I think he aids the theist posit of associating 'good' with 'god,' and he ignores the many storytelling traditions which also assign such words as evil/jealous/vengeful/angry etc to god(s). — universeness
It really as something as simple as science or literature or music or philosophy. — lll
God, for him, was just a projection of the best parts of ourselves — lll
building Heaven on earth — lll
I've never heard of Tucker Carlson.
— Gregory A
— lll
No kidding? The dude is the, last I checked.
The Selfish Gene is an exciting/good book (you might like it, given your interest in chromosomes ), and I think he was already famous as a popularizer of evolutionary science and felt that rationality and science needed to be defended. Just as you may feel males need defending. If you read his book, you'll see why males and females automatically stay just about balanced. It's game-theoretical.
There are plenty of men on the left, plenty of women on the right. A war of the sexes sounds like a fortunately unrealistic nightmare. Some of us are married and/or have great friendships with women (or at least hope to at some point.)
I'm genuinely concerned that you might be troubled in some way. From my perspective, you are worried about something that's as unlikely as aliens attacking the planet. Please seek help if you are having violent fantasies. Seriously.
My metaphor is misleading, I see. The 'ghost' just refers to the popular idea of a solitary consciousness. One philosopher (Ryle) called this 'the ghost in the machine.' The far out version would be : how do you know that you are a singular person? Why are you an 'I' and not a 'we' or a 'this' ? We inherit ways of talking and thinking, and we take them as if they are more than that. — lll
a replacement of God by an awakened humanity who realizes that God was its dream of what it should/could be. — lll
Nice ! We using the ordinary 'magic' of language for that right now. Amazing ability we've evolved biologically, culturally, and technologically (given the help of the screens and wires.) — lll
The title 'The Selfish Gene' (although the book is genuine science I'm sure) is so atheistic as to put me off. If it's not obvious Dawkings is taking a shot at theism as he does with all titles of his books that I'm aware of. — Gregory A
You had to show me where he didn’t say what I said he said about Dark Energy, and actually said that it wasn’t a good argument for an omnipotent power, not what his poor philosophical mind says about God when equating God with religion and faith. The point I made was that even with his poor philosophical mind he still logically deduced that Dark Energy displays the characteristics of an omnipotent power. — Joe Mello
The Selfish Gene should have been called The Altruist Gene. — EugeneW
Let me use this forum to thank those little wokkels for their serviced they gave us already billions of years! Thank you wokkel genes! With proud we shuffle you on to next generations, to make your services available to new life! — EugeneW
which I did when getting a Philosophy degree and Graduate degree in Professional Writing. — Joe Mello
I far prefer the profound mystery of not knowing and really not needing to know the absolute truth regarding the source/origin of our Universe. I can live FULLY and HAPPILY without a 'god crutch' — universeness
notably the memory of the USSR and Maoist China, collective atheism ran the show — Dermot Griffin
God might be the same — Mike Radford
You think poorly, write poorly, and are simply a face in a crowd of others like you with very big mouths attached to very small minds — Joe Mello
No. I read the book and when he said that organisms are vessels to secure the procreation of genes (or memes) I just thought, why aren't genes just in our service instead of we in theirs? Altruistic, that is. — EugeneW
Well, I am almost certain that 'The altruistic gene' was one of the titles he thought might have been a better choice.
4m — universeness
in a materialist universe where there are no absolute standards or an absolute Lawgiver. — Dermot Griffin
Other religions carry truth and goodness but beauty is absent and by this I do not mean religions are not aesthetically pleasing. Buddhist prayers are beautiful as well as the Islamic call to prayer and Jewish temple services. When I say they lack beauty I mean that they lack it as a property of reality, of being. — Dermot Griffin
The cover wouldn't match the content then — EugeneW
Keep the faith man! Dawkins would have found a way! — universeness
If there were no structure to the “materialist universe,” whatever that’s supposed to mean, nothing would be possible and there could only be chaos (though chaos would have no meaning). — praxis
I don't think so. He obediently sticks to the dogma... — EugeneW
Get involved in philosophical discussions about knowledge, truth, language, consciousness, science, politics, religion, logic and mathematics, art, history, and lots more. No ads, no clutter, and very little agreement — just fascinating conversations.