Tyson Rebukes Dawkins - Dawkins shoots and SCORES!

[ZoichiKanoe85]

While I agree with Dawkins' science 100% I believe that Tyson is right. Unfortunately you see a lot people who use Dawkins as what I think of as a god substitute. They talk as if he's infallible. In the public realm Tyson's method is teaching and getting people interested in science. Dawkins is frequently arrogant and insulting. It rightfully turns a lot of people off.

[LegionarioCruel]

What a stupid, useless and shallow debate is going on over here.

[DoctorOfDisbelief]

@LegionarioCruel But not so stupid, useless and shallow that you couldn't take time out of your busy schedule to stop and submit your comment. Irony is so ironic.

[LegionarioCruel]

@DoctorOfDisbelief - I don't think you understand the meaning of the word "ironic". And I can do whatever I want with my time, don't you think so?

[Pythagoras211]

Dawkins is a child. This is one of Dawkins' own telling him that he lacks tact, compassion, foresight, that his arrogance should maybe concern him a little, and he shrugs it off. He's not concerned about the truth, he just wants to establish his 'dominance' over people that are maybe not so fortunate as he is. And people venerate him. Stuff makes nauseous.

[DoctorOfDisbelief]

@Pythagoras211 Dawkins is responding to a claim about his teaching methods. At the time of this video, Dawkins had announced his retirement from a very successful career as a professor. Dawkins did not teach science in the same way he debated religious idiots.

Tyson used this for no purpose other than for his own.

[Fuglebolle]

I don't understand why you're selling T-shirts with that last text printed around Dawkins' picture.. he's quoting someone.

[DoctorOfDisbelief]

@Fuglebolle What is it that you don't understand? After seeing this video, people on facebook, youtube, twitter and others started to say they would love this on a shirt. So there it is. His final statement, on a shirt. Yes, we know he was quoting someone.

Not certain why this was confusing for you. It's either you are actually confused, or, you were just being insufferable prick. Which is it?

[Fuglebolle]

@DoctorOfDisbelief Usually printing text around a picture is descriptive of the person on the picture, and not just is Dawkins quoting someone else, but he says that what he is quoting is more extreme than anything he would say.

There are a lot of good quotes by Dawkins, what I don't understand is why you don't go with these instead.

[DoctorOfDisbelief]

@Fuglebolle Dawkins used those words in jest to make his point. I believe you understand that. I went with this quote, as I already mentioned, because people mentioned wanting it when they saw this video.

It is one of the most popular shirts I sell.

[Fuglebolle]

@DoctorOfDisbelief I'm not trying to stop you from selling T-shirts, and I'm not blaming you for it since you say that this was requested. However, people seeing this shirt will most probably think that this is a quote by Dawkins which in turn will give people the wrong impression of who Dawkins is. According to Tyson these types of statements are counter productive to Dawkins' cause.

[DoctorOfDisbelief]

@Fuglebolle You are missing the larger picture. If people see someone wearing this shirt, it may cause a discussion to ensue, which is positive. By the way, if Dawkins was not comfortable with those words, he wouldn't have embraced them so heartily.

Tyson is in the business of promoting science (and himself), not debating theists.

Dawkins revolutionized evolutionary biology, and taught science successfully for decades. Tyson used this politically.

[LostForrest]

"science is interesting, and if u you don't agree...you can fuck off!!!"

I'm gonna use that one forever ;pp

[xoxopetal]

just love dawkins .. great mind

[GOOdGuyGreg1]

@AceofDIamonds @DoctorOfDisbelief Dawkins and Tyson both have the same ideals, yet differing methods of approach. Dawkins is like malcolm X and Tyson like Luther King with regards to black civil rights. both of their methods are effective and go even better hand in hand. its not about which is more appropriate, the point is these are two magnificent men that share a common ground. the world would be a dark and sinister place without them.

[n8style]

@GOOdGuyGreg1 hear hear

[jeans1515]

Damn, it has to be tiring being Dawkins. Dealing with such staggeringly stupid questions, rebukes, debates and people ALL the time.

[richjammcl]

I have to agree with Dawkins on this one. In any debate, I like to throw out every piece of information I can get my hands on before hand. Really let my competitor think about my arguments, consider them honestly and come up with the strongest rebuttals possible. Then when I do have the opportunity to talk to them about it, I tear their arguments to shreds, leave no possibility that they were right. Demolish them, it's far more convincing.

[MgoMSx]

Dawkings comes off edgy for certain reasons, How long has he debated ignorant religious people who could not accept facts? I've seen so many debates with Richard Dawkings where the other debater would just stop him in his tracks when trying to explain something. Everyone can get edgy and a bit aggressive, but it's to stamp the facts in those brains.

[JamesAuseten]

I have very little respect for Dawkins simply because he chickened out against William Lane Craig.

Dawkins should stick to debating against 14 year old muslim girls.

[Gonzotabb]

@JamesAuseten He refused to debate him because the man refuses to stick to his area of expertise. When he debated Hitchens he started going after a astrophysical argument. It was insulting and embarrassing. The man is nowhere close to being an astrophysicist and has absolutely no authority to make claims about physical law implying a creator as he when I saw him he was highly ignorant of the subject.

[AntidoteY]

Look, we can agree these are both very intelligent, thoughtful people who are doing a lot of good in promoting sanity to the rest of the world. The discussion is whether to use a velvet glove or a studded glove to deal with obscurantists and ignoramuses who willfully avoid confronting the facts.

They both raise valid points and both their arguments should be synthesized for their collective wisdom.

[TurpentineRec]

@AntidoteY Do you think "who willfully avoid confronting the facts" was really tried? We are messing around with "a studded glove" for years.

[kingkyzr]

i don't know...its kinda a moot point that tyson was making...

[unholyjebus]

What! No "Watch out, we've got a badass over here" jokes. Youtube, I am disappoint.

[Vroom246]

I have tremendous respect for both Tyson and Dawkins. They're both brilliant men imo. However, Tyson is right, sometimes Dawkins comes off edgy and very aggressive in his approach of the belief of others. But, I do love it when he totally shuts down those ignorant people

[Mustacheftw]

@Vroom246 Dawkins has a right to be strident in his efforts. Half of the country believes his incredible contributions to science are on the level of a chiropractor, and many outright deny it. I would argue that Prof. Dawkins is taking the very first, and most important step to even begin to approach his charge of educating the public properly.

[Vroom246]

@Mustacheftw I'm not saying what Dawkins has done for atheism isn't incredible. I'm just saying that Tyson and Dawkins have two different approaches. Tyson, who prefers to obviously inform rather than rebuke, is obviously going to look at Dawkins' approach as a little aggressive. Where, as you said, Dawkins has done incredible strides in educating the public with his signature bluntness towards theists.

[Kneleist]

Hahahhaha

[wowamonn]

Religious people sometimes need a good verbal bashing every once and while.

[Murder0redruM]

THAT'S MY PHILOSOPHY TOO!

[oODarkEnergyOo]

@PNGeng ... I guess I should sit here and take pains at explaining intricately at how I reached my conclusion to satisfy your desperate need to know ... LOL ... dickhead.

[memonk11]

Tyson is worth ten Dawkins. 

[oODarkEnergyOo]

Despite Tyson making a reasonable point ... the way he delivered it was insulting.

[TrillianAlice]

Dawkins is for adults.

Tyson is for children

That is how I see their approach to discussions..

[LuqAtMeNow]

Ba Dawk-a-Dawk.

[naughtydreadz]

isn't it awesome how two atheists can disagree amicably???

Ending on one telling the other to fuck off and everyone laughs...

Doubt that would happen with any theists

[MatterStorm1]

@naughtydreadz He was telling an anecdote, not speaking directly to Tyson. Re-watch it please.

[naughtydreadz]

@MatterStorm1

subtext mi amigo....

[TurpentineRec]

@naughtydreadz Such an enlighten and unique shht...

[IoEstasCedonta]

OTP.

[grahamlive]

That was brilliant. I think I love Richard Dawkins. Hahahaha........... 

[solusdiver]

Dawkins is British...that says it all.  Brits tend to speak sharply, and it's quite understandable that after years of debating with morons he can have a sharp tongue.

[TurpentineRec]

@solusdiver he's from Kenya

[solusdiver]

@TurpentineRec He was born there, but he's not Kenyan. He is an Englishman through and through.

[MadcapMacabre]

I always found this with Dawkins. His points come across as barbed jargon. It makes it sound as if he is using complex Science to embarrass people.

[BlackFlashDrive]

@MadcapMacabre My eleven year old sister can understand him just fine.

[TheSnoopy1750]

@TraceurMeeka I agree with you.

The smarter among us have a responsibility to drag these ignorant rednecks into the 21st century for the sake of human progress. I think Dawkins has been trying to do that.

[Razman360]

Totally understand Tyson. I'm a big supporter of Dawkins, but its true that when you 'attack' someone or put your point forward aggressively, as Dawkins often does, the person you are trying to help will often become defensive and much less likely to let his side down.

[Thatguywithlogic]

I think Dawkins is plenty empathetic. He doesn't blame people for being Muslim or Christian, he knows were they born somewhere else they would very well have different beliefs; we are all born atheist, it is the unnatural teachings of religion wrought from our natural compulsion to understand the world around us that allows religion to proliferate.

Perhaps his empathy has augmented to apathy after decades of wrongly being told by the disillusioned that he is destined for hell for all eternity.

[Reyalp]

I love Dawkins accent. He even manages to say "fuck off" with class and elegance.

[KingEyebrow]

my new favourite quote someone find me the tshirt

[tomwiddv2]

The joys of being a science nerd.

[MrRossi159]

To All The Haters.

1. Look at the Dislike Bar

2. Look at your dick

Notice The Similarity?

[MyNameIsAldi]

tyson is right...

dawkins is not answering the critique... a classic deflection:

"Learn to recognize deflections. Usually when people are lying, they will tell stories that are true but are deliberately aimed at not answering the question you asked."

wwwDOTwikihowDOTcom/Detect-Lie­s

[TacticalHub]

@MyNameIsAldi Learn to notice when someone accepts criticism. Dawkins accepts the criticism, admits to it but then offers a story to show that he is not the worst offender. For humour if nothing else. What was dawkins to do? Say "No I am not" or "I don't agree"? Tyson was merely saying that Dawkins could put his point across better, not that his points are wrong. Tyson himself is an atheist and irreligious.

[AceofDlamonds]

I sometimes have a Dawkins-like attitude when dealing with ignorant people, but Neil deGrasse Tyson is 100% correct...

[AnswerFortyTwox]

@AceofDlamonds I always have a Dawkins like attitude when dealing with ignorance. I respect Tyson to the nth degree but I think he called it wrong here. In the case of society today where the greater population has become almost desensitized to violence and chaos because we are fed it all the time. I think the only way you can reach people is to jab at them sharply to wake them up.

[DoctorOfDisbelief]

@AceofDlamonds Tyson is wrong for a simple reason. He is attacking Dawkins who was about to retire after decades as a very successful professor, for Dawkins' personal choices related to debating the topic of religion. Debating religion, Dawkins was not acting in his role as the Simonyi Professorship Chair for the Public Understanding of Science. Tyson has gone out of his way to be the new Carl Sagan, and attacking a man who revolutionized evolutionary biology was a mistake. IMHO

[JayDee98765]

@DoctorOfDisbelief I see what you mean, but its easy for you and me, to say that because, we aren't taking into account the people who need a 'learning step ladder' in terms of how Dawkins delivers his knowledge to his audience, it's abit like speaking with a teacher, ask a good veteran teacher of any age group whether they would ever give up on a student, I doubt, any would say yes. Imo...

[L1zardK1n9]

@DoctorOfDisbelief I don't think Dawkins felt attacked by his statement and Tyson was saying all of this with respect, love, and his personal views which is why Dawkins summed it up with humor.

[JoeDSileo1988]

@DoctorOfDisbelief I think that no man is beyond reproach and attacking a man with a valid point regardless of his previous works is quite alright. Dawkins himself accepted the rebuke.

[Jonayofsweden]

@DoctorOfDisbelief I have watched Neil Degrasse Tyson way less then Richard Dawkins and i most say i have learned more from Neil. Even though Dawkins is extremly interesting and fun to listen to, sometimes he does tend to become alittle to arogant. For my taste.

[silverlight68]

@AceofDlamonds I would also agree with you that Tyson made a valid point of how Dawkins can rub some people the wrong way, but on the other hand, I can also appreciate how some people, still so ignorant in the midst of the Age of Information & Knowledge, would absolutely need a damned good bitch-slapping to wake them up. No one is proposing a world without hope & faith, but it's time the human race stop fighting for the wrong reasons + start working 2gether for the right ones.

[j4c300]

I fucking love Tyson on nova! I like dawkins too, tho

[resident19guy]

Dawkins isn't a cruel man. He just doesn't give a shit.

[southparkiscool]

What conference is this? And is it related to Tyson's speech about the "god of the gaps?" 

[redbreast3]

*articulate as they always are. Fucker.

[spiderpig85]

I like Tyson, but he should think logically.

[UNLebanon]

Tyson is wrong about the role of an educator. Teachers do not (or rather should not) persuade students to do, think, or believe anything. Education does not equal indoctrination. Teachers should not be trying to sell you anything.

A teacher's task is to 1) give students the information and 2) present it in a way so that students can understand the information. #2 is essential, otherwise teachers could be replaced with a good set of encyclopedias.

[twiistaaa]

@UNLebanon his point to dawkins was that his approach to the teaching role wasn't sympathetic or sensitive to what the students may already believe. its not trying to sell an idea, it is making the idea accessible to the student. if said student already accepts X and you are showing them Y, they will gain a more robust and interested understanding of Y if you explain it to them without demeaning or dismissing their beliefs about X.

[UNLebanon]

@twiistaaa That may work in the subjective field of the arts, but not in the sciences. If a student believes the earth is flat, there is no way to teach the earth is round without undermining that misconception. You're correct in that student beliefs should not be ridiculed or ignored by the teacher. But to accept X as being fact when it most certainly is not is the wrong way to teach. Falsehoods of any kind should never be taught in the classroom, unless for pointing out that they are false

[twiistaaa]

@UNLebanon i'm pretty sure i agree with what you are saying. i'm just saying that a part of the delivery of information has to be sensitivity to the students already established beliefs. if you just throw the ideas out there with no regard for those beliefs (which is what tyson was critiquing dawkins on, which i only partly agree with, i don't think dawkins is that bad at teaching), then the student might react negatively towards what you are teaching them and not learn anything at all.

[UNLebanon]

@twiistaaa I think we are on the same wavelength. Yes, teachers should be sensitive to student beliefs and culture. However, there is a fine line between being sensitive to a misconception and being receptive to it. True, throwing out info without regard to student culture is a bad idea. However, my point was against Tyson's comment that educators must "persuade" students. Teachers should neither try to persuade nor give credence to student beliefs that are factually incorrect.

[babelnumber5]

So he's a bit sharp. What's the big deal? There are too many pussies in this world and frankly, the ignorant masses can fuck off as Dawkins suggested.

[Ryousuke91t]

Tyson is right. The way Dawkins delivers his message sometimes affects how convincing he needs to be to help people.

lol, not one post on the=is page has to do with Tyson's actual point.

[JayDee98765]

1. I'll choose one piece out of many, chapter 6, the roots of morality, in the God Delusion.

2. Pinceton Astrophysics Professor Bruce Draine, for the book 'Death by black hole'.

If you have no real constructive reply except to defend Dawkins to the grave because you look up to him, i'll assume this conversation has come to an end.

[nova973]

@shumble32 . . . damn u just got ripped

[nova973]

@shumble32 . . . damn u just got ripped

[JayDee98765]

@nova973 Hey hey, it's not about that, it's about discussing to find a truthful conclusion if any :P

[Pablo113]

Funny Ass Shit!!!!!!!

[ViperRob42]

Hey guys, theres a full lecture of Dr. Tyson & Dawkins together doing a sit down back n forth from a few months ago, its online here on youtube, look for it, its a great like hour talk on everything!

[fishbone937]

1337

[DoctorOfDisbelief]

@fishbone937 Yes indeed.

[Tyfudd]

Why are there empty seats there! They should all be filled!

[anwealde]

@Tyfudd There were empty seats because there aren't enough education grants in the bloated federal budget to pay enough students to waste their time watching career academics falling all over each other

[Tyfudd]

@anwealde Why would the students get paid to watch these guys? At the least, it's a high form of entertainment, at the best, it's an exceptional opportunity to engage some of the most brilliant minds in their respective fields. I'd pay to go watch them hang out and eat a pizza. I'd also pay for their pizza.

[tonybeir]

@Tyfudd private gathering... sorry bub

[sh00008]

@Tyfudd Well, that is an excerpt from beyond belief 2006 and it was a private gathering of scientists. I think thats why there were empty seats.

[heeh2]

I want to see a discussion between lawrence krauss and neil degrasse tyson.

[anwealde]

@heeh2 I want to see a discussion between neil tyson and mike tyson

[Cyberjunkie09]

I love these guys.

[CaptainFragalicious]

@sebc2s Is it relevant?

[glummdead]

@sebc2s If you mean Dawkins, he's been married three times and has a daughter. So that means he's like, done it with a lady, at least once. Like Capt. Fragalicious said, utterly irrelevant.

[syjeklye]

@sebc2s He's english dumbass

[176smn]

@sebc2s are you gay?

[TennisGvy]

@sebc2s Comment removed? :(

[2CSST2]

@sebc2s hahahahaha idiot

[thedavehatessheep]

Haha both of those guys are awesome, I love that they can have banter like that.

[DoctorOfDisbelief]

@thedavehatessheep It's a classic.

[shumble32]

@thedavehatessheep - Tyson is extremely devious in his use of the English language.

ex. "I worry that..." - he's not worried at all, he's just showing false concern to paint himself as the reasonable, caring person in this debate.

He also likes to use irrelevant and strawman arguments

"writing a book is not being an educator" - "not a professor of delivering truth to the public"

Dawkins ignores that crap.

Dawkins is awsome, Tyson is just a con man

[JayDee98765]

@shumble32 Isn't Richard Dawkins the one who wrote a book explaining why there probably isn't a god? And sold like 2 million copies or so? (I think) , that's not scientific, where as Tysons books are about science, and things knowable. Who's the con man?

[shumble32]

@JayDee98765

If there is an overall theme to Dawkins' book it's showing that belief in god is not rational or based on scientific principals - how is that not scientific?

Tyson is a typical theologian, trained to distort the meaning of language and fool people with pseudo-science. Look up the meaning of 'straw man' and you'll see how often Tyson uses this discredited form of argument. Dawkins doesn't stoop so low.

Tyson's books are about pseudo-science and things unknowable

[JayDee98765]

@shumble32 Everything he knows, which is testable, is based on science, science which is not about feelings or any other nonsense, his book is full of it, that is not scientific.

Tyson on the other hand, has his work cross checked by many recognised scientists, and he himself does not get involved in silly theologian arugments like dawkins does, as if some answer is waiting to be found.

He sticks to the knowable, Dawkins can't even grasp what tyson tries to explain here..

[shumble32]

@JayDee98765

1. So you've read Dawkins' book? if so quote the bits you say "are about feelings or any other nonsense". If you haven't or if you can't I'll assume you withdraw your statement.

2. Name one of the 'recognised scientists' that is not a believer who has cross checked both Tyson's facts and his conclusions?