Re: Re: An open letter to Richard Dawkins

[horvay]

hahaha, you scare quoted reality and perceive. Wow.

Most intellectuals today also think socialism is right. And thats evading basic facts from history.

Your arguments are evasive.

[JohananRaatz]

People who have problems with foundationalism lack sufficient foundations for their position. Leading minds who are anti-foundationalist are just analogous to the sophists of ancient Greece. The real intellectuals are like Plato and Aristotle who believe in absolute truth. Unfortunately much of academia seems to be corrupted by people who are actually anti-intellectual sophists.

[JohananRaatz]

Derrida and Foucalt are interesting to read but are post-modern deconstructionists and so because of that they are by default sophists and as sophistry their arguments shouldn't be taken seriously at least insofar as they are sophistry.

[MrCropper]

"Are you trying to say there is absolutely no difference between induction and deduction?

"

No, but they are both species of the genus of logic, in which discipline the conclusions follow necessarily.

[MrCropper]

Btw, the inductive process is empirical. So much for that stupid dichotomy.

[BedtimeWithALunatic]

way to wrap up where my defense meets up with emotion's misdirection and further "incoherence". Dawkins intent may have multi-agendas not to be belittled by swarmy "My friend didn't like it", but who thinks Dawkins could be more serious.

[Barklord]

I thought it was interesting in The Selfish Gene when Richard Dawkins argues/suggests for the possibility of teaching altruism but still tries to get his jabs into religion as such. It has always seemed to me that teaching altruism in one form or another was what most world prophets actually tried to do. Eventually religious teachings get bogged down in legalistic dogmas and that seems to be what Dawkins rejects. Jesus, I'm so serious today...