Lawrence Krauss Discussion (12/12) - Richard Dawkins

See more at http://RichardDawkins.net

Richard Dawkins and Lawrence Krauss sat down for a public discussion at Stanford University on Sunday, March 9th 2008. The focus was on Science education, but the discussion also covered religion, physics, evolution and more. This video will be released on DVD soon at RichardDawkins.net , along with other unmoderated discussions with Richard Dawkins.

Credits:
Filmed by Josh Timonen and Wayne Marsala
Edited by Josh Timonen

Category:

Science & Technology

Tags:

• Richard
• Dawkins
• Lawrence
• Krauss
• Teaching
• Science
• Evolution
• Quantum
• Physics
• Religion
• God

[iliveon]

I'm running out of Richard Dawkins material on youtube

[Derwind]

I'm always amazed at how awe inspiring these lecture's and forum's are. I'm not ashamed to say that I've finally opened up to my own islamic family that I'm an athiest due for the most part of Richard Dawkins insightful speech's. Not that I already wasn't a closet athiest for many years, I've long affirmed my own belief, rather I've just been too scared to bring it out to attention.

[justjulie37]

Good discussion !

[andthereisntone]

Thanks.

[Tj930]

Huh.. We should be fair to scientists & the perceived 'gap' in their communication skills.

2 essential parts to communicating a new idea: i) having the idea (something worth saying), and ii) communicating that idea to the intended audience.

Plenty of people (particularly 'celebrities') are great communicators, but have nothing to say (at least nothing worth listening to); whilst Scientists' complex ideas may require a lot of prior reading, way beyond the comprehension of the 'average Joe'

[TrollTowelhead]

@IDidactI - Please note that all of the analysis of the concept of a deity in the world will not serve to begin examining or observing what the experience of gods holds for human beings. Belief is over-rated. It is almost entirely unimportant why it may be that someone believes something respective of science's investigations (ok, one might examine sociology and the biology of belief, no doubt), but the psychology of consciousness, anthropology, and sociology of religion are bound to be helpful.

[IDidactI]

@TrollTowelhead This is not the goal of either of these men. Generations of scientists and philosophers, all much smarter than you or I have spent a great deal of time applying the rigors of their respective methodologies to the analysis of the concept of a deity, and yet still there is no ration reason for the belief in a God. Science therefore, with its dependence on evidence, is intrinsically incompatible with the faith driven theology.

[TrollTowelhead]

Mr. Krauss provides a helpful ballast to Dawkins' anti-theism. This gives those who love gods something to hope for in the application of science to religion. Neither of these individuals go far enough. They continue to restrict science to their specialized fields of interest (biology, cosmology), rather than to encourage scientific exploration of god-related experiences, religious processes and practices, and the complete meshing of religion with science (as is done by the Church of Reality.

[TweekDash]

I had a long conversation with my father last night about Atheism and he basically agreed with me that evolution is fact. This is something he's denied many times in the past.

I think what the problem is for most people is simply that Religion is simple, Christianity is just a few stories and commandments that basically everyone has learnt. Whereas if you turn to Atheism, INSTANTLY you are subjected to a loss of knowledge, you immediately know very little about how we came to be alive.

[TweekDash]

@iliveon lol

[slados1]

@Reip187 Well said! Couldn't agree more...

[happyhappy85]

@Reip187 Sure, teach them but I don't think any marking system should be based on it.