Re: virus: Dawkins is an idiot

David Leeper (dleeper@gte.net)
Mon, 27 Aug 1956 21:18:06 +0000

Duane Hewitt wrote:
>
> On Mon, 27 Aug 1956, David Leeper wrote:
>
> > The "idiot" part came from a desire to get people worked up. I
> > wanted a nice spicy thread. I now regret because I'm tired of
> > even talking about it. I withdraw from the thread.
>
> If you intentionally meant to be provocative then you have succeeded to
> some extent. However if you desired to have a rational discussion then the
> means that you employed helped prevent you from reaching that end.
>
> It may have been more constructive to critique Dawkins in a less offensive
> manner. An honest attempt at refining his theories without attacking him
> personally probably would have been met with enthusiasm.
>
> Not that I am without sin in this area but I thought that I would share my
> observations.

Hi Duane. I didn't know you were still here.

Yes, I know like produces like. However, sometimes emotional arguments can
make points that rational ones can't, such as people tend to follow what Dawkins
says without really stopping to think about the meaning of what he's saying.

Much of the effect of using a Dawkins quote comes from the power of his
personality, not from the rationality of his words.

I think that point has been made on this thread and it's much more useful to
realize this point than to argue about this or that aspect of some theory.
I think this point was made _because_ I attacked Dawkins the way I did.
(So I guess I don't really "regret" it after all.)

However, that point has been made and now this thread is just going around
in circles. That's why I'm withdrawing from it.

-- 
David Leeper         dleeper@gte.net
Homo Deus            http://home1.gte.net/dleeper/index.htm
1 + 1 != 2           http://home1.gte.net/dleeper/CMath.html