US Indymedia Global Indymedia Publish About us
Printed from Boston IMC : http://boston.indymedia.org/
Boston.Indymedia
IVAW Winter Soldier

Winter Soldier
Testimonies
Brad Presente

Other Local News

Spare Change News
Open Media Boston
Somerville Voices
Cradle of Liberty
The Sword and Shield

Local Radio Shows

WMBR 88.1 FM
What's Left
WEDS at 8:00 pm
Local Edition
FRI (alt) at 5:30 pm

WMFO 91.5 FM
Socialist Alternative
SUN 11:00 am

WZBC 90.3 FM
Sounds of Dissent
SAT at 11:00 am
Truth and Justice Radio
SUN at 6:00 am

Create account Log in
Comment on this article | View comments | Email this article | Printer-friendly version
News ::
Richard Dawkins: The Science of Religion (english)
19 Nov 2003
Modified: 20 Nov 2003
52:45min. Richard Dawkins is an evolutionary biologist who teaches at Oxford University. He is famous for advancing the concept of the"selfish gene" but also for arguing against religion and for a humanistic ethics. Steven Pinker comments briefly at the end. This is the first of 2 lectures, the second is entitled: The Religion of Science. Rec. Nov. 19, 2003 at Harvard U, Cambridge MA.
See also:
nouturn.org
Add a quick comment
Title
Your name Your email

Comment

Text Format
Anti-spam Enter the following number into the box:
To add more detailed comments, or to upload files, see the full comment form.

Comments

there are other evolutionary theories (english)
20 Nov 2003
stephen dawkins has the dubious distinction of having written the only book i've ever bought and thrown away in complete disgust.
Other evolutionary theories may be more useful to revolutionaries and more palatable to those with a social conscience.
And before anyone waves the 'truth' card: scientific theories are products of a social environment too. this is a product of the eighties.

If you don't know the work of any other evolutionary biologists, either don't read/listen to this... or -better- do so, and then find some different opinions.
the Revolutionary is always right! (english)
20 Nov 2003
Disgust as a reaction to a science book is likely the result of an ideological clash or a matter of taste. In these two lectures Dawkins disects the poor standing of religious reasoning and offers some evolutionary considerations why the phenomenon of religiosity is persisting despite being objectively false and totally unsupported by facts.
The second lecture (just uploaded) asks whether science is not itself a variant of religion, a notion Dawkins refutes by pointing to the very different standards by which scientists arrive at their findings, and re-evaluate them in light of new evidence. That science plays itself out in a societally biased context is known to Dawkins but not his subject here.

I personally think the view of the Anonymous who commented that there are evolutionary theories s/he liked better than Dawkins' because they are "more useful to revolutionaries and more palatable to those with a social conscience" is a dangerous piece of SHIT. Perhaps I'm overreacting and it's just dishonorable buffet style use of arguments for whatever cause at hand. If it suits my preconceived notions, fine, if not, dump it. But it smacks of the old "vanguard" elitist ideology crap where the party leaders know what is good for the workers. All forgotten about Mao's cozy "cultural revolution"? Or Pol Pot's henchmen who killed anyone who knew a foreign language or had gone to university. Not the kind of revolution I'm dreaming of.
See also:
nouturn.org
Richard, NOT Stephen (english)
20 Nov 2003
Regarding the first commenter: I shouldn't have wasted time on someone who can't even read a printed name without reading something that isn't there.
Maybe s/he mixed up Stephen Hawking (A brief history of time) with the speaker featured here (Richard Dawkins).
Does not bode well for the revolution...
(and it also reminds me of the deadly Buttle/Tuttle mixup in "Brazil")