Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

The Genius of Charles Darwin on now C4

Options
  • 11-10-2009 7:03pm
    #1
    Handsome Bob
    Closed Accounts Posts: 22,905 ✭✭✭✭


    Just thought I'd give a heads up, I forsee various interviews with oddballs and Dawkins passing off the opinions of said oddballs as the opinions of every religious person.


Comments

  • Options
    #2
    dragonsgates
    Closed Accounts Posts: 114 ✭✭dragonsgates


    LZ5by5 wrote: »
    Just thought I'd give a heads up, I forsee various interviews with oddballs and Dawkins passing off the opinions of said oddballs as the opinions of every religious person.

    This is an excellent show. Children should be shown this during school time in place of religious indoctrination.


  • Options
    #3
    stevejazzx
    Registered Users Posts: 3,247 ✭✭✭stevejazzx


    It was pretty good, I particulalrly liked the scene where Dawkins grills the PC sicentists on the timidity of their beliefs.

    Generic PC scieentist no. 1 "Well I believe it becasue I'm a scientist"

    Dawkins "No you believe it becasue the evidence supports it"


  • Options
    #4
    magicbastarder
    Moderators, Category Moderators, Arts Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 48,482 CMod ✭✭✭✭magicbastarder


    i found it a bit irritating. too often when he was speaking to someone whose views he disagrees with, the audio track from the interview fades out and he comes in on a voiceover telling us why they're wrong. why bother interviewing them?


  • Options
    #5
    stevejazzx
    Registered Users Posts: 3,247 ✭✭✭stevejazzx


    magicbastarder wrote: »
    i found it a bit irritating. too often when he was speaking to someone whose views he disagrees with, the audio track from the interview fades out and he comes in on a voiceover telling us why they're wrong. why bother interviewing them?

    Creationsts not only talk over him but they also quote him out of context and employ video delays in his responses to make him apeear stumped so I think he's entitled to a little retribution. In saying that all he was doing was reinforcing his main assumption that religious slants on scientific education are unwelcome in the classroom.


  • Options
    #6
    magicbastarder
    Moderators, Category Moderators, Arts Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 48,482 CMod ✭✭✭✭magicbastarder


    stevejazzx wrote: »
    Creationsts not only talk over him but they also quote him out of context and employ video delays in his responses to make him apeear stumped so I think he's entitled to a little retribution.
    you're saying he should use the tactics he decries?


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #7
    MagicMarker
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 32,865 ✭✭✭✭MagicMarker


    I agree with magicbastarder, I would have liked to hear more of his conversations with the opposition, most notably that really obnoxious woman who argued about teaching children the ''bad science'' about evolution. Which is fair enough, but Dawkins pointed out that we don't teach the bad science about the earth being round!!

    I also found the Australian Evangelist completely ignorant. ''Show me evolution, if we can't see it it's not science''... what a moron, wouldn't even stick around to let Dawkins respond.


  • Options
    #8
    Handsome Bob
    Closed Accounts Posts: 22,905 ✭✭✭✭Handsome Bob


    stevejazzx wrote: »
    It was pretty good, I particulalrly liked the scene where Dawkins grills the PC sicentists on the timidity of their beliefs.

    Generic PC scieentist no. 1 "Well I believe it becasue I'm a scientist"

    Dawkins "No you believe it becasue the evidence supports it"

    They were right though, Dawkins seems to think that students will listen if you aggresively tell them for a want of a better phrase that they are ****ing idiots.


  • Options
    #9
    stevejazzx
    Registered Users Posts: 3,247 ✭✭✭stevejazzx


    magicbastarder wrote: »
    you're saying he should use the tactics he decries?

    But he doesn't use those tactics, he simply talked over a few people, not exactly right but hardly a big deal either. Nice to see you taking the high moral ground though.


  • Options
    #10
    stevejazzx
    Registered Users Posts: 3,247 ✭✭✭stevejazzx


    LZ5by5 wrote: »
    They were right though, Dawkins seems to think that students will listen if you aggresively tell them for a want of a better phrase that they are ****ing idiots.


    No this is not right, he has not done that but I do get where you're coming from. He can appear to be arrogant however this is not the case. He is far more liberal than that. The fact is that he is unwilling to compromise scientific ideas for fear of threading on the toes of people who like to get offended about things does not make him a 'bad' person. I think his point is that we have to start drawing a line in the sand and start calling things the way they are. I thought his line that 'our evidence is better than theirs becasue their evidence is not really there' hit the nail firmly on the head.


  • Options
    #11
    Handsome Bob
    Closed Accounts Posts: 22,905 ✭✭✭✭Handsome Bob


    stevejazzx wrote: »
    No this is not right, he has not done that but I do get where you're coming from. He can appear to be arrogant however this is not the case. He is far more liberal than that. The fact is that he is unwilling to compromise scientific ideas for fear of threading on the toes of people who like to get offended about things does not make him a 'bad' person. I think his point is that we have to start drawing a line in the sand and start calling things the way they are. I thought his line that 'our evidence is better than theirs becasue their evidence is not really there' hit the nail firmly on the head.

    Dawkins doesn't like the passive nature of how the teachers are presenting science to their students. You said it yourself, he's unwilling to compromise on how scientific ideas are expressed. I wonder how he would teach a class, and I would even be more interested in how many students he actually brings round to his way of thinking.

    I never said that Dawkins was a bad person for what he believes, just deeply misguided in how expects to bring people around to his way of thinking.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #12
    stevejazzx
    Registered Users Posts: 3,247 ✭✭✭stevejazzx


    LZ5by5 wrote: »
    Dawkins doesn't like the passive nature of how the teachers are presenting science to their students. You said it yourself, he's unwilling to compromise on how scientific ideas are expressed. I wonder how he would teach a class, and I would even be more interested in how many students he actually brings round to his way of thinking.

    I never said that Dawkins was a bad person for what he believes, just deeply misguided in how expects to bring people around to his way of thinking.


    Yeah I would go along with that bit alright.
    Only problem I have with the timid opinions of the teachers is that it creates a kind of soft envoioment where anything goes. Dawkins was trying to them tell that all this wobbling can only lead to mediocrity and confusion. I mean take creationits for example - how in the hell did they become a movement with so much indisputable evidence to the contrary?


  • Options
    #13
    Handsome Bob
    Closed Accounts Posts: 22,905 ✭✭✭✭Handsome Bob


    stevejazzx wrote: »
    Yeah I would go along with that bit alright.
    Only problem I have with the timid opinions of the teachers is that it creates a kind of soft envoioment where anything goes. Dawkins was trying to them tell that all this wobbling can only lead to mediocrity and confusion.

    I imagine that it's deeply frustrating and unfulfilling for a teacher where you are stuck in limbo. All one can do is present the facts to the best of his/her ability and hope they get through to some students.
    I mean take creationits for example - how in the hell did they become a movement with so much indisputable evidence to the contrary?

    Arguably the biggest interest group in America alongside evangelical christians, and I'm afraid to say that the biggest interest groups call the shots.


Advertisement