennett. |
| | + | |
| | + | === Impact of the New Atheism === |
| | + | The "New Atheism" has not had much of an impact in terms of gaining new adherents to [[atheism]]. In a March 10, 2008 [[USA Today]] article Stephen Prothero stated the following regarding the impact of the "New Atheism": |
| | + | {{cquote|Numbers lie, but they also tell tales untrustworthy and otherwise. So the key question stirring around the much discussed U.S Religious Landscape Survey released in late February by the Pew Forum on Religion & Public Life is what tale does it state about the state of the union. |
| | + | |
| | + | For some, the story of this survey, based on interviews in multiple languages with more than 35,000 adults, is the strength of American Religion. |
| | + | |
| | + | Not too long ago, I wrote that American atheism was going the way of the freak show. As books by Christopher Hitchens and other "new atheists" climbed the best seller lists, I caught a lot of flak for that prophecy. But atheist make up only 1.6% of respondents to this survey....<ref>American Faith: A Work In Progress by Stephen Prothero, USA Today, March 10, 2008, page 11A</ref>}} |
| | + | |
| | + | ==== Richard Dawkins' lack of a counter plan to reverse the decline of global atheism and agnosticism ==== |
| | + | |
| | + | Also, on July 31, 2012 in an article entitled ''Evolutionists, atheists and agnostics: Where is your master plan to reverse your decline?'' supporters of the [[Question evolution! campaign]] indicated that atheists, agnostics and evolutionists lack a plan to reverse their global decline.<ref>[http://questionevolution.blogspot.com/2012/07/evolutionists-atheists-and-agnostics.html Evolutionists, atheists and agnostics: Where is your master plan to reverse your decline?]</ref> |
| | + | |
| | + | ==== Poor leadership skills ==== |
| | + | |
| | + | Using academic studies, survey data and other information, supporters of the [[Question evolution! campaign]] maintain that including Richard Dawkins, there is a lack of sound leadership within the agnostic/atheist and evolutionist communities. |
| | + | |
| | + | See: |
| | + | |
| | + | *[http://questionevolution.blogspot.com/2012/07/richard-dawkins-insightful-secular.html Richard Dawkins: Insightful secular strategist or an insincere book peddler?] |
| | + | |
| | + | *[http://questionevolution.blogspot.com/2012/07/atheism-is-rudderless-and-unseaworthy.html Atheism is rudderless and unseaworthy] |
| | + | |
| | + | *[http://questionevolution.blogspot.com/2012/07/evolutionists-atheists-and-agnostics.html Evolutionists, atheists and agnostics: Where is your master plan to reverse your global decline?] |
| | + | |
| | + | ===== Elevatorgate ===== |
| | + | |
| | + | In 2011, Richard Dawkins sparked major dissension and factions within via the incidents surrounding the [[Elevatorgate]] controversy. See also: [[Atheist factions]] |
| | + | |
| | + | == Richard Dawkins on homosexuality == |
| | + | |
| | + | ''For more information please see:'' [[Richard Dawkins on homosexuality]] and [[Genetics, Homosexuality, Evolutionary Paradigm, and Creation Science]] and [[Atheism and homosexuality]] |
| | + | |
| | + | Richard Dawkins, who is a liberal, speculates that a "gay gene" causes [[homosexuality]], but science has not discovered such a gene (see: [[Causes of Homosexuality|Causes of homosexuality]])<ref>[http://anglicansamizdat.wordpress.com/2010/04/26/richard-dawkins-explains-how-the-gay-gene-was-preserved/ Richard Dawkins speculates that gene for homosexuality exists]</ref> In 1993, Professor [[Miron Baron]], M.D., the renowned medical researcher and Professor at [[Columbia University]], wrote in [[BMJ]] (British Medical Journal) that there is a conflict relative to the [[evolution|theory of evolution]] and the notion of [[gene|genetic]] [[determinism]] concerning homosexuality. Dr. Baron wrote "...from an evolutionary perspective, [[homosexuality and genetics|genetically determined]] homosexuality would have become [[extinct]] long ago because of reduced reproduction."<ref>[http://www.pubmedcentral.nih.gov/articlerender.fcgi?artid=1678219 BMJ. 1993 August 7; 307(6900): 337–338.]</ref> In the United States, liberals are [[Theory of evolution and liberalism|more likely]] to believe in evolution.<ref>http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2005/10/22/opinion/polls/main965223.shtml</ref> Also, in the United States, twice as many liberals as conservatives (46% versus 22%) believe people are born homosexual and liberals generally have [[Views on Homosexuality|more favorable]] opinions about homosexuality. Given Dr. [[Miron Baron]]'s commentary about homosexuality, many American liberals are inconsistent on the issues of evolution and homosexuality. |
| | + | [[Image:Carl weiland.jpg|thumbnail|150px|right|Dr. [[Carl Wieland]] is the Managing Director of [[Creation Ministries International]] ]] |
| | + | An individual's beliefs regarding [[creation science]]/[[Creationism|creationism]] and the theory of evolution appear to influence their views on homosexuality. Creationist scientists and creationist assert that the theory of evolution cannot account for the origin of gender and sexual reproduction.<ref>http://www.apologeticspress.org/articles/136</ref><ref>http://www.answersingenesis.org/pbs_nova/0928ep5.asp</ref> [[Creation Ministries International]] states: "Homosexual acts go against [[God]]’s original [[Intelligent design|design]] of a man and a woman becoming one flesh — see [[Genesis]] 1 and 2, endorsed by [[Jesus]] Himself in [http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Matthew%2019:3–6;&version=49; Matthew 19:3–6]."<ref>http://creation.com/web-cast-questions-and-answers-2002</ref> In addition, the vast majority of creation scientists reject the notion of [[gene|genetic]] [[determinism]] concerning the [[Causes of Homosexuality|origin of homosexuality]].<ref>http://www.answersingenesis.org/pbs_nova/0928ep5.asp</ref> |
| | + | |
| | + | See also: |
| | + | |
| | + | *[[Atheism and homosexuality]] |
| | + | *[[Religious Upbringing and Culture Affects Rates of Homosexuality]] |
| | + | |
| | + | ==== Richard Dawkins commentary on the God of the Old Testament ==== |
| | + | |
| | + | Richard Dawkins has accused the [[God]] of the [[Old Testament]] of being [[homophobic]].<ref>[http://www.truefreethinker.com/articles/richard-dawkins-praises-bible%E2%80%A6-he-ignorant-barbarian Richard Dawkins praises the Bible…is he an ignorant barbarian?]</ref> Yet, Dawkins has not explained why God, who is described as an all powerful spiritual being in the Old Testament, would be afraid of homosexuals. |
| | + | |
| | + | ==Implication in the death of Jesse Kilgore== |
| | + | |
| | + | ''See also:'' [[Richard Dawkins and Jesse Kilgore]] and [[Atheism and depression]] and [[Atheism and suicide]] and [[Atheism and Mental and Physical Health]] |
| | + | |
| | + | [[Image:Desperation_man.jpg |thumb|left|200px|Pitzer College sociologist Phil Zuckerman stated concerning [[Atheism and suicide|atheism and suicide]]: "this is the one indicator of societal health in which religious nations fare much better than secular nations."]] |
| | + | Dawkins' book "The God Delusion" along with a [[community college]] biology class, have been linked to the tragic suicide of Jesse Kilgore.<ref>http://worldnetdaily.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=81459</ref> Kilgore had several discussions with friends and relatives in which he made it clear Dawkins' book had destroyed his belief in God. This loss of faith is considered the cause of his suicide which is not surprising given that there is evidence which suggest that atheism can [[Atheism and suicide|be a causal factor]] for suicide for some individuals.<ref>http://www.adherents.com/misc/religion_suicide.html</ref><ref>http://www.adherents.com/misc/religion_suicide.html</ref><ref>[http://query.nytimes.com/gst/abstract.html?res=9507E2DC1131E033A25754C1A96F9C94659ED7CF NY Times, September 17, 1894, ATHEISM A CAUSE OF SUICIDE.; Dr. MacArthur Preaches on the Sin and Cowardice of Self-Destruction]</ref> |
| | + | |
| | + | Jesse's father is quoted as saying "If my son was a professing [[homosexuality|homosexual]], and a professor challenged him to read [a book called] 'Preventing Homosexuality'… If my son was gay and [the book] made him feel bad, hopeless, and he killed himself, and that came out in the press, there would be an outcry. He would have been a victim of a hate crime and the professor would have been forced to undergo sensitivity training, and there may have even been a wrongful death lawsuit. But because he's a [[Christianity|Christian]], I don't even get a return telephone call." |
| | + | |
| | + | Jesse's blog remains online after his death.<ref>http://users.newblog.com/Jkrapture/?post_id=17727</ref> |
| | + | |
| | + | Please see: [[Atheism and depression]] and [[Atheism and suicide]] |
| | + | |
| | + | == ''Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed'' == |
| | + | |
| | + | In the film ''[[Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed]]'', a documentary concerning suppression of the [[intelligent design]] movement, [[Ben Stein]] interviewed Richard Dawkins. |
| | + | |
| | + | === Ben Stein Interview with the evolutionist Richard Dawkins === |
| | + | |
| | + | See also: [[Ben Stein Interview with Richard Dawkins]] |
| | + | |
| | + | In the movie [[Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed]], [[Ben Stein]] demonstrated the folly of [[evolutionism]] in his interview with Richard Dawkins ([http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=12rgtN0pCMQ A clip of the interview has been uploaded to YouTube] ). |
| | + | |
| | + | The [[Discovery Institute]] provides an transcript of part of the interview along with some commentary: |
| | + | {{cquote|BEN STEIN: "What do you think is the possibility that [[Intelligent design|Intelligent Design]] might turn out to be the answer to some issues in genetics or in evolution?" |
| | + | |
| | + | DAWKINS: "Well, it could come about in the following way. It could be that at some earlier time, somewhere in the universe, a civilization evolved, probably by some kind of Darwinian means, probably to a very high level of technology, and designed a form of life that they seeded onto perhaps this planet. Now, um, now that is a possibility, and an intriguing possibility. And I suppose it's possible that you might find evidence for that if you look at the details of biochemistry, molecular biology, you might find a signature of some sort of designer." |
| | + | |
| | + | |
| | + | Ho,ho! That is precisely what the [[Raëlism|Raelians]] say: |
| | + | |
| | + | Years ago, everybody knew that the earth was flat. Everybody knew that the sun revolved around the earth. Today, everybody knows that life on earth is either the result of random evolution or the work of a supernatural God. Or is it? In "Message from the Designers", Rael presents us with a third option: that all life on earth was created by advanced scientists from another world. |
| | + | |
| | + | Richard Dawkins and Rael; "clear thinking" kindred spirits! |
| | + | <ref>http://www.discovery.org/a/4589</ref>}} |
| | + | [[File:Ben stein.jpg|right|thumbnail|251px|[[Ben Stein]] ]] |
| | + | A [[Christian apologetics]] website provides some additional commentary on the Ben Stein/Richard Dawkins interview which focuses on Dawkins response to Ben Stein's questions about the likelihood of the existence of God: |
| | + | {{cquote|In this interview there is the following exchange between Ben Stein and Richard Dawkins. Mr. Stein prefaces the exchange with this comment: “Professor Dawkins seemed so convinced that [[God]] doesn’t exist that I wondered if he would be willing to put a number on it.” Here is Professor Dawkins response, “Well, it’s hard to put a figure on it, but I’d put it at something like ninety-nine percent against or something like that.” Mr. Stein responded with this question. “Well, how do you know it’s ninety-nine percent (“I don’t,” Dr. Dawkins interjects.) and not, say, ninety-seven percent?” Dr. Dawkins continues, “You asked me to put a figure on it and I’m not comfortable putting a figure on it. I think it’s… I just think it’s very unlikely.” “But you couldn’t put a number on it?,” Mr. Stein clarifies. “No, of course not,” said Dr. Dawkins. “So it could be forty-nine percent?,” Mr. Stein asks. Dr. Dawkins replies, “Well, it would be… I mean I think it’s… it’s… it’s unlikely, but… but… I… and it’s quite far from fifty percent.” (He's very difficult to quote.) “How do you know?,” Mr. Stein asks. “I don’t know, I mean, I put an argument in the book,” Dr. Dawkins responds.<ref>http://www.readyalways.org/Home/does-god-exist</ref>}} |
| | + | |
| | + | Stein expressed surprise in the narration that Richard Dawkins "believe[d] in intelligent design."<ref name=DSouza>D'Souza, Dinesh. "[http://www.townhall.com/columnists/DineshDSouza/2008/04/21/ben_stein_exposes_richard_dawkins Ben Stein Exposes Richard Dawkins]." ''<Townhall.com>'', April 21, 2008. Accessed April 21, 2008.</ref> |
| | + | |
| | + | Instead of attempting to defend [[abiogenesis]], Dawkins actually suggested [[directed panspermia]]—the very thing that [[Francis Crick]] once suggested to explain life's beginnings. |
| | + | |
| | + | On March 20, 2008, Dawkins and colleague [[Paul Zachary Myers|P. Z. Myers]] tried to gain entry to a special preview of the Ben Stein documentary, though no member of the production team had invited them. Dr. Myers was not allowed in, but Dawkins was. Accounts vary as to why this was so; the production team asserts that they decided to grant Dawkins entry on-the-spot because {{cquote|he has handled himself fairly honorably, he is a guest in our country and I had to presume he had flown a long way to see the film.<ref name=Dean>Dean, Cornelia. "[http://www.nytimes.com/2008/03/21/science/21expelledw.html No Admission for Evolutionary Biologist at Creationist Film]." ''The New York Times'', March 21, 2008. Accessed April 21, 2008. Note the erroneous headline: ''Expelled'' propounds [[intelligent design]], not [[creationism]].</ref>}} On the other hand, Myers himself states that he guesses that Richard Dawkins was not recognized. |
| | + | |
| | + | Richard Dawkins arranged to have a filmed conversation between Richard Dawkins and [[PZ Myers]] concerning this incident posted to YouTube<ref>[http://au.youtube.com/watch?v=c39jYgsvUOY]</ref> In it Myers claimed that the production team had full knowledge of his attendance through the online RSVP system and Dawkins claimed that it was an "incredible piece of inept public relations" to "expel" PZ Myers from a film about people being expelled for their views. Both PZ Myers and Richard Dawkins were featured in the film. |
| | + | |
| | + | == Richard Dawkins, atheist attrocities, and historical revisionism == |
| | + | |
| | + | ''For more information please see:'' [[Richard Dawkins, atheist atrocities, and historical revisionism]] and [[Atheists and historical illiteracy]] and [[Atheism and historical revisionism]] |
| | + | |
| | + | [[Dinesh D'Souza]] took Richard Dawkins to task for engaging in [[historical revisionism]] when it comes to the atrocities of [[atheism|atheist]] regimes and declared Dawkins "reveals a complete ignorance of history".[http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FmrRC6zD4Zk VIDEO] |
| | + | [[Image:Stalin-140508 27880t.jpg|left|201px|thumb|[[Joseph Stalin]]'s atheistic regime killed tens of millions of people.]] |
| | + | In a recent interview D'Souza declared: |
| | + | {{cquote|Richard Dawkins argues that at least the atheist regimes didn't kill people in the name of [[atheism]]. Isn't it time for this biologist to get out of the lab and read a little history? Marxism and [[Communism]] were atheist ideologies. [[Joseph Stalin|Stalin]] and [[Mao Zedong|Mao]] weren't dictators who happened to be atheist; atheism was part of their official doctrine. |
| | + | |
| | + | It was no accident, as the Marxists liked to say, that they shut down the churches and persecuted the clergy...}} |
| | + | |
| | + | Dinesh D'Souza stated in another interview: |
| | + | {{cquote|As one writer put it, “Leaders such as Stalin and Mao persecuted religious groups, not in a bid to expand atheism, but as a way of focusing people’s hatred on those groups to consolidate their own power.” Of course I agree that murderous regimes, whether [[Christian]] or atheist, are generally seeking to strengthen their position. But if Christian regimes are held responsible for their crimes committed in the name of Christianity, then atheist regimes should be held accountable for their crimes committed in the name of atheism. And who can deny that Stalin and Mao, not to mention Pol Pot and a host of others, all committed atrocities in the name of a Communist ideology that was explicitly atheistic? Who can dispute that they did their bloody deeds by claiming to be establishing a “new man” and a religion-free utopia? These were mass murders performed with atheism as a central part of their ideological inspiration, they were not mass murders done by people who simply happened to be atheist.<ref>http://www.churchinhistory.org/pages/atheism/805-answering-atheists-regarding-war.htm</ref>}} |
| | + | [[Image:Khvhkgfiy.jpg|right|thumb|[[Vladimir Lenin]] ]] |
| | + | [[Karl Marx]] said "[Religion] is the opium of the people". Marx also stated: "[[Communism]] begins from the outset (Owen) with atheism; but atheism is at first far from being communism; indeed, that atheism is still mostly an abstraction."<ref>http://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1844/manuscripts/comm.htm</ref> |
| | + | |
| | + | [[Vladimir Lenin]] wrote: "A Marxist must be a [[materialism|materialist]], i. e., an enemy of religion, but a dialectical materialist, i. e., one who treats the struggle against religion not in an abstract way, not on the basis of remote, purely theoretical, never varying preaching, but in a concrete way, on the basis of the [[class struggle]] which is going on in practice and is educating the masses more and better than anything else could."<ref>http://www.marxists.org/archive/lenin/works/1909/may/13.htm</ref> |
| | + | |
| | + | Dr. R. J. Rummel, professor emeritus of political science at the University of Hawaii, is the scholar who first coined the term [[democide]] (death by government). Dr. R. J. Rummel's mid estimate concerning the loss of life due to communism is that communism caused the death of approximately 110,286,000 people between 1917 and 1987.<ref>http://www.hawaii.edu/powerkills/COM.ART.HTM</ref> The atheism in [[communism|communist]] regimes has been and continues to be [[militant atheism]] that has committed various acts of repression including the razing of thousands of religious buildings and the killing, imprisoning, and the oppression of religious leaders and believers (for details see: [[communism]]). In the atheistic and communist Soviet Union, 44 anti religious museums were opened and the largest was the 'The Museum of the History of Religion and Atheism' in [[Leningrad]]’s Kazan cathedral.<ref>http://bedejournal.blogspot.com/2008/12/merry-anti-christmas.html</ref> |
| | + | |
| | + | == John Lennox's discussion with New Atheist Richard Dawkins about the historicity of Jesus == |
| | + | |
| | + | ''See also:'' [[Atheists and historical illiteracy]] and [[Historicity of Jesus]] |
| | + | |
| | + | [[John Lennox]] pointed out to Richard Dawkins that Dawkins claimed in his book ''The God Delusion'' that [[Jesus Christ]] may have never existed and that Dawkins errantly claimed that ancient historians have some disagreement on whether Jesus existed or not. After some additional discussion with Dawkins, Dawkins conceded that Jesus existed and said, "I take that back. Jesus existed".<ref>[http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ant5HS01tBQ Richard Dawkins admits Jesus existed]</ref> |
| | + | |
| | + | == Christian apologist Dr. William Lane Craig is Reported to Have Called Dawkins a Coward == |
| | + | |
| | + | ''See also:'' [[Richard Dawkins and William Lane Craig]] and [[Atheism and cowardice]] and [[Atheism and Debate]] |
| | + | |
| | + | Dr. William Lane Craig is one of [[Christian apologetics|Christianity's leading defenders]] and many individuals over the years have attempted to arrange a debate between Dr. Craig and Richard Dawkins. Richard Dawkins has offered various ruses on why he will not debate William Lane Craig, which Dr. Craig supporters have shown were inconsistent and merely a dodge to avoid debating one of Christianity's strongest advocates.<ref>http://www.uncommondescent.com/evolution/william-lane-craig-is-avoided-by-richard-dawkins/</ref> |
| | + | |
| | + | [[File:Dr. William Lane Craig.jpg|thumb|150px|Dr. [[William Lane Craig]] ]] |
| | + | [[Christian apologetics|Christian apologist]] Dr. Victor Reppert is the author of ''[[C. S. Lewis]]'s Dangerous Idea: In Defense of the Argument from Reason''.<ref>http://dangerousidea.blogspot.com/2007/01/dawkins-ducks-craig.html</ref> In 2007, Dr. Reppert wrote: |
| | + | {{cquote|[[William Lane Craig|Bill Craig]] sent me a newsletter in which he will be debating twice in the UK on "Is God a Delusion" but will not be debating Dawkins himself. Now that would be the debate to see! Having seen this, I wrote him saying "Oh drat! no debate with Dawkins!" He responded: |
| | + | |
| | + | The coward! He said, "I've never heard of [[William Lane Craig|William |
| | + | Craig]]. A debate with him might look good on his |
| | + | resume, but it wouldn't look good on mine!" |
| | + | |
| | + | Bill<ref>http://dangerousidea.blogspot.com/2007/01/dawkins-ducks-craig.html</ref>}} |
| | + | |
| | + | There is now growing public pressure for Dawkins to debate the Christian [[philosophy|philosopher]] of science and Christian apologist Dr. [[William Lane Craig]].<ref>http://manawatu.christian-apologetics.org/sign-the-richard-dawkins-should-debate-william-craig-petition/</ref> For example, currently there is a petition for Richard Dawkins debate William Lane Craig.<ref>http://manawatu.christian-apologetics.org/sign-the-richard-dawkins-should-debate-william-craig-petition/</ref> |
| | + | |
| | + | == Refusal of Richard Dawkins to Debate Christian apologist Dinesh D'Souza== |
| | + | |
| | + | ''See also:'' [[Richard Dawkins and Dinesh D'Souza]] and [[Atheism and Debate]] and [[Atheism and cowardice]] |
| | + | [[File:Dineshdsouza-full.jpg|thumb|180px|left|[[Dinesh D'Souza]] ]] |
| | + | Christian author [[Dinesh D'Souza]] wrote concerning Richard Dawkins refusal to debate him: "To be honest, I find your behavior extremely bizarre. You go halfway around the world to chase down televangelists to outsmart them in an interview format that you control, but given several opportunities to engage the issues you profess to care about in a true spirit of open debate and inquiry, you duck and dodge and run away."<ref>http://www.one-episcopalian-on-faith.com/2008/07/richard-dawkins.html</ref> D'Souza further wrote concerning Dawkins: "When he is confronted with history, philosophy, and logic, Dawkins seems to have very little to say."<ref>http://townhall.com/columnists/DineshDSouza/2008/07/28/countering_richard_dawkins_on_al-jazeera</ref> Next, D'Souza indicated Dawkins was a "showman who takes on unprepared and unsuspecting opponents when you yourself control the editing, but when a strong opponent shows up you manufacture reasons to avoid him."<ref>http://www.one-episcopalian-on-faith.com/2008/07/richard-dawkins.html</ref> Lastly, D'Souza wrote: "So why doth Dawkins languish in his corner, attended by sycophants? Tremble not, Sir Richard. 'Cowards die many times before their deaths. The valiant do taste of death but once.'"<ref>http://www.tothesource.org/11_13_2007/11_13_2007.htm</ref> |
| | + | |
| | + | Dr. Jamie Glazov wrote concerning the refusal of Richard Dawkins to debate Dinesh D'Souza: |
| | + | {{cquote|As many readers can attest, D’Souza has debated [[Daniel Dennett]], [[Christopher Hitchens]], Peter Singer, [[Michael Shermer]], Dan Barker, and other well-known atheists. He intellectually cut those guys to pieces. Harris and Dawkins are just afraid to meet D’Souza. D’Souza writes: “And my challenges to Dawkins to step into the arena have only met with pathetic rationalization: ‘Richard is simply too busy and smart to debate you Dinesh.’ Busy doing what besides being caught with his pants down by Ben Stein? And I guess he's smart because he doesn't want to risk further embarrassing himself and destroying his public reputation. Won't it be hilarious if the ‘party of faith’ is unafraid of opposing arguments while the ‘party of reason’ cannot withstand the arguments of its critics? This is what Henry James might describe as a most interesting turning of the screw.”}} |
| | + | |
| | + | == Richard Dawkins' public refusal to debate creationists == |
| | + | |
| | + | For more information please see: [[Richard Dawkins' public refusal to debate creationists]] and [[Atheism and cowardice]] and [[Global atheism]] |
| | + | |
| | + | [[File:Safarti3.jpg|thumbnail|right|Recently, a [[Christian apologetics|Christian apologist]] called Richard Dawkins a "cowardly clown" for refusing to debate apt debate challengers such as the [[creation science|creation scientists]] at Creation Ministries International.<ref>http://www.truefreethinker.com/articles/richard-dawkins-cowardly-clown</ref> Dr. [[Jonathan Sarfati]] recently published the book ''The Greatest Hoax on Earth'' which rebuts Richard Dawkins' recent book ''The Greatest Show on Earth''.<ref>http://www.truefreethinker.com/articles/richard-dawkins-cowardly-clown</ref>]] |
| | + | Richard Dawkins has publicly declared that he will not debate creationists.<ref>http://www.uncommondescent.com/evolution/william-lane-craig-is-avoided-by-richard-dawkins/</ref> Yet, Richard Dawkins debated the theist John Lennox who adheres to the position of [[intelligent design]].<ref>http://www.uncommondescent.com/evolution/william-lane-craig-is-avoided-by-richard-dawkins/</ref> According to Richard Dawkins, intelligent design is a form of creationism.<ref>http://www.uncommondescent.com/evolution/william-lane-craig-is-avoided-by-richard-dawkins/</ref> Therefore, Richard Dawkins is not consistent and trustworthy concerning his assertion that he will not debate creationists.<ref>http://www.uncommondescent.com/evolution/william-lane-craig-is-avoided-by-richard-dawkins/</ref> Evolutionists and atheists inconsistency concerning debating creationists was commented on by the [[Christian apologetics|Christian apologetic]] website [[True Free Thinker]] which declared: "Interestingly enough, having noted that since some atheists refuse to debate “creationists” but then go on to debate some of those people but not others, it is clear that they are, in reality, being selective and making excuses for absconding from difficulties..."<ref>http://www.truefreethinker.com/articles/speaking-assiduous-absconders%E2%80%A6yet-again-vox-day-challenges-pz-myers-debate</ref> When Richard Dawkins refused to debate Dr. William Lane Craig one of the ruses Richard Dawkins used was supposedly because Dr. Craig was a creationist and Richard Dawkins claimed he didn't debate creationist.<ref>http://www.uncommondescent.com/evolution/william-lane-craig-is-avoided-by-richard-dawkins/</ref> Richard was called on his inconsistency and lack of trustworthiness concerning his excuses for refusing to debate Dr. Craig by the intelligent design advocate Clive Hayden.<ref>http://www.uncommondescent.com/evolution/william-lane-craig-is-avoided-by-richard-dawkins/</ref> |
| | + | |
| | + | In 2010, the prominent atheists who attended the 2010 global atheist conference, which included Richard Dawkins, were challenged to a debate by Creation Ministries International.<ref>http://www.truefreethinker.com/articles/richard-dawkins-cowardly-clown</ref> Richard Dawkins, [[PZ Myers]] and other prominent atheists refused to debate the creation scientists at Creation Ministries International.<ref>http://www.truefreethinker.com/articles/richard-dawkins-cowardly-clown</ref> Generally speaking, [[Creation scientists tend to win the creation vs. evolution debates|creation scientists tend to win the creation vs. evolution debates]]. |
| | + | |
| | + | The refusal of Richard Dawkins and other prominent atheists to debate the staff of Creation Ministries International is not surprising given that there are several instances Richard Dawkins avoiding strong debate opponents. In addition, creationists maintain that Richard Dawkins did not give a particularly strong showing at the [[Huxley Memorial Debate]]. One of the more embarrassing debates (particular the events surrounding the debate) was the case of Richard Dawkins losing a video taped debate to Rabbi Boteach according to the college audience.<ref>http://www.beliefnet.com/Faiths/Judaism/2008/05/Richard-Dawkins-Shameful-Attack.aspx</ref><ref>http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=61565</ref> After the debate, Richard Dawkins denied the debate ever took place and Rabbi Boteach provided the video taped evidence that the debate did take place.<ref>http://www.beliefnet.com/Faiths/Judaism/2008/05/Richard-Dawkins-Shameful-Attack.aspx</ref><ref>http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=61565</ref> Mr. Dawkins has declined to debate Rabbit Shmuley Boteach another time.<ref>http://www.beliefnet.com/Faiths/Judaism/2008/05/Richard-Dawkins-Shameful-Attack.aspx</ref><ref>http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=61565</ref> Incidentally, Paul Humber notes there was a deception that occurred during email correspondence with Mr. Dawkins concerning the tally of vote counts that occurred for the Oxford debate between creation scientists Professor A.E. Wilder-Smith and Professor Edgar Andrews and evolutionists Richard Dawkins and John Maynard Smith (see: [[Huxley Memorial Debate]])<ref>http://www.creationresearch.org/creation_matters/pdf/2003/cm08_04_rp.PDF</ref> Mr. Humber did not indicate whether Mr. Dawkins committed the deception or was merely duped by someone who provided an altered account.<ref>http://www.creationresearch.org/creation_matters/pdf/2003/cm08_04_rp.PDF</ref> |
| | + | [[File:PzMyers2.jpg|thumbnail|250px|left|The atheist and evolutionist [[PZ Myers]] declared, "...I don’t object to [[bestiality]] in a very limited set of specific conditions..."<ref name="achilles">[http://templestream.blogspot.com/2012/08/atheist-achilles-heels-objective.html Atheist Achilles Heels: Objective Morality and Sacred Life]</ref><ref>[http://freethoughtblogs.com/pharyngula/2012/05/22/the-objective-morality-gotcha/ The “objective morality” gotcha]</ref> See: [[Atheism and bestiality]] |
| | + | <br /> |
| | + | <br /> |
| | + | <small>(photo obtained from [http://www.flickr.com/photos/reuvenim/4426093513/ Flickr], see [http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/2.0/deed.en license agreement])</small>]] |
| | + | The website [[True Free Thinker]] declared concerning the refusal of Richard Dawkins, [[PZ Myers]] and other prominent atheists to debate the [[creation science|creation scientists]] and other staff at Creation Ministries International: |
| | + | {{cquote|In keeping with his constant attention getting shenanigans and his equally constant absconding from debating apt challengers via a barrage of illogical and excuses, the moniker of cowardly clown fits Richard Dawkins more than ever (see [http://www.truefreethinker.com/articles/send-clowns-%E2%80%93-richard-dawkins-obliges Send in the Clowns – Richard Dawkins Obliges]). |
| | + | |
| | + | Enter Jonathan Sarfati (PhD in chemistry),senior scientist at Creation Ministries International, who recently published the book “The Greatest Hoax on Earth? Refuting Dawkins on Evolution.” Interestingly, Jonathan Sarfati sought to publish the book by the time that the 2010 Global Atheist Convention—billed as “The Rise of Atheism”—of March 12-14 at the Melbourne Convention and Exhibition Center in Australia. |
| | + | |
| | + | The most intelligent, well informed and vociferous atheists in the world, including [http://www.truefreethinker.com/richard-dawkins Richard Dawkins], [http://www.truefreethinker.com/dan-barker Dan Barker], [http://www.truefreethinker.com/pz-myers PZ Myers], et al, were challenged to debate while their worldwide choir was gathered in one place and yet, one by one they each found excuses to cower from debate even whilst proclaiming to their adherents the intellectual superiority of atheism.<ref>http://www.truefreethinker.com/articles/richard-dawkins-cowardly-clown</ref>}} |
| | + | === Richard Dawkins excuses for not debating creationists === |
| | + | |
| | + | Richard Dawkins has offered some [[Richard Dawkins' ruses for refusing to debate creation scientists|unjustifiable ruses for not not wanting to debate creationists but the true reason is that he knows he will lose the debates]]. |
| | + | |
| | + | There are certainly reputable scientists, medical doctors and members of the public who hold the evolutionary paradigm in low esteem for valid reasons so Dawkins excuses for refusing to debate creationists simply have little to no weight and they are certainly not the best explanation for Mr. Dawkins' behavior in this matter. In 2007, "[[Discovery Institute]]'s Center for Science and Culture today announced that over 700 scientists from around the world have now signed a statement expressing their skepticism about the contemporary theory of Darwinian evolution."<ref>http://www.discovery.org/a/2732</ref> In addition, given that atheism is held in low esteem in many parts of the world and it is a minority position worldwide, Dawkins' refusal to debate strong theistic debaters is quite odd given his allegation that he doesn't debate creationists because he doesn't want to give them respectability and publicity. Furthermore, the Rabbi Boteach debate and the events surrounding it, shows the great lengths that Dawkins will go to avoid letting the public know about a debate loss to a [[theism|theist]] (As mentioned previously Dawkins lost his video taped debate to Rabbi Boteach and then claimed the debate never took place). The reason why Dawkins refuses to debate creation scientists is that generally speaking, [[Creation scientists tend to win the creation vs. evolution debates|creation scientists tend to win the creation vs. evolution debates]]. |
| | + | |
| | + | == Selective outrage on child molestation and so called "gentle pedophiles" == |
| | + | [[File:668738335 394b3820fb.jpg|thumbnail|300px|right|Ben-Peter Terpstra wrote in the ''Australian Conservative'': "In all truth, Britain’s clean-shaven [[atheism|atheists]] aren’t serious about children’s rights, or they’d be launching venomous attacks against the [[United Nations]], in light of their more recent sex abuse scandals."(photo obtained from [http://www.flickr.com/photos/tunnelarmr/668738335/ Flickr], see [http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/2.0/deed.en license agreement]) ]] |
| | + | ''See also:'' [[Atheism and child pornography]] and [[Richard Dawkins on child molestation and so called "gentle pedophiles"]] and [[Atheism, pederasty and NAMBLA]] |
| | + | |
| | + | The ''Australian Conservative'' recently published an article by Ben-Peter Terpstra entitled ''Preparing for Richard Dawkins’ crocodile tears'' which charges that Richard Dawkins exhibits selective outrage on the issue of child molestation. In the article Terpstra cites Bendan Oneill who wrote: |
| | + | {{cquote|The [[New Atheism|New Atheist]] campaign to have Pope Benedict XVI arrested when he visits Britain later this year exposes the deeply disturbing, authoritarian and even Inquisitorial side to today’s campaigning secularism... |
| | + | |
| | + | In 2006, Dawkins criticised ‘hysteria about paedophilia’ and said that, even though he was the victim of sexual abuse at boarding school, he would defend his abusive former teachers if ‘50 years on they had been hounded by vigilantes or lawyers as no better than child murderers’. Yet now he wants to put abusive priests on a par with genocidaires.<ref>http://www.spiked-online.com/index.php/site/article/8526/</ref>}} |
| | + | |
| | + | Ben-Peter Terpstra writes: "In all truth, Britain’s clean-shaven atheists aren’t serious about children’s rights, or they’d be launching venomous attacks against the [[United Nations]], in light of their more recent sex abuse scandals." |
| | + | |
| | + | Concerning Richard Dawkins recent selective outrage on child molestation the Christian apologetics website [[True Free Thinker]] writes: |
| | + | {{cquote|His reputation has always been the very same and this Pope related publicity stunt is nothing new. Moreover, why would he oppose the Pope considering that what the Pope may be complicit in, surely, relates to some gentle pedophiles. |
| | + | |
| | + | What! “Gentle pedophiles”!!! |
| | + | |
| | + | Oh, no, no, no; those are not my words but Richard Dawkins who, indeed, argues that there are gentle pedophiles and that way too much is made of pedophilia at times. |
| | + | |
| | + | For these reasons and more Robert Fulford’s referring to Richard Dawkins as a clown is very, very offensive—to clowns. Clowns are lovable and funny whilst Richard Dawkins is belligerent, arrogant, belittling and shockingly lacking in knowledge with regards to many of the issues that he takes on (find ample evidence [http://www.truefreethinker.com/richard-dawkins here]).<ref>http://www.truefreethinker.com/articles/send-clowns-%E2%80%93-richard-dawkins-obliges</ref>}} |
| | + | |
| | + | ==Opposition to Creationism and Religion == |
| | + | |
| | + | * Professor Dawkins' anti-religious views are based on two subjective opinions. The first is that religious faith is irrational, the second is that religion causes wars and [[hatred]], or as he puts it, 'Religion makes good people bad'. |
| | + | |
| | + | Richard Dawkins is a writer and media commentator on the debate between evolution and the opposing positions of creation science and intelligent design.<ref>[http://www.christiananswers.net/creation/people/dawkins-r.html Christiananswers.net webpage on Richard Dawkins.]</ref><ref>[http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/education/1872331.stm School attacked over evolution teaching]</ref> He is an ardent proponent of the evolutionary view of life in works targeted at the general public, such as his books entitled ''The Selfish Gene'' and ''The Ancestor's Tale''. However, his efforts to promote the theory of evolution have not been very successful, and even in his native land of the UK, 40% of the population believes that creationism or intelligent design should be taught in the school science curriculum.<ref>http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/4648598.stm</ref> |
| | + | [[Image:Winston.jpg|right|thumb|175px|Lord Robert Winston stated Richard Dawkins is bringing science "into disrepute".]] |
| | + | As an evolutionist, Dawkins holds [[Charles Darwin]]'s view that "the universe we observe has precisely the properties we should expect if there is, at bottom, no design, no purpose, no evil, no good, nothing but blind, pitiless indifference." In addition, he often comes across as having a mocking attitude towards religion.<ref>[http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=6mmskXXetcg]</ref> He stridently<ref>Dawkins "has repeatedly likened religious faith to a mental defect." Cornelia Dean, "Scientists Feel Miscast in Film on Life’s Origin," New York Times, Science Section (September 27, 2007).[http://www.nytimes.com/2007/09/27/science/27expelled.html]</ref> opposes the traditional role of religion in educational institutions and in society in general.<ref>[http://www.godlessinamerica.com/When%20atheists%20attack.html When atheists attack: Debunking religion without apology] - George A. Ricker.</ref> Dawkins has derided belief in [[God]] as a "mind-virus",<ref>[http://www.alternet.org/mediaculture/47052/ The Dawkins Delusion] by Alistair McGrath</ref> which is infectious and harmful to society. In his 2006 book ''The God Delusion'', he states his belief that fundamentalist religion "subverts science and saps the intellect," a view that is contrary to the fact that many of the most productive scientists, from [[Isaac Newton]] to [[Louis Pasteur]], were devout Christians. The foundation of modern science [[Christianity and Science|was largely established by those who held a Christian worldview]]. Dawkins often says that these men were rather a product of their time and, like many that came before them, lived in fear of persecution by Christians. There is no substantive evidence for this. |
| | + | Dawkins also cites in his book, the God Delusion, that not one winner of the [[Nobel Prize]] for Science is a theist. While this has been openly debated, he cites his own personal relationships with many of these scientists. |
| | + | [[Image:McgrathatRefresh.jpg|left|thumb|175px|[[Alister McGrath]]]] |
| | + | Lord Robert Winston is a prominent scientist and British doctor who served as the President of the British Association for the Advancement of Science from 2004 to 2005.<ref>http://www.tvsa.co.za/actorprofile.asp?actorID=5547</ref> Currently, Lord Winston serves as Emeritus Professor of Fertility Studies at Imperial College in Britain. In 2006, Winston launched a broadside against Richard Dawkins and stated that he is bringing science "into disrepute" due to his refusal to "connect with spirituality". Winston also stated that Dawkins "sometimes doesn't seem to understand the limitations of science." |
| | + | |
| | + | [[Alister McGrath]], a Christian theologian who has a background in biophysics and is Professor of Historical Theology at Oxford University, wrote: |
| | + | {{cquote|Richard Dawkins’ latest book ''The God Delusion'' fires off a series of salvos against religion. It is perhaps his weakest book to date, marred by its excessive reliance on bold assertion and rhetorical flourish, where the issues so clearly demand careful reflection and painstaking analysis, based on the best evidence available.}} |
| | + | |
| | + | Atheist philosopher [[Michael Ruse]] echoes McGrath's estimation of ''The God Delusion'' and recently stated that the book makes him embarrassed to be an [[atheist]]. |
| | + | |
| | + | Professor McGrath asserts that the aggressive rhetoric of Dawkins' works is merely a mask to cover a deep insecurity about the public credibility of [[atheism]]. |
| | + | McGrath recently wrote a book opposing the [[atheist]] ideology of Dawkins entitled ''The Dawkins Delusion?: Atheist Fundamentalism and the Denial of the Divine''.<ref>http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/articles/news/news.html?in_article_id=433628&in_page_id=1770</ref> |
| | + | |
| | + | ==Darwin's Rottweiler and the [[Huxley Memorial Debate]]== |
| | + | |
| | + | For more information please see: [[Huxley Memorial Debate]] |
| | + | |
| | + | The September 2005 issue of ''Discover'' magazine had an article on Richard Dawkins entitled "Darwin’s Rottweiler".<ref name="discover">http://discovermagazine.com/2005/sep/darwins-rottweiler/</ref> The title is an allusion to Thomas Henry Huxley who became to be known as "Darwin's Bulldog".<ref>http://www.answersingenesis.org/creation/v13/i1/monkeys.asp</ref> Huxley is arguably most well known for his debate with Bishop [[Samuel Wilberforce]] over the theory of evolution, and evolutionists and creationist dispute whether or not a key claimed event in the debate actually occurred.<ref>http://www.answersingenesis.org/articles/cm/v13/n1/kids</ref> The ''Discover'' article stated the following: |
| | + | {{cquote|Dawkins has become “Darwin’s rottweiler”— as [[Alister McGrath]], an Oxford theologian, reminded readers of his recent book, Dawkins' God: Genes, Memes, and the Meaning of Life — so intent on prevailing in intellectual combat that he alienates others and undermines the dazzling quality of his argumentative skills."<ref name="discover" />}} |
| | + | |
| | + | The Simonyi Professorship Home Page promotes the idea that Richard Dawkins is "Darwin's Rottweiler" and has an article published in the Seattle newspaper ''EastSideweek'' which states the following: |
| | + | {{cquote|...Thomas Henry Huxley, earned the nickname "Darwin's bulldog" from his fellow Victorians. In our own less decorous day, Dawkins deserves an even stronger epithet: "Darwin's Rottweiler, perhaps," Simonyi suggests. Now, thanks to [[Charles Simonyi|Simonyi]]'s gift of £1.5 million sterling to England's venerable Oxford University, the Rottweiler is unleashed."}} |
| | + | [[Image:Wilder-smith-book.jpg|right|150px|thumb|Dr. Arthur Ernest Wilder-Smith]] |
| | + | Now given that Thomas Henry Huxley's is arguably most well known for his debate over the theory of evolution and given that Dawkins has stated he will no longer debate a [[creation scientists]] the title of "Darwin's Rottweiler" can certainly be disputed. Creationists wrote regarding Richard Dawkins current refusal to debate a creation scientist: |
| | + | {{cquote|A. E. Wilder-Smith is also probably responsible for Richard Dawkins refusing to debate creationists any more. In 1986, Wilder-Smith and Edgar Andrews debated the two leading evolutionists in Britain, Richard Dawkins and John Maynard Smith, at Oxford – a lions’ den with the two strongest Darwinian lions in Europe. Yet even there, over a third – almost half – of the staunchly pro-evolution audience voted that the creation side had won the debate. The vote count became a contentious issue. There were claims of a cover-up by the Oxford Student Union. The AAAS was accused of lying about the vote count and didn’ [sic] correct it even when confronted (see article). The evolutionists apparently were embarrassed that the creationists made such a strong showing. For whatever reason, Dawkins no longer will debate creationists. Reports from those in attendance say that, contrary to the ground rules of the debate, the Dawkins and Maynard Smith repeatedly attacked religion, while the creationists used only scientific arguments. Dawkins himself had to be reprimanded by the moderator for attacking Wilder-Smith about his religious views. Dawkins implored the audience not to give any votes to the creationists lest it be a “blot on the escutcheon of ancient University of Oxford” (an odd remark, considering Oxford was founded by Christians). After the debate, details of the event were lost by the University. Normally, Oxford Union debates are big news, given prominent publicity in the press, radio and television. This one, however, which should have rivalled the historic 1860 Huxley-Wilberforce debate in importance, and indeed was even titled the ’Huxley Memorial Debate,” was silently dropped from the radar screen. In his memoirs, Dr. Wilder-Smith wrote, “No records of my having held the lecture as part of the Oxford Union Debate could be found in any library. No part of the official media breathed a word about it.<ref>http://www.creationsafaris.com/wgcs_5.htm</ref>}} |
| | + | |
| | + | The aforementioned debate involving Richard Dawkins is fairly well known in creationist/intelligent design]circles and the debate was tape recorded.<ref>http://www.uncommondescent.com/intelligent-design/1986-huxley-memorial-debate/</ref> In August of 2003 the [[Creation Research Society]] published some interesting material about their correspondence with Richard Dawkins which focused on the debate.<ref name="cr">http://www.creationresearch.org/creation_matters/pdf/2003/cm08_04_rp.PDF</ref> The Creation Research Society declared: |
| | + | [[Image:PH2006022801720.jpg|left|thumb|150px|[[Henry Morris]]]] |
| | + | {{cquote|Despite Dr. Dawkins’ plea, there were apparently 115 votes for the creation position (more than 37%). This was done near Darwin’s turf. Imagine flat-earthers going to NASA and convincing over 37% of the scientists there that the earth is flat. Maybe creation science is not as closely akin to flat-earthism as Dr. Dawkins supposes (see his Free Inquiry article).<ref name="cr" />}} |
| | + | |
| | + | Richard Dawkins no longer will debate a creation scientist. Robert Sloan, Director of Paleontology at the University of Minnesota, reluctantly admitted to a ''Wall Street Journal'' reporter that the "creationists tend to win" the public debates which focused on the creation vs. [[theory of evolution|evolution]] controversy.<ref>Ankerberg, John, and Weldon, John, [http://www.ankerberg.com/Articles/science/SC0104W1E.htm Truth in Advertising: Damaging the Cause of Science]</ref> |
| | + | In August of 1979, [[Henry Morris|Dr. Henry Morris]] reported in an [[Institute for Creation Research]] letter the following: “By now, practically every leading evolutionary scientist in this country has declined one or more invitations to a scientific debate on creation/evolution.” |
| | + | Morris also said about the creation scientist [[Duane Gish]] (who had over 300 formal debates): “At least in our judgment and that of most in the audiences, he always wins.” Generally speaking, leading evolutionists generally no longer debate creation scientists.<ref>http://www.icr.org/article/811/</ref> |
| | + | |
| | + | === Richard Dawkins violation' of the terms of the debate proceedings === |
| | + | As noted earlier, it was agreed before the debate that discussion of religion was not to occur during the debate and that only the evidence related to the physical sciences were going to be discussed. At the end of the debate, Richard Dawkins started to give an impassioned plea to the audience to not give a single vote to the creationists which would show support for creationism. Mr. Dawkins was told to sit down by the President of the Oxford Union for violating the terms of the debate as far as not mentioning religion (as noted earlier John Maynard Smith also violated the terms of the debate).<ref>http://www.creationresearch.org/creation_matters/pdf/2003/cm08_04_rp.PDF</ref> |
| | + | |
| | + | === Deception related to email correspondence with Richard Dawkins === |
| | + | As mentioned earlier, Paul Humber notes there was a deception that occurred during email correspondence with Mr. Dawkins concerning the tally of vote counts that occurred for the Huxley Memorial Debate between creation scientists Professor A.E. Wilder-Smith and Professor Edgar Andrews and evolutionists Richard Dawkins and John Maynard Smith.<ref>http://www.creationresearch.org/creation_matters/pdf/2003/cm08_04_rp.PDF</ref> Mr. Humber did not indicate whether Mr. Dawkins committed the deception or was merely duped by someone who provided an altered account.<ref>http://www.creationresearch.org/creation_matters/pdf/2003/cm08_04_rp.PDF</ref> |
| | + | |
| | + | ==Brights Movement== |
| | + | [[Image:DrVitz.jpg|thumbnail|110px|right|Ex-[[atheist]] and psychologist Dr. [[Paul Vitz]]]]The [[Brights Movement]] was started in 2003 by Paul Geisert and Mynga Futrell in order to assist in the advocacy of a [[Naturalism|naturalistic worldview]]. In October of 2003 in a article in ''[[the Guardian]]'', Richard Dawkins associated being a "bright" with being an intellectual.<ref>http://books.guardian.co.uk/review/story/0,12084,981412,00.html</ref> Atheist [[author]] and columnist Christopher Hitchens expressed his "annoyance at Professor Dawkins and Daniel Dennett, for their cringe-making proposal that atheists should conceitedly nominate themselves to be called "brights".<ref>http://www.slate.com/id/2165033/entry/2165035/</ref> [[ABC News|ABC]] News.com commentator John Allen Paulos remarked of the Brights campaign, "I don't think a degree in [[Public Relations|public relations]] is needed to expect that many people will construe the term as smug, ridiculous, and arrogant" (Paulos 2003).<ref>http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m2843/is_2_28/ai_114090211/pg_2</ref>[[Psychology|Psychologist]] and [[ex-atheist]] Dr. [[Paul Vitz]] wrote a book entitled ''Faith of the Fatherless'' in which he focuses on his study of the lives of more than a dozen leading atheists.<ref>Vitz, Paul, [http://www.columbia.edu/cu/augustine/arch/vitz.txt The Psychology of [[Atheism]]], September 24, 1997 (lecture notes taken by an audience member).</ref> Dr. Vitz has stated there were two common factors he observed in the leading atheists he profiled: they were all intelligent and arrogant.<ref>http://www.columbia.edu/cu/augustine/arch/vitz.txt</ref> Richard Dawkins is listed as an "Enthusiastic Bright" at the Brights Movement website.<ref>http://www.the-brights.net/people/enthusiastic/index.html</ref> |
| | + | |
| | + | == Other reactions to Dawkins' views within the academic community == |
| | + | |
| | + | Some in the academic community are critical of Richard Dawkins. One such example is Martin Rees, the Astronomer Royal and President of the [[Royal Society]]. In a debate in May 2007 between Rees and Dawkins, Rees said that science needed as many friends as possible and that creating enemies within mainstream religion will make it "more difficult to combat the kinds of anti-science sentiments that are really important". He also argued that it will make it more difficult to fight terrorism. Richard Dawkins counter-argued that being nice to bishops helps to foster the view that faith is virtuous and can excuse any act on its behalf. Rees continued to argue that religion has no [[monopoly]] on being unreasonable citing examples of scientific sects such as the [[Raelism|Raelians]] or extreme eco-groups as being as dangerous as religious fundamentalists.<ref>Guardian story of Martin Rees and Richard Dawkins debate|http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/2007/may/29/controversiesinscience.peopleinscience</ref> |
| | + | |
| | + | Among theologians there are many critics of Richard Dawkins, a notable example being Alister McGrath as noted earlier. Alister McGrath is Professor of Historical Theology at the University of Oxford. He has accused Dawkins of being ignorant of theology and has written a book challenging Dawkins' anti-religious stance, ''The Dawkins Delusion''. Even among biology colleagues, there are critics. While Ken Miller, a biology professor, doesn't challenge Dawkins' views on evolution, he does take issue with his insistence that religion and science are incompatible.<ref>Discover's article on Darwin's Rottweiler|http://discovermagazine.com/2005/sep/darwins-rottweiler/article_view?b_start:int=1&-C=</ref> |
| | + | |
| | + | Richard Dawkins, for his part, claims bafflement that some scientists he respects are capable of religious faith.<ref>Richard Dawkins, 2006. ''The God Delusion''</ref><ref>The Humanist article Is Science A Religion?|http://www.thehumanist.org/humanist/articles/dawkins.html</ref> |
| | + | |
| | + | ==Criticism of the Blind Watchmaker and Climbing Mount Improbable== |
| | + | [[Image:Willard-dallas-3.jpg|left|thumbnail|150px|Dr. Dallas Willard]] |
| | + | [[United States|American]] [[Philosopher|philosopher]] Dr. Dallas Willard wrote concerning ''The Blind Watchmaker'' by Richard Dawkins: |
| | + | {{cquote|When he writes a book like the present one he is not functioning as a scientist. If he were, he should incorporate his "findings" into the most advanced textbooks in the field and see how they fare as representations of established knowledge. He complains that "the true, Darwinian explanation of our own existence is still, remarkably, not a routine part of the curriculum of a general education." Then by all means let him enter the academic arena and present his views about the watchmaker as established knowledge. He should not reserve his views for infliction upon a largely helpless public whom his scientific credentials and elaborate rhetorical devices will overwhelm and make incapable of any accurate assessment of argument. When he writes books like ''The Blind Watchmaker'' he is just a naturalist [[metaphysics|metaphysician]], trying to cozy up to the scientists and blend into their company in such a way that his true colors will not be noticed. He takes the liberty to dress down what he calls "redneck creationism", but unfortunately there are rednecks on the side of "Darwinianism" as well. He is one of the most outstanding.<ref>http://www.dwillard.org/articles/artview.asp?artID=52</ref>}} |
| | + | |
| | + | Dr. [[Jonathan Sarfati]] offered several criticisms of the book ''The Blind Watchmaker'' by Richard Dawkins and states in his summary that the "...Apostle of [[Atheism]] has a long way to go to make a convincing case for his faith."<ref name="cotw">http://www.creationontheweb.com/content/view/1855</ref> |
| | + | |
| | + | ==Non-Academic Position at Oxford== |
| | + | Up until his retirement from the post in September 2008, Dawkins was the Charles Simonyi Professor of the Public Understanding of Science at [[Oxford University]], having been appointed as the first holder of this endowed position. One Reverend has accused him of using his post "not to promote science, but rather his own [[atheistic]] materialist philosophy." |
| | + | |
| | + | The "post" was a donated one, and is not a normal professorship<ref> "[...] the income from the endowment shall be applied in the first instance to fund a post in the Public Understanding of Science to be held by Dr C.R. Dawkins, Fellow of New College, on such terms and conditions as Council and the General Board may determine, and to provide support costs for such a post to be administered in accordance with ibid., cl. 5." [http://www.ox.ac.uk/gazette/1995-6/weekly/091195/acts.htm#4Dec]</ref> at the Museum of Natural History, an institution owned by the [[University of Oxford]]. The "post" did not entail "substantial teaching and administrative duties within Oxford University." According to the Simonyi Professorship website, the professor holding this position is to "communicate scientific ideas through a variety of media, in order to reach a wide range of people."<ref> "[...] the Simonyi Professor is not expected to undertake substantial teaching and administrative duties within Oxford University: any such efforts should be directed primarily towards the education of non-specialists."</ref> However, in a review of the book ''Climbing Mount Improbable'' by Richard Dawkins, Dr. [[Jonathan Sarfati]] has stated regarding Dawkins's position at Oxford: |
| | + | [[Image:35242.jpg|right|thumb|125px|Paul Johnson]] |
| | + | {{cquote|British author Paul Johnson called it ‘Oxford’s first Chair of [[Atheism]].’ But true (operational) science involves repeatable, observable experimentation in the present, which includes [[physics]], [[chemistry]], experimental [[biology]] and [[geology]], etc. ... Dawkins has made no notable contributions to any of these, or even to the history or philosophy of science.<ref name="cotw" />}} |
| | + | |
| | + | It has been claimed by Rabbi Shmuley Boteach that the special terms of this gift might have allowed Dawkins to bypass the peer review promotion process customarily required before receiving the title of "professor" as he believes a decree by Oxford seems to imply this. Rabbi Shmuley Boteach wrote about Dawkins' claim to legitimate professorship: |
| | + | {{cquote|Many publications refer to you as 'Professor' Richard Dawkins, even though, as your critics maintain, leading Universities regularly deny to any Professor who played a role in acquiring the funding for their own chair the use of the title. Your critics may be wrong here, Richard, but they cite the fact that the Oxford University Hebdomadal Council Decree of 6 November 1995, establishing the Charles Simonyi Professorship, says that you hold a "post" rather than a "professorship." They write that since your post was endowed by Charles Simonyi and the terms of the gift allowed you to bypass the peer review promotion process customarily required for a professorship, it will become a "professorship" only when a subsequent beneficiary is promoted to the position based on a peer review election process, which, they maintain, was not conducted for your receipt of the post. Now, you defended yourself in a posting on your website, dated Sept. 28, 2006, and wrote that you were "elected to the Charles Simonyi Professorship." But that does seem to directly contradict the Hebdamadol Council decree cited above which expressly says "Notwithstanding the provisions of Ch. VII, Sect. III (which discuss the election of a professor to the post), the income from the endowment shall be applied in the first instance to fund a post in the Public Understanding of Science to be held by Dr C.R. Dawkins, Fellow of New College." It seems, so your critics contend, that your appointment was a condition of the grant rather than the product of an election, and since it may be that you are falsely maligned in the matter, your clarification as to the true nature of your professorship, whose official location is the Museum of Natural History, is welcomed."<ref>http://www.huffingtonpost.com/rabbi-shmuley-boteach/rabbi-shmuley-responds-to_b_100275.html</ref>}} |
| | + | |
| | + | Richard Dawkins announced his intention to retire from his position in September 2008: |
| | + | |
| | + | :"The University of Oxford has advertised the Charles Simonyi Professorship in the Public Understanding of Science. I retire from the Chair in September 2008." |
| | + | |
| | + | == Awards == |
| | + | |
| | + | * ''Silver Medal of the Zoological Society of London'' (1989)<br /> |
| | + | * ''Royal Society's Michael Faraday Award'' (1990)<br /> |
| | + | * ''Nakayama Prize for Achievement in Human Science'' (1990)<br /> |
| | + | * ''The International Cosmos Prize'' (1997)<br /> |
| | + | * ''Kistler Prize'' (2001)<br /> |
| | + | * ''Shakespeare Prize of the Alfred Toepfer Foundation'' (2005)<br /> |
| | + | * ''Lewis Thomas Prize for Writing about Science'' (2006)<br /> |
| | + | * ''Galaxy British Book Awards Author of the Year'' (2007)<br /> |
| | + | * Honorary Doctorates in both literature and science<br /> |
| | + | * Fellow of the Royal Society |
| | + | * Fellow of the Royal Society of Literature |
| | + | |
| | + | ==Books== |
| | + | Dawkins has written eleven books: nine have been on evolution and evolutionary theory, another is his ''[[New York Times]]'' bestselling [[atheist]] polemic ''[[The God Delusion]]'', and most recently, he has written a book for children introducing them to his way of thinking. |
| | + | |
| | + | The first of his books, ''[[The Selfish Gene]]'', was published in 1976, and won him international acclaim. It has sold over one million copies and has been translated into 25 languages. |
| | + | |
| | + | His books are: |
| | + | |
| | + | * ''[[The Selfish Gene]]'' (1976) |
| | + | * ''The Extended Phenotype'' (1982) |
| | + | * ''The Blind Watchmaker'' (1986) |
| | + | * ''River Out of Eden'' (1995) |
| | + | * ''Climbing Mount Improbable'' (1996) |
| | + | * ''Unweaving the Rainbow'' (1998) |
| | + | * ''A Devil's Chaplain'' (2003) |
| | + | * ''The Ancestor's Tale'' (2004) |
| | + | * ''[[The God Delusion]]'' (2006) |
| | + | * ''[[The Greatest Show on Earth]]: The Evidence for Evolution''. Free Press (United States), Transworld (United Kingdom and Commonwealth). 2009. |
| | + | * ''The Magic of Reality: How We Know What's Really True'' (2011) - a science book for children. |
| | + | |
| | + | '''Anti-evolution books specifically addressing Richard Dawkins:''' |
| | + | |
| | + | *''The Greatest Hoax on Earth? Refuting Dawkins on Evolution'' by Dr. [[Jonathan Sarfati]], 2010 |
| | + | |
| | + | == Essays relating to Richard Dawkins == |
| | + | |
| | + | *[[Essay: Atheism: A house divided and in global decline|Atheism: A house divided and in global decline]] |
| | + | *[[Essay: Is Richard Dawkins an intellectually fulfilled atheist?|Is Richard Dawkins an intellectually fulfilled atheist?]] |
| | + | |
| | + | == Comedy and satires concerning Richard Dawkins == |
| | + | |
| | + | *[[Essay: Does Richard Dawkins have machismo?|Does Richard Dawkins have machismo?]] |
| | + | *[[Essay: Unlike Napoléon Bonaparte, Richard Dawkins failed to take his Waterloo like a man|Unlike Napoléon Bonaparte, Richard Dawkins failed to take his Waterloo like a man]] |
| | + | *[[Essay: Richard Dawkins is terrified of Islam|Richard Dawkins is terrified of Islam]] |
| | + | *[[Essay: Richard Dawkins vs. Barack Hussein Obama and Islamacists|Richard Dawkins vs. Barack Hussein Obama and Islamacists]] |
| | + | *[[Essay: The world weighs Richard Dawkins in the balance|The world weighs Richard Dawkins in the balance and finds him wanting!]] |
| | + | *[http://questionevolution.blogspot.com/2012/05/jesus-vs-richard-dawkins-and-pz-myers.html Jesus vs. Richard Dawkins and PZ Myers - Jesus wins!] |
| | + | *[[Essay: What is the difference between Joe Stalin and Richard Dawkins?|What is the difference between Joseph Stalin and Richard Dawkins?]] |
| | + | *[[Essay: Conservapedians laugh at the "superior atheist intellect"|Conservapedians laugh at the "superior atheist intellect"]] |
| | + | *[[Essay: Richard Dawkins in his native habitat|Richard Dawkins in his native habitat]] |
| | + | *[[Essay: Richard Dawkins' lack of appeal to the Asian women audience|Richard Dawkins' lack of appeal to the Asian women audience]] |
| | + | *[[Essay: Atheist evangelists and Hiroo Onada|Atheist evangelists and Hiroo Onada]] |
| | + | *[[Essay: Richard Dawkins, obesity has enveloped your marketing campaign| Richard Dawkins, obesity has enveloped your marketing campaign]] |
| | + | |
| | + | ==See Also== |
| | + | |
| | + | *[[Richard Dawkins and Creation Ministries International]] |
| | + | *[[British atheism]] |
| | + | *[http://www.conservapedia.com/Category:Richard_Dawkins Directory of Richard Dawkins articles] |
| | + | *[[Theory of Evolution and Cases of Fraud, Hoaxes and Speculation]] |
| | + | *[[Atheism and deception]] |
| | + | *[[Resources for leaving atheism and becoming a Christian]] |
| | + | *[[Essay: Debate challenge for Richard Dawkins|Debate challenge for Richard Dawkins]] |
| | + | *[[Conservapedia essay: Are Richard Dawkins fans cultic?]] |
| | + | *[[Richard Dawkins and William Dembski]] |
| | + | |
| | + | == External Links == |
| | + | |
| | + | *[http://www.atheistdelusion.net/ The Atheist Delusion] (cite rebutting Richard Dawkins) |
| | + | *[http://www.spectator.co.uk/features/8885481/after-the-new-atheism/ Richard Dawkins has lost: meet the new new atheists] by [[Theo Hobson]] |
| | + | |
| | + | '''Video:''' |
| | + | |
| | + | *[http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9W4e4MwogLo Is Richard Dawkins really stumped? The truth - In his own words - YES...he is!] - [[YouTube]] video |
| | + | * Former Atheist Alister McGrath discusses Dawkins (video) [http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ghIghLvttVU part 1] [http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9UiCUEBB9Z4&feature=related part 2] |
| | + | *[http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zaKryi3605g&NR=1 YouTube - Video of Richard Dawkins being stumped by a creationist's question] |
| | + | *[http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FmrRC6zD4Zk&eurl=http%3A%2F%2Fvideo.google.com%2Fvideosearch%3Fhl%3Den%26client%3Dfirefox-a%26channel%3Ds%26rls%3Dorg.mozilla%3Aen-US%3Aofficial%26hs%3DxUv%26q%3Ddawkins%2520and%2520his&feature=player_embedded Atheists dodge their history of atrocities] (Video) |
| | + | |
| | + | |
| | + | '''Articles/videos on Richard Dawkins dodging debates:''' |
| | + | |
| | + | *[http://www.truefreethinker.com/articles/send-clowns-%E2%80%93-richard-dawkins-obliges Send in the Clowns – Richard Dawkins Obliges] |
| | + | *[http://www.truefreethinker.com/articles/richard-dawkins-cowardly-clown Richard Dawkins, the cowardly clown] |
| | + | *[http://www.truefreethinker.com/articles/will-william-lane-craig-debate-richard-dawkins Will William Lane Craig debate Richard Dawkins?] |
| | + | *[http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VrW-ZUjyWmU Does Richard Dawkins have machismo?] |
| | + | |
| | + | |
| | + | '''Collection of rebuttals:''' |
| | + | |
| | + | *[http://www.truefreethinker.com/richard-dawkins Richard Dawkins - Christian rebuttals] by [[True Free Thinker]] |
| | + | |
| | + | |
| | + | '''Reviews of Richard Dawkins' works:''' |
| | + | |
| | + | *[http://www.creationontheweb.com/content/view/1855 A Review of Climbing Mount Improbable by Richard Dawkins] by Dr. [[Jonathan Sarfati]] |
| | + | *[http://www.atheistdelusion.net/ Atheist delusion: Answering "The God Delusion" and other works of atheist Richard Dawkins] |
| | + | *[http://www.dwillard.org/articles/artview.asp?artID=52 Reflections on Dawkins' The Blind Watchmaker] by [[Christianity|Christian]] [[Philosophy|philosopher]] Dallas Willard |
| | + | *[http://www.leaderu.com/ftissues/ft9908/reviews/barr.html A Review of Unweaving the Rainbow by Richard Dawkins] |
| | + | *[http://www.answersingenesis.org/docs2006/1127dawkins.asp Deconstructing a deluded Dawkins by Paul Taylor] |
| | + | *[http://creationontheweb.com/content/view/6280 A review of A Devil’s Chaplain: Reflections on Hope, Lies, Science, and Love by Richard Dawkins] |
| | + | |
| | + | |
| | + | '''News stories:''' |
| | + | |
| | + | *[http://www.answersingenesis.org/docs2006/1122dawkins.asp Richard Dawkins Foundation plan to supply [[atheist]] literature to schools] |
| | + | *[http://truthbomb.blogspot.com/2008/05/professor-dawkins-rabbi-boteach-and.html Professor Dawkins, Rabbi Boteach, and Adolf Hitler] |
| | + | *[http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/comment/faith/article6925781.ece Children who front Richard Dawkins' atheist ads are evangelicals] |
| | + | |
| | + | |
| | + | '''From a Frog to a Prince video''': |
| | + | |
| | + | *[http://creationontheweb.com/content/view/5712/ Was Dawkins Stumped?] |
| | + | *[http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zaKryi3605g&NR=1 YouTube - Video of Richard Dawkins being stumped by a creationist's question] |
| | + | *[http://www.trueorigin.org/ca_gb_01.asp Gillian Brown answers Barry Williams] (Gillian Brown is the film's producer. Barry Williams is a Skeptic who criticised the film. The page includes an apology from another skeptic, and an admission that the film accurately presents Dawkins' answer.) |
| | + | *[http://creationwiki.org/%28Talk.Origins%29_Dawkins_could_not_give_an_example_of_increasing_information CreationWiki's response to TalkOrigins Archive's criticism of interview.] |
| | + | |
| | + | '''Richard Dawkins administered websites and web pages:''' |
| | + | |
| | + | *[http://www.richarddawkins.net/ Richard Dawkins' main website] |
| | + | *[http://twitter.com/richarddawkins Richard Dawkins' Twitter page] |
| | + | *[http://richarddawkinsfoundation.org/ The Richard Dawkins Foundation] |
| | + | *[http://users.ox.ac.uk/~dawkins/ Richard Dawkins homepage at Oxford University] |
| | + | |
| | + | == Notes == |
| | + | {{Reflist|colwidth=30em}} |
| | + | |
| | + | {{DEFAULTSORT: Dawkins, Richard}} |
| | + | [[Category: Richard Dawkins]] |
| | + | [[Category:Academics]] |
| | + | [[Category:Atheism]] |
| | + | [[Category:Authors]] |
| | + | [[Category:Atheists]] |
| | + | [[Category:Biologists]] |
| | + | [[Category:Evolutionists]] |
| | + | [[Category:Liberals]] |
| | + | [[Category:New Atheism]] |