Planetarion Forums - View Single Post

Dante Hicks · 8 Mar 2007, 19:43

Dawkins has always been a bit of a knob, but he is entirely necessary. If everyone were like him (even if all atheists were like him) then the world would be a bit dull, but the Good Guys require hardliners.

Basically, there's two types of wrong. One that is harmless enough (on it's own) and the second which is very harmful. A passenger on a plane believing that the plane is really being carried by angels when it flies and the engine is for show is harmless enough in most cases. An aircraft engineer on a flight-crew believing the same thing would be much more dangerous. Dawkins argument is that too much tolerance of the former (harmless) nonsense creates room for the latter (harmful) nonsense.

And he's probably right. But tactics dictate how you handle these things. In any argument, regardless of how right you are, you never "win" by being a prick.

8 Mar 2007, 19:43	#27
Dante Hicks Clerk Join Date: Jun 2001 Posts: 13,940	Re: Evolution of religion Dawkins has always been a bit of a knob, but he is entirely necessary. If everyone were like him (even if all atheists were like him) then the world would be a bit dull, but the Good Guys require hardliners. Basically, there's two types of wrong. One that is harmless enough (on it's own) and the second which is very harmful. A passenger on a plane believing that the plane is really being carried by angels when it flies and the engine is for show is harmless enough in most cases. An aircraft engineer on a flight-crew believing the same thing would be much more dangerous. Dawkins argument is that too much tolerance of the former (harmless) nonsense creates room for the latter (harmful) nonsense. And he's probably right. But tactics dictate how you handle these things. In any argument, regardless of how right you are, you never "win" by being a prick.