101. Town moves against Islamic school

Comment #184853 by Corylus on May 26, 2008 at 9:48 am

Esuther

Why, for example, is this Muslim community building a school so far away from Sydney, where all the students live?

Good question. I have been wondering that myself. I can only presume that the land is cheaper.

However, to be willing put children through an hour journey to and from school seems to indicate that child welfare is not the school planner's first concern.

102. Animal Science Without Evolution

Comment #184757 by Corylus on May 26, 2008 at 5:55 am

Well, I have been having an informative time reading the effusive Amazon reviews of Jeannie Fulbright's work (one way of immersing yourself in and understanding another mindset).

One particularly telling comment was found in a positive review on her Exploring Creation with Astronomy*

I've spent my life avoiding science, but this Apologia book brings the Creator right into the study and leads you to worship as you learn so that I've discovered that science is about HIM!

These are books that can be purchased without feeling any sense of fear about what they may contain.

No wonder they sell.
----
*Not just biology this woman is messing with, she's obviously quite the polymath.

103. Repulsive but right

Comment #184751 by Corylus on May 26, 2008 at 5:36 am

Fairy nuff, Quetz, mustn't forget the principle of charity.

Anyway, glad to hear Hitchens has given up the cigarettes. Not just because of the image problems, but for his health too.

104. Repulsive but right

Comment #184742 by Corylus on May 26, 2008 at 5:12 am

"Repulsive but right" or "repulsive because he's right?"

It's a very thin line.

The first statement can be a starting point for discussion concerning techniques of debate and manners of expression.

The second, however, is a battle nobody can win. It is merely anti-intellectualism given form.

I am often not sure which point is being made in articles like this.

105. The Faith of Flanders

Comment #184466 by Corylus on May 25, 2008 at 11:53 am

I'm glad you put your comment back up Alan Canon.

Happy Towel Day to you too.

106. Losing Our Spines to Save Our Necks

Comment #184070 by Corylus on May 23, 2008 at 2:12 pm

Ah yes Quetz off to play on your blog now.

107. Losing Our Spines to Save Our Necks

Comment #184064 by Corylus on May 23, 2008 at 2:04 pm

Quetz

Arh. Dis cute!!

However, your spelling is too gud.

Tis 'fites' not 'fights'... srsly :P

108. Losing Our Spines to Save Our Necks

Comment #184054 by Corylus on May 23, 2008 at 1:54 pm

Wasn't going to get sucked into this one, but, I just have to say that Wiki is fine. I have not found a serious error yet. What you do sometimes find is a lack of detail. However, these articles are generally self-defined as 'stubs' - which is fair enough.

I have absolutely no problem with people citing it. In fact, I have noticed when people say 'aha but it is only Wiki' they are often only appealing to intellectual snobbery. The issue is not that people cite wiki; it is when they cite only wiki that you start to wonder.

Something that I have noticed the most people on here (very much including Al here), simply do not do.

Oh crap! Wanders off to shot self yet again for sitting on fence.

What can I rail against?? I know Conservapedia ... I look at that when I am feeling sluggish and need to reignite some fire in my belly. Uncyclopedia? Hehe; that's just funny.

Errors with grammar and punctuation? Blah. Never play that card. I make too many errors with both to do so.

109. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #183172 by Corylus on May 21, 2008 at 1:36 pm

Well Calvaryguy I am not really concerned about who you are personally acquainted with.

However do, please, elucidate about what 'necessary research' was done.

Tell you what. Why not give us a particular point that you agreed with so that we can discuss it?

110. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #182312 by Corylus on May 19, 2008 at 4:37 pm

You are a bad man Goldy, but I spend enough of my pennies on my car.

Which I always drive with either my glasses on or lenses in (hmph these also cost me...)

Oh no, what's that big bird like shadow hanging over me!! *hides*

----

Ternatornis - only playing sweetie :-)

111. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #182306 by Corylus on May 19, 2008 at 4:16 pm

Goldy

I've also got a bit of astigmatism as well,on top of the myopia.

Heh - hindsight, foresight - it's all stuffed.

Honestly glad no bike :-)

112. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #182295 by Corylus on May 19, 2008 at 3:43 pm

Oh rats Dr. B. Get well soon.

(Tried to leave a message on your blog, but it's not playng for some reason - probably my dreadful connection)

Re motorcycles, I once had a desire for one in my teens which caused parental panic like you wouldn't believe. With hindsight, I'm glad they stopped me.

Incidently, why not send your husband off for a thorough eye test? Might distract him long enought to rethink, and if not, at least you know he is seeing ok to ride the thing.

I spent a lot of my adolescence with undiagnosed myopia, I guess I just assumed everyone else lived in a blur (you don't notice when it comes on gradually) yet another good reason for no bike...

113. These dim-wits believe in anything but God

Comment #181825 by Corylus on May 18, 2008 at 10:23 am

Quetz

What makes everyone so sure that it's the same David Robertson as he who frequents this site?

You're right Quetz, we shouldn't just assume and it is a common name.

Reading though the comments on the Telegraph site, I just to say, well!

There are (at present) three comments by a David Robertson on there.

One sounds a lot like him (calling atheists vehement and vitriolic). Another one sounds a bit like him (but more political than normal; libertarian argument), but the third one really strays into 'green ink' city (excess capitalization, lots of scripture and an anti-evolution rant).

I might be that there is more than one David Robertson on there, and our DR is not responsible for all of the comments, or it might simply be that none of them are him. (Unlikely, but I cannot in all fairness discount the possibility).

HoHum, maybe he will be on later to clarify.

114. These dim-wits believe in anything but God

Comment #181728 by Corylus on May 18, 2008 at 4:43 am

MMurray

It's the UK so there isn't any separation of church and state.

Yeah, I know, I live there.

My point, which I should have expanded on, was that these people simply do not understand what it is that is being asked for by secularists. Or maybe they do understand and simply decide to misrepresent it...

---

Oh my, why am I not surprised the David Robertson reads the Telegraph :D

115. These dim-wits believe in anything but God

Comment #181460 by Corylus on May 17, 2008 at 8:55 am

Sigh.

This is about children being able to opt out of collective worship, not only education.

See the press release from the National Secular Society on this subject.

http://www.secularism.org.uk/legalactionthreatenedoverreligio.html

I can't be bothered to examine what a bunch of dim-witted MPs can possibly mean in this context by under-16s "of sufficient maturity, intelligence and understanding".

Can't be bothered to read a recommendation from the Joint Committee on Human Rights have to say??!

What a dreadful indictment upon not only his journalistic skills, but his morals. Doesn't say a great deal for his understanding of the separation of church and state either. Or, for that matter, his respect for officials elected by the people.

116. Pelosi, Reid shunning Ten Commandments?

Comment #181361 by Corylus on May 17, 2008 at 3:24 am

I agree that it is noticeable that these good Christians never seem to remember their own injunctions, heh, maybe they should use mnemonics more.

I good one I saw recently....

One idle damn Sunday, Dad killed cheating thief and lied to cover it.

This breaks down to....
One god, no idols, don't swear, keep the Sabbath, honour your father (and mother), don't kill, don't commit adultery, don't steal, don't bear false witness, don't covert.

Their brains do appear to need all the help they can get.

Maybe, I am being unjust here though. It is a possibility, albeit a frightening one, that some of these people might just have been reading their Barthes. (Methinks not Lynn Westmoreland though!)

Possibly the idea is for people to constantly see the ten commandments in a civic place and to thus make no distinction between the signifier (the plaque with writing on it) and the signified (the state).

When people stop making these distinctions the manipulation is complete.

117. Group finds Starbucks logo too hot to handle

Comment #180904 by Corylus on May 16, 2008 at 4:00 am

Hmm.

So we have someone setting up a group called 'The Resistance' and then going up against a huge company...I'm smelling a martyr complex here.

"Infamy, infamy.... they've all got it in for me."

118. The Dissent Of Darwin - The World Of Richard Dawkins

Comment #180723 by Corylus on May 15, 2008 at 3:58 pm

Cartomancer

Are we going to have to have a violent schism now and start killing each other?

Nah, darling.

Well, not unless you want to start talking about dualism, in which case I might just have to kill you dead.

I have had a nice dinner followed by some port and I simply can't manage such discussions after a certain hour.

I fear I'm a lightweight :-)

119. The Dissent Of Darwin - The World Of Richard Dawkins

Comment #180711 by Corylus on May 15, 2008 at 3:31 pm

Comment, no 180678 by Cartomancer

*Sniggers* :-)

----

There you go Dodger, dissent on a fundamentalist atheist message board.

I will leave it up to you to decide what to call out in the middle of the night, and in whose hearing.

120. The Dissent Of Darwin - The World Of Richard Dawkins

Comment #180667 by Corylus on May 15, 2008 at 1:35 pm

Best of luck Artful.

BTW - I reserve the right to dislike you intensely if you understand the articles straight away.

With philosophical works I like to...


1) First, read with no hope of understanding and then...
2) Have a sleep.
3) Second, read with a hope of understanding a little and then...
4) Have a swim.
5) Third, read with concentration and optimism and then...
6) Have a nice bath.
7) Fourth, read a dissenting view and then...
8) Have another sleep.

When I am very, very lucky I find that my subconscious has worked and I sit up in bed in the middle of the night calling out "Well, bugger me!!"*

If I am not lucky, well... *shrugs* at least I am clean and my complexion glows.

Take your time.

----

*Best to only do this when you are on your own.

121. The Neural Buddhists

Comment #180642 by Corylus on May 15, 2008 at 12:42 pm

I personally will read Richard Morgan's conversion story with interest when he posts it for all to see.

He need not be afraid that I will subject it to kneejerk ridicule - this is not my style - although I do reserve the right to tease a little :-)

However, I'm afraid to say that this statement

(I have re-opened PM access so if you do want to have further details, you can PM me.)

Smacks to me of the 'Why not come to our Church and see for yourself, no pressure, honest." line.

I am, no doubt, an overly cynical individual, but my caution concerning getting into private correspondence with people that I do not have a complete handle on has served me well.

P.S, BTW RichardM you need not have any concern for me. I am not one of the posters on here about which you so tantalising stated...

And for those, who, behind intellectual brilliance hide a profound emotional anguish, especially.....*

I am neither brilliant nor anguished. As I am sure you are glad to hear.

---
*See below for full quote.
http://richarddawkins.net/articleComments,2488,Open-Letter-to-a-victim-of-Ben-Steins-lying-propaganda,Richard-Dawkins,page36#173048

122. The Dissent Of Darwin - The World Of Richard Dawkins

Comment #180627 by Corylus on May 15, 2008 at 12:13 pm

When I'm asked questions like yours about testicles, the best strategy may be to refuse to answer. Because if you allow yourself to exercise your ingenuity in solving a particular question, then people come up with another one that you just can't think of an answer to.

*Wonders to self just how many questions about testicles I would have to get asked in a public debate, before I could get that blase; or not collapse into giggles.*

HeeHee - guess I'm just a prude.

-----

Artful_Dodger Why not check out the site below if you are into the philosophy of mind? Lots of interesting articles with differing viewpoints on there.

http://themindi.blogspot.com/

I do think that the story of the unfortunate dualist is very sweet :-)

http://themindi.blogspot.com/2007/02/chapter-23-unfortunate-dualist.html

123. Vatican: It's OK to believe in aliens

Comment #179960 by Corylus on May 14, 2008 at 3:17 am

Praise Quetz!!

124. Vatican: It's OK to believe in aliens

Comment #179948 by Corylus on May 14, 2008 at 2:59 am

Hmmph - can get this embedding picture thing to work. Bah.

Top one on today's page...

http://icanhascheezburger.com/

125. 'My daughter deserved to die for falling in love'

Comment #179070 by Corylus on May 12, 2008 at 1:30 pm

'They are men and know what honour is,' he said.

Interesting. I have noticed how the term 'honour' can sometimes be used as a smokescreen for sexual jealousy.

I find myself wondering what thoughts this murderous low-life had in the dark of the night concerning his daughter.

Children are not property, in any sense of the term.

126. Church of Scotland mediators to quell disputes

Comment #178313 by Corylus on May 11, 2008 at 7:09 am

I wonder if these mediators are working for free? Doubt it.

That being the case, those troublesome parishoners are (when putting money into the collection plate or tithing) contributing to the payment of someone being sent to stop them agitating.

Strange when you think about it.

If I were in this position I would simply leave the institution in question. If god is omnipresent - what need for a church? This leads me to the conclusion that this is more likely to be about petty scraps than doctrine.

---
BW022

The first rule of getting someone to overlook your own failings is to blame someone else.

Very good point.

127. Scientists Know Better Than You--Even When They're Wrong

Comment #177939 by Corylus on May 10, 2008 at 2:49 am

Spinoza

They're criticisms and they may be justified or not, but they ought to be dealt with rationally and calmly...

Okay, dude, I'll give it a bash. :)
-----
Setting aside the question of 'lay' contributions for a second (those discussion tend to get emotional with accusations of intellectual snobbery flying around), let's look at whether this article works on its own terms. I don't think it does for one simple reason.

There is a danger here that the author does not seem to have considered (maybe because he has shut himself up into a very specific area of physics), that his dichotomy between 'lay' and 'expert' is not just applicable to scientists and non scientists, but also between scientists of different fields.

How do you distinguish the people who can and can't contribute to a specialized field?
The key to the whole thing is whether people have had access to the tacit knowledge of an esoteric area;tacit knowledge is know-how that you can't express in words. The standard example is knowing how to ride a bike. My view as a sociologist is that expertise is located in more or less specialized social groups. If you want to know what counts as secure knowledge in a field like gravitational wave detection, you have to become part of the social group. Being immersed in the discourse of the specialists is the only way to keep up with what is at the cutting edge.

Well, I can understand Collins' admiration for people with specialized knowledge and can see why specialisation is necessary. If you look at the history of science over the last 200 hundred years what you see is the increasing and astonishing amount of specialisation. This is understandable, no one can learn everything; this concentration on one specific thing can be hugely productive.

However, and this is a huge 'however', by this statement he appears to rule out the possibility of cross-disciplinary dialogue and knowledge sharing. If one professional tells another that their particular pet theory will not work because of evidence from other fields are they to be dismissed merely because they cannot 'walk the talk'?

People need to be able share knowledge without being forced into written tests. That is the way they can work towards coming up with ideas that work in both fields. The question is not whether they can bullshit their way through a test. The question is whether or not they are right.

What you have to do is not sort out the people who are right and wrong; what you have to sort is the people who can make sensible contributions from those who can't.

Umm... Isn't being right making a sensible contribution? By definition?

Too narrow.

128. My Response to Rabbi Shmuley Boteach

Comment #177715 by Corylus on May 9, 2008 at 2:29 pm

Fascinating. I have been catching up on this business by reading the linked documents and watching the Youtube videos of Rabbi Shlmuley. Oh dear.

Good letter, Ian. I liked the honest tone. I agree with you that playing fast and loose with the age of the universe for rhetorical effect was a particularly low trick.

129. Churchgoing on its knees as Christianity falls out of favour

Comment #177411 by Corylus on May 9, 2008 at 3:41 am

Increasing numbers of Muslim youth, while young people are leaving Christianity in droves? Hmm. It might be that some of the variance in the figures is down to the apostasy taboo, and the threats that can result for people who leave this religion. I am sure that there are many people who simply trapped and too frightened to leave.

This is why the West has a moral duty to support the brave people in the Central Council of Ex-Muslims.

Grayling on this organisation:

http://commentisfree.guardian.co.uk/ac_grayling/2007/06/the_courage_of_their_convictions.html

Their website:

http://www.ex-muslim.org.uk/

The majority of Muslims probably do want to stay in the religion, however, we mustn't forget to fight for the rights of those that want to leave.

----
Anyways, I was absolutely intrigued as to why churches were moaning about their water bills...

Hundreds of churches are protesting at soaring water bills, with some parishes facing increases of up to 1,300 per cent. Senior churchmen from the Church of England, Methodist and other churches are meeting officials from Ofwat, the industry regulator, to argue their case against the charges today.

Huh? I thought, it's a while since I went to a church service, but I don't recall seeing a dishwasher on the go, or the vicar's smalls hanging on a line from the steeple...

So I did a bit of research

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/tees/7386647.stm

It appears that they are protesting at the thought of being charged the same as everyone else.

130. Faith in Britain today

Comment #177122 by Corylus on May 8, 2008 at 3:40 pm

Amoungst all the waffle were slipped both a frightening statement and a deeply demeaning one.

First the frightening one...

Only a modern person would think that religion is a private matter, something the individual does in his or her solitude, but the tradition of Catholicism is that Christianity is profoundly social. How can it be otherwise if the first commandment to love God is inseparable from the second commandment to love our neighbour? True Christianity always becomes culture.

This is someone with absolutely no understanding of the separation of church and state. These people scare me.

(Any lurking christian here that does not understand why I'm worried - try swapping the word 'Christianity' for 'Islam' to see why. This argument could be used for imposing sharia).

Now the demeaning one...

But where does this sense of 'missing' God come from? ..... our hearts are always restless until they rest in God: before that point, we are missing something, or rather, we are missing someone, the one whose love pulses the blood through our veins.

The BBC translate this as 'respect atheists. Urgh. I am shocked and disappointed that they do not recognise denigration and dehumanisation when they hear it.

As for the use of the Coupland quote...

...I need God; that I am sick and can no longer make it alone. I need God to help me give because I no longer seem to be capable of giving; to help me to be kind, as I no longer seem capable of kindness, to help me love, as I seem beyond being able to love".

Strange. I can honestly say that I have never needed god to make me capable of giving, I have never needed god to help me to be kind and I have certainly never needed god to make me capable of loving. I fail to see what it is that I am 'missing'. I wonder, what precisely is it that I lack?

What a dreadful world the archbishop must live in to think that god is the source of all love.

How dare he.

131. An Atheist Goes Undercover to Join the Flock of Mad Pastor John Hagee

Comment #176562 by Corylus on May 7, 2008 at 3:27 pm

I feared for my normal.

Sign of sanity that.

Mr Taibbi, if you are reading this, remember to take some time out for yourself after this experience.

Your normal life can feel both real (in that it is familiar) and also unreal in that you know that there is a harsher reality elsewhere.

P.S. Loved the clown story :)

132. The detail in the Devil

Comment #176236 by Corylus on May 7, 2008 at 1:23 am

And it happens to good people, Bradshaw theorizes, noting that targets tend toward the innocent, highly virtuous and unusually gifted.

It's true that often the darkest amongst us can often be found in bright daylight. Doesn't mean they are possessed though - just practiced deceivers.

... asking if people could be that inhumane to each other independently of ultra-human assistance, or if a kind of demonic possession was involved...

It is hard to believe what some people are capable of, and you can invent daemons to take away your sense of disillusionment with humanity.

However, this is a very dangerous thing to do because this explanation shifts the blame away from where it should truly lie. Also, post exorcism, the individual concerned is given another chance to re-offend.

133. A New Jack Chick Tract: Moving On Up!

Comment #175164 by Corylus on May 4, 2008 at 5:30 pm

PBUM

A minor thing, but something that niggles me as much as your latin name (bringing out the latin is something you unfortunately share with some of my fellow atheists. They seem to turn into freshers when it comes to wannabe pretentious use of latin alternatives.)

Arh come on... tis just natural honesty on my part.

I like to use my real name, but I also like to get people to work to know it...

;-)

134. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #174817 by Corylus on May 3, 2008 at 3:29 pm

Thank you Quine, I'm calming down now.

135. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #174773 by Corylus on May 3, 2008 at 12:48 pm

exp(2*i*pi)=1

The reason I'm here is that I saw Ben Stein yesterday on Glenn Beck's program on CNN's Headline news.

Thank you so much for flagging this interview, I tracked it down, and I think others on here would be interested in viewing it.

I starts off with some dreadful individual saying to Ben Stein 'You are like the smartest man I know'. It then goes downhill...

http://edition.cnn.com/video/#/video/bestoftv/2008/04/29/gb.stein.economy.cnn

Warning: It's bad. It's very bad - but worth perservering with just for the marvellous Freudian slip at the end.

Don't worry, exp(2*i*pi)=1I won't ask you to watch it twice :-) Interestingly, Stein does not mention RD.net in this interview - maybe it's been cut..

P.S. Great first post by the way.

[Edit: I see that the video I found was just the trailer for this extravaganza! (Bangs head on wall) - did anyone see the full version?]

136. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #174645 by Corylus on May 3, 2008 at 3:47 am

You're getting it now Brian!

137. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #174640 by Corylus on May 3, 2008 at 3:38 am

Rian

I thought mastication was a sin? :-)

I understand it is ok if you penitently floss afterwards.

138. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #174636 by Corylus on May 3, 2008 at 3:36 am

Yep Brian, muscardinus avellanarius is a blast at parties.

You do need to keep us away from the nut liqueur though, or we get over confident and pick fights with the biggest ferret in the room ;)

139. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #174632 by Corylus on May 3, 2008 at 3:26 am

Oh for pity's sake! Is that what we are reduced to now? The argument from dentistry??

Kardashovel, if you are still reading this, do please come back and chat, we need smart Christians to talk to.

N.B. Hope you weren't offended by my frivolous treatment of your thought experiment; I get playful at times.

However, there was an element of seriousness in there, in that my solution (obviously howlingly wrong!) seemed (prima facie?) to be more parsimonious than yours.

Anyway, what did you think of the videos that Quine and Frankus linked?

140. Was the new finger a 'natural' miracle?

Comment #174525 by Corylus on May 2, 2008 at 2:57 pm

Robotaholic

You're a good looking guy - one picture at a time is fine :-)

141. Jesus Camp: A scary movie that should frighten us all

Comment #174502 by Corylus on May 2, 2008 at 2:08 pm

For people with access to UK TV, an edited version of this will be shown on Channel 4 at 11pm on Tuesday 6th May.

142. Was the new finger a 'natural' miracle?

Comment #174469 by Corylus on May 2, 2008 at 1:22 pm

Actually, I 'm quite glad to see Bizarro back. While he is here he is talking. Ok, generally being priggish and snide, but talking nonetheless.

He is not stupid and it breaks my heart to think of his promising mind in the intellectual prison that is Liberty University.

I'm not ready to give up yet.

------

Bizarro What are your views on god healing amputees? Is he unable? Or able but unwilling?

143. Muslim Rebel Sisters: At Odds With Islam and Each Other

Comment #174399 by Corylus on May 2, 2008 at 11:29 am

Her first book, a collection of essays, was entitled "The Caged Virgin: An Emancipation Proclamation for Women and Islam

This book actually has an interview with Irshad Manji in one of the chapters. Overall, It is an interesting (if harrowing at times) read.

(N.B. The subtitle is "A Muslim Woman's Cry for Reason" in the UK edition)

144. How to reconcile Richard Dawkins?

Comment #174299 by Corylus on May 2, 2008 at 3:23 am

Fides

Where's Steve?

Taking a break - exhaused by dealing with the concentrated ignorance of the creationist and ID trolls brought here via the Expelled site.

Can't say I blame him. Have to say, I did wonder where our theistic posters were when this was going on. Some comments from them to the creationists might have filtered through and encouraged them to read some books.

Help of this nature would have been much appreciated. It would also have been a wonderful opportunity for you to demonstrate that faith and reason are compatable. Oh well, I am sure you will participate next time we get some loons on here.

I wonder if it would be possible for the Prof to revise future prints of his book to make them more representative of his views, now that he's had the opportunity to be more informed about the issues covered in them.

I am going to give you the benefit of the doubt, and assume that this comment was a genuine point, rather than a snide dig.

The new preface to the God Delusion is read by RD on the link below.

http://richarddawkins.net/article,1305,The-new-preface-to-The-God-Delusion-paperback-and-QampA,Richard-Dawkins

145. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #174088 by Corylus on May 1, 2008 at 3:20 pm

Alien64,

Thank you for your comment.

It is however, somewhat general. It would help if you could quote the statements you take objection to, with the name of the person making them.

That way the individuals responsible can address you directly, and either apologise or defend their position.

Generalised comments tend to lead to people mistakenly taking things personally.

---
Instructions on how to quote comments and highlight names in bold (so people do not miss comments addressed to them) can be found when you click on 'Comment Posting Guidelines' which is just above the box in which you type your post.

146. Bill Good Interviews Richard Dawkins

Comment #174086 by Corylus on May 1, 2008 at 3:11 pm

Heh, very well, Henri we'll drop it.

It is not as if we are not going to agree anytime soon.

I just couldn't resist playing for a second.

147. Bill Good Interviews Richard Dawkins

Comment #174031 by Corylus on May 1, 2008 at 12:55 pm

Henri

Having said that though, 'the Golden Rule' ("treat others as you would like to be treated") is, despite Dawkins' claim, not a logical proposition (i.e. not true empirically or analytically).

Another person could say, "treat others as you wish" ('the Iron Rule'), and you could not, through reason, contradict him/show him to be logically wrong.

Actually, I have problems with the Golden Rule too: for the simple reason that it is somewhat egocentric.

Far better is ("treat others as they would like to be treated").

Whilst not true empirically or analytically either, you can argue that it has a certain utility in that it prevents dreadful confusion for individuals into S&M.

148. Bill Good Interviews Richard Dawkins

Comment #173274 by Corylus on April 30, 2008 at 3:04 pm

ZZyx1170

I placed an mp3 of this without advertisements on RapidShare

Thank you, appreciate it.

149. Pat Condell: Anthology DVD available now!

Comment #172756 by Corylus on April 30, 2008 at 3:46 am

Not my style of humour, I have to admit, I go for silliness more than anything else.

However, I do note from the interview with Pat below (linked on his website), that this is a non-profit thing for the benefit of RDFRS, so I will say nothing further.

http://www.freethinker.co.uk/2008/02/27/laughing-religion-off-the-planet-an-interview-with-pat-condell/

I was also pleased to see Pat recommending that people in the UK join the National Secular Society and/or the British Humanist Society.

150. Is religion a threat to rationality and science?

Comment #172558 by Corylus on April 29, 2008 at 6:11 pm

Note to self:

Do not piss off Calilasseaia.