1. Interview with Richard Dawkins about 'The Enemies of Reason'

Comment #63730 by opposablethumbs on August 15, 2007 at 2:56 pm

Well what do you know. Somebody actually thought teh TV womenz was an inadvertent typo! Thanks for raising a smile, I suppose.

2. Interview with Richard Dawkins about 'The Enemies of Reason'

Comment #63722 by opposablethumbs on August 15, 2007 at 2:22 pm

Fortunately tedious throwbacks like this usano are relatively far and few between on this site - unlike him, most posters have something relevant and interesting to say!

3. The Gullible Age: Review of 'The Enemies of Reason'

Comment #63222 by opposablethumbs on August 13, 2007 at 2:44 pm

Just watched the first half of the two-parter, which was great! Thoroughly enjoyable - Richard is unfailingly polite despite terminal in(s)anity on the part of many of those he spoke with - though of course it was depressing at the same time ...... To my eternal regret, we failed to tape it - does anybody know if it will be made available on DVD? I'd like to get this for future re-watching with the zoics (zoics #1 and #2 also loved watching it), and wouldn't mind giving a copy to some friends as well.

4. Is Your Baby Gay? What If You Could Know? What If You Could Do Something About It?

Comment #26529 by opposablethumbs on March 20, 2007 at 6:11 am

zoic*1, aged 3 (to gay friends with whom we had dinner, as we were saying goodnight at the door): "now you kiss and go to bed" (well if it was bed-time for 3-year-old and parents, it must be bed-time for everybody, right?).

It's nice that nobody is born homophobic. It's a tragedy that so many learn to become so.

5. 'They Tried To Teach My Baby Science'

Comment #26526 by opposablethumbs on March 20, 2007 at 5:57 am

re 5. Venator. It's not so much that the gullible are caught out, though of course that happens and I'm sure I would be no more immune than the next person - it's more that it's practically impossible to parody fundamentalism. You think you've come up with something so insane that nobody on earth could possibly proclaim it for real, only to discover that somewhere out there there are real fundamentalists who sincerely believe something very similar to (or even more extreme than) your furthest-fetched flights of fancy.

6. When the ain'ts go marching in

Comment #25271 by opposablethumbs on March 11, 2007 at 2:28 pm

My siblings and I organised the funerals of both our parents within a couple of years of each other (a few years ago now), and it never occurred to us to do anything but choose some favourite music, speak ourselves and invite a couple of their respective friends to speak in celebration of their lives. Both scientists and lifelong atheists, it just so happens that one of my mother's close friends is a rev.; we invited him to be one of the speakers, and he gave a very moving, funny eulogy with no mention of religion whatsoever - now there's true affection and respect, both for her and for the family. I have never understood how a more-or-less standardised service delivered by someone who may barely have known the deceased could hold any comfort for anyone.
opposablethumbs

7. If God is talking to you, too, Mr Cameron - don't listen

Comment #23502 by opposablethumbs on March 1, 2007 at 6:16 am

Re 20. Comment #23498 by Luthien on March 1, 2007 at 5:41 am:

"I sent him an email ang got the following response:

"I expected to be attcked by the religious community for my article but actually most of the criticism has come from those who like you are alarmed that during the course of the article I "copped out" over teaching etc. I accept that I did that and thanks for taking me to task." "


ok, now I may have to admit to a bit of respect for Portillo after all!

8. If God is talking to you, too, Mr Cameron - don't listen

Comment #23495 by opposablethumbs on March 1, 2007 at 5:08 am

Reading the first part of this article, I thought I was going to have to reverse the custom of years and actually find something of significance (notwithstanding his intelligence) to respect and admire in Portillo; but then came


"I do not regard myself as a militant secularist. For example, I see no need (as the government does) to drive Catholic adoption agencies out of business because they will not place children with same-sex couples. I recognise that teaching religious belief may be a good way, perhaps the best way, to impart a sense of right and wrong to children and it is fundamental to our society's survival that most people should distinguish good from bad.
Many fine things are done by people because of their faith. As an MP I saw a number of examples. And as we mark the 200th anniversary of the abolition of the slave trade we are reminded that William Wilberforce, who brought it about, was a man driven by religious conviction who eschewed political ambition."


- and I was reminded of why I found him repellent in the first place. Never mind consistency (others have pointed out the contradiction!) and never mind mere facts (again, others have pointed out that this is not the most accurate depiction of Wilberforce, who was in any case an important figurehead but hardly responsible for "bringing about" abolition single-handed); it would never do to offend the Conservatively-inclined, of whom you have a reasonable expectation that they just might do you some good.

You can take the man out of politics, but you can't take the politician ....

9. In praise of Darwin this Sunday ... in hundreds of churches!

Comment #21958 by opposablethumbs on February 12, 2007 at 1:41 am

rofl. Oh - you mean Ham and Looy weren't actually trying to be funny?

10. My critics are wrong to call me dogmatic

Comment #21957 by opposablethumbs on February 12, 2007 at 1:36 am

Oh dear .... before having the temerity to utter a word about their speciousness, one must clearly get (yet again) degrees in fairyology, unicornology, hobgoblinology etc.(as opposed to actual disciplines such as psychology, neuroscience, moral philosophy, social anthropology ....). "lunatic fundamentalist"? That would be the beam in your own eye obscuring your vision, I'm afraid. "THE Truth" is the province of fundamentalism; one of the defining characteristics of reason is that it is always ready to look at genuine new evidence.

11. The Only One in Step

Comment #21866 by opposablethumbs on February 11, 2007 at 9:19 am

Get thee behind me, reason! Now if I could just set that to music .... I'm sure with a couple of thousand years of "persuasion" it would catch on. Oh, bother - it's already been done.

12. The questions science cannot answer

Comment #21860 by opposablethumbs on February 11, 2007 at 8:57 am

... not forgetting that tiny and inconvenient detail which has been mentioned many times before: even if religion were, hypothetically speaking, "useful to society as a whole" that is not in any way proof that its tenets are actually true.

13. The Only One in Step

Comment #21789 by opposablethumbs on February 11, 2007 at 5:29 am

I find Hoddlwood's experience tremendously inspiring. But you know atheists, with that pernickety thing about evidence and reason ... now if only there actually were some hard evidence susceptible of independent confirmation, atheists would all be hoist by their own petard! (And nobody has even asked yet for an exact metric measurement - with photographs or some other comparable record of course - of the size of the angels and the size of the head of the pin ...)

14. Tolerating intolerance is still this country's besetting sin

Comment #20705 by opposablethumbs on February 6, 2007 at 4:02 am

As a number of people have pointed out, education is key - which is why this looks interesting:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/scotland/6330631.stm (Clackmannanshire introduced age-appropriate philosophy lessons in their primary schools some six years ago, for children from age 4 upwards, and is now extending this into secondary schools)

If children are encouraged to think critically, especially from an early age - well before anybody fools them into believing that it's somehow "too difficult"! - and to question how and why we know what we know, they will be much better equipped to deal with fairytale-mongers of all kinds. The national curriculum should include philosophy, ethics and discussion of issues of morality instead of R(idiculous)E(ducation).

opposablethumbs

15. Intelligent design to feature in school RE lessons

Comment #19253 by opposablethumbs on January 26, 2007 at 12:29 am

Recommended reading for - well, anyone really, from last-few-years-of-primary-school age upwards: Stephen Law's "The Philosophy Files", "The Philosophy Files II" and "The Philosophy Gym". Just reading and discussing these would make a pretty good start to the classes I wish I could see replacing RE in the UK curriculum. They are a lot of fun, kids really enjoy them and they stimulate the little grey cells .... what an idea, a school lesson devoted to logic and critical thinking, rather than rote-learning what are supposed to be the similarities and differences between different versions of a fairytale.

opposablethumbs

16. Intelligent design is a science, not a faith

Comment #17271 by opposablethumbs on January 12, 2007 at 2:43 pm

I very much love the comment made by wundergeist -

32. Comment #16983 by wundergeist on January 10, 2007 at 12:44 am -

especially with regard to the powerful medicine of humour. I have taken the liberty of showing it to some friends on an atheist-friendly discussion site who I believe will appreciate it; if this is not acceptable behaviour, please let me know and I will certainly not repeat.

many thanks,
opposablethumbs

17. Halting progress

Comment #17062 by opposablethumbs on January 10, 2007 at 2:38 pm

Attempt to enshrine homophobic bigotry in law defeated by 199 votes to 68. Mine's a pink champagne, thanks! But how lamentable the attempt to justify prejudice. Lawyers' Christian Fellowship - isn't there an oxymoron in there somewhere?