Richard Dawkins "What if you're wrong?"

Richard Dawkins answers a Liberty U student and gets an answer from a professional philosopher. Visit meaningfulscience.com for more.

Category:

Science & Technology

Tags:

• Richard
• Dawkins
• atheism
• atheist
• god
• debate
• theism
• oxford
• science
• religion
• question
• answer
• faith
• christianity
• design
• intelligent
• evolution

[rudolphsteinkampf]

An ASSUMPTION that the speed of light is constant??? And that's why he's a philosopher and not a scientist. Thank goodness. Also, who PAYS a professional philosopher? They should seriously dock his salary for spouting such nonsense.

[NamesForDogs]

The Genetic Fallacy argument is completely tangential to the girl's question and Dawkins' answer.

The strangest part is that Dawkins isn't trying to prove that all religions are wrong (at least in this clip). He's responding to the girl's "Pascal's Wager" argument by saying that it applies equally well to every other proposed religion.

You should be a Christian, or else you'll be tortured forever.

You should be a Muslim, or else you'll be tortured forever.

You should be a Hindu...

Wiccan...

[GodTheHypothesis]

This isn't the genetic fallacy at all- since he did NOT say, "therefore the religion is wrong". He was simply pointing out that different people around the world think the exact same thing about a different God and that they tend to be based on the area you grew up in. This doesn't show that the religions are wrong, it shows they PROBABLY are.

[soskid]

@fearfulmatrix I consider myself a spiritual person, indeed I have had some personal indications that there might be an afterlife. But thats my personal belief without and I have zero evidence for it so I keep it to my self.

If religious people could do the same we wouldnt have a problem, but they cant. Their holy books commands them to Prostaletize. Open a tv or historybook to see what misery that has caused all over the world.

Im not against religion, I absolutely despise it as the evil it is.

[fearfulmatrix]

@soskid

In turn, I must ask one question about your criticism.. Are you more against religion? or rather are you against the acceptance of a transcendental world, or spiritualism (as people call it now)?

[soskid]

@fearfulmatrix The bible is not being misused by the fanatics. Read and you.ll see that they actually are the more precise followers of the BS that's in it. Modern christians have to ignore half of what's in the old testamente, not to break the law on a daily basis.

Juacques Maritain was a catholic Thomist nutcase.

[soskid]

@fearfulmatrix I'm not going to defend calims I did'nt make.

Never said that modern morals are straight and set. They have evolved along with humans and will hopefully continue to do so. It is the religious beliefs that are frozen in time,

The ten commandments is not just unsufficial.

God saw fit to use 4 of 10 to talk about himself, not leaving room for other matters.

Only a selfcentered egomaniac would do that, not an all powerfull all knowing deity.

Obviously they were made by man not god.

[fearfulmatrix]

@soskid

Let me be clear..

Not even the wisest men on earth had their morals straight and set. Socrates, Nietzsche, Schopenhauer and many other philosophers all struggled with it in their lives till the very end. So to say that we would have it figured out is an outright absurdity. Most would agree that Yes, the Ten commandments don't suffice, but in all cases the church establishes a sense of need for good and love, which is what the atheist movements lack. A system of morals is necessary.