Jalur Gemilang

Bloody AdSense

My Alibi - only on Take180.com

Saturday, May 17, 2008

Richard Dawkins can fuck off!



I'm a Muslim but i don't care if it offends other people or not. I have atheist friends, but do i care if they are Atheist? No. I don't care if evolution happens. Heck, maybe evolution is a part of creationism. But still, i don't care.

One thing i don't like about atheism is their "philosophers/scientists" or whatever you call it. I enjoyed the works of Nietzche, but with people like Hitchens, Dawkins, Hari and Pullman, they should just fuck off. Especially Dawkins.

Some atheists aren’t satisfied by simply having this argument and feel the need to actually dedicate their lives to it by writing books and appearing on TV. Dawkins, a scientist and author who has a chair at Oxford University and has many acclaims. He’s done other stuff in the past but at the moment his whole thing seems to be going round the world and explaining to religious people that they’ve wasted their lives.

That's fine. But do we care? No. Do we care you're an atheist? Fuck no. Why should an atheist like Dawkins care if there are people with religion? It's like a straight man caring about gay sex(which is a reality sadly).

It's not like people are gonna say to Dawkins - "Gee thanks Richard. I used to believe that there was a universal controller, but thanks to you i'm now free". Okay, so maybe there are people who became atheists because of Dawkins, and yes it is true that his book "The God Delusion" sold 31 million copies. But Dawkins, with his arrogant smirk and intolerance, believes that the world would be better without religion. It's like saying that children will be free without parents.

One reason he cites is that wars have been fought over religion, therefore it is bad. Yes Richard, wars have been fought over religion, millions of people have died in its name but do you really think that there would have been no war without it? I think we’d probably just have had wars for different reasons don’t you? Sadly people just fight with each other sometimes, people’s interests are at odds sometimes, sometimes people look across borders and think ‘Y’know what? I’d quite like all that land for myself.’ More often than not religion’s just an excuse.

‘Religion gets in the way of scientific progress!’ is another form of bullshit spewed by atheists like Dawkins. Religion may not be compatible with science, but science and religion can exist together without clashing of ideas. Look at the likes of Al-Razi, Albert Schweitzer, Isaac Newton, Benjamin Franklin, Thomas Edison, Al-Jabr, Al-Ghazali and such. These scientists and inventors are religious. However, what Dawkins seems to forget is how these innovators can be intelligent while being religious. Simple: The leave out religion so that they could continue their works. Dawkins thinks that "If a man with a religion wants to do science, he has to involve hsi religion" That's not true. Scientists have never involve their religion with theirs cientific achievements. Never. Does Mohamad El Baradei ever involve his Islamic beliefs when he's dealing with Iran's nuclear issue? Never.

But what about intolerance? Religions promote intolerance right? Okay, a very small minority use religion as an excuse to be homophobic, racist etc. But again, there are just small minded people in the world who are going to see somebody doing something different and get all angry. People hear what they want to - if someone’s chosen to fixate on the obscure parts of the Bible or the Qur’an that deride homosexuality then, let’s be honest, they’re most probably quite the homophobe anyway. It’s not as if there aren’t racist/sexist/homophobic academics now is it?

And what pisses me more about Dawkins is that he downplays the positives of religion. Rumi, Michaelangelo, Leonardo da Vinci, David Lynch, Stephen King and Bono have such a hard-on for God that they created arguably the greatest work of art, film, music and literature in history(Eventhough i hate Bono). I’m pretty sure that some Muslim brothers would still perform the haj & umrah when every copy of ‘The God Delusion’ has been rightly pulped - are we really more of an advanced society without God?

I remember watching Dawkin's documentary "The Root of All Evil", and one thing that kept pissing me off was the use of the word "truth" continually. To start with, considering it was such an integral part of his argument, you would think he would define the term 'truth' at least once. But alas, it was left unsubstantiated.

Richard Dawkins thinks truth is inalienble with science. That is such a rigid and presumptious way to look at truth. What has been considered scientifically sound in the past has been disproven: 'The earth is flat'. Science cannot provide us with total stability or objectiveness. My personal understanding of truth is a philisophical one of individual perception. Something is only true if I perceive it to be true. Truth is only that which I agree for it to be. And is not completely based on scientific knowledge

Nietsche once wrote "There are many kinds of eyes..., and consequently there are many kinds of 'truths', and consequently there is no truth"

The perception argument for truth is classic post modernism, and I personally disagree with the idea of their being 'no truth'. If truth is only what we perceive, then the 'truth' can be twisted to fit ones own ends. On the other hand, I think that hunting for truth by logic and science alone is foolish and is subject to ones own perception and use of that logic. As the cliche goes, the truth is somewhere in the middle of these two arguments!

Dawkins, as usual, believes there is only his way and that somehow that his pure, robotic logic is delusion and perception free and hence can only be the truth. Unfortunately, like most of his arguments, it is a lie...

So, in conclusion; are those guys at the Christian rock concert & Nasyid gatherings waving their hands in the air a little weird? Yes. Deluded? Maybe, but you definitely can’t call them miserable. They’ve figured out a way to exist in this bizarre world that works for them and they’re not hurting anyone, so leave them alone you sanctimonious prick!

7 comments:

-su- said...

I've read the book, but I didn't quite arrive to such strong opinions of it. Probably because I'm still undecided about religion and science and all that stuff. I tend to be slightly too open in that sense.

But your argument is quite sound. And there are quite a few things that Dawkins is prone to saying that don't quite add up. Like the "religion causes war" part. People will probably find other reasons to instigate war, and so far, religion has been the most convenient of all excuses.

Was interesting to read your opinions. There aren't many people know this much. Or care this much.

Obefiend said...

unfortunately most wars were instigated by religion. catholics vs protestants. Shiite vr sunno. jews versus muslim.. hindus versus muslim etc etc

i kind get Dawkins argument but i don't subscribe to his conclusion that the root of evil is religion

i came to the conclusion that the root of all evil is humankind itself. just look at the story of Kane and Abel. The first murder in the history of man. what's the cause of that murder? was it religion? was it intolerence? nope. the cause was jealousy. thats the most fundamental of human feelings.religious hate is just a by product of jealousy. "my god has bigger dicks than your god so you can fuck off". its not really like that but you get the idea right? religion were used as the tool to instigate. it is only the branch

i also love listening to Bill Maher and George Carlin jokes about atheism. pretty funny stuff.

so where do i stand in this religion vs atheism issue? i dunno. I am a huge fan of sciene and also believes in god.

you mentioned about how religion and science can co exist. but this is actually a rarity. in the history of man i think there are more clashes between science and religion. the war is still going on now. I think Dawkins is just a pissed off scientist/anthropologist.he is just angry that galileo was prosecuted for his beliefs. same goes to Darwin and Einstein

TheInternet.Why? said...

Well thanks for your opinions.

And if you liked Carlin and Maher check out the works of Stephen Fry, Bill Hicks and Penn Jillette. They are pretty much the best atheist comedians out there.

Vífill~ said...

What kind of factional arguments are this?

You start with statements like "It's not like people are gonna say to Dawkins - "Gee thanks Richard[...]" and end up with correcting yourself when figuring that actually lot of people have never thought of religion that much, are making A Bright choice and when your arguments run out you attack his appearance and accuse him of intolerance, which is backed with the smirk argument?

Your definition of Truth is obviously expressed throughout the blog post. You make your own truth and obviously don't base it on anything scientific basis or logic at all. All you care about is your religion and accuse Richard Dawkins by attacking your Religion because it's soooo holy, which in the process of it you prove him correct, religions are untouchable.

Never play the positive side of religion? Have you read his book, AT ALL? If you say you had, you are either interpreting it with absurd preconceived ideas or lying.

I'm not getting into wars or bad things that religion may or may not be held responsible for, it's irrelevant and not the core problem. What Richard Dawkins is arguing for is that people wake up and start being Bright. Being critical and first and foremost being not so damn respectful to Religion.

I shouldn't need to repeat Richard Dawkins arguments here as you seem to have read enough about him and it seems that if you've ignored his texts which is obvious, you'll will most likely ignore mine the same way.

Saying the world would be better off without Religion is like children without parents in what way? One of your "Truths" at work there?

What Atheists like Richard Dawkins and Christopher Hitchens are saying is that they are fully aware that a lot of really great literature and art is driven from Religion but that doesn't mean Religion is correct. Like the famous writer that wrote his best book when he was trapped on a boat with severe fever, even though he wouldn't have written as good book don't make us recommend going out being stranded on a boat. Additionally I'm sure that if Leonardo da Vinci would have

Moderate theists may not be harmful directly but it's their and most people's attitude *about* religion that is most damaging. By believing that a faith is a ultimate virtue makes it easy for extremist to excuse them selfs with : "it's my faith" and moderates often defend their absurd religious motives.

To obefiend:
And a short note about the story of Cane and Abel for the first murder in history of man. Are you being serious? I'm open for that religion doesn't need to be the first ultimate root of evil but bring up children of Adam and Eva from the Bible as an reliable source of "first murder in the history of man"? That's too much.

Bashing Richard and other famous atheists without arguments is pretty low, and you theists think you're being attacked and tramped on with arrogance?

If you actually have interest knowing what arguments lie behind Richard Dawkins, Christopher Hitchens and other atheists I recommend a in-depth non-provoking calm intellectual conversation here http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-869630813464694890

Jimmbo said...

"It's like a straight man caring about gay sex(which is a reality sadly)."

That's the point! Religion has a lot to answer for in terms of human rights especially gay rights at the moment! One way to fix this is to get rid of religion and the only way to do that is to show it's claims are false.

Yes people will find excuses to go to war... but there will be one less excuse and hopefully a lot less wars.

Cetacea said...

Right then, Dawkins has written the following books:

The Selfish Gene
The Extended Phenotype
The Blind Watchmaker
River Out of Eden
Climbing Mount Improbable
Unweaving the Rainbow
A Devil's Chaplain
The Ancestor's Tale
The God Delusion


Making a total of... 9 books.

6 out of 9 of those books were about evolution. 1 devoted to general science (Unweaving the Rainbow). A Devil's Chaplain was a compilation of various essays on all sorts of social issues, not just religion. The God Delusion, which only came out in 2006, is the only one specifically devoted to religion.

I guess this counts as devoting one's entire life to not-god?

freefun0616 said...

酒店經紀人,
菲梵酒店經紀,
酒店經紀,
禮服酒店上班,
酒店小姐兼職,
便服酒店經紀,
酒店打工經紀,
制服酒店工作,
專業酒店經紀,
合法酒店經紀,
酒店暑假打工,
酒店寒假打工,
酒店經紀人,
菲梵酒店經紀,
酒店經紀,
禮服酒店上班,
酒店經紀人,
菲梵酒店經紀,
酒店經紀,
禮服酒店上班,
酒店小姐兼職,
便服酒店工作,
酒店打工經紀,
制服酒店經紀,
專業酒店經紀,
合法酒店經紀,
酒店暑假打工,
酒店寒假打工,
酒店經紀人,
菲梵酒店經紀,
酒店經紀,
禮服酒店上班,
酒店小姐兼職,
便服酒店工作,
酒店打工經紀,
制服酒店經紀,
酒店經紀,

,酒店,

Nuffnang ad