Richard Dawkins Interview at Point of Inquiry 3/7

Richard Dawkins, considered one of the world's most influential scientists, is the first holder of the Charles Simonyi professorship of the public understanding of science at Oxford University and the recipient of a number of awards for his writings and for his science, including the International Cosmos Prize, the Kistler Prize, and the Shakespeare Prize. He is also a fellow of the Royal Society. In a recent poll in the United Kingdom, he was named Britain's leading public intellectual. He is the author of a number of critically acclaimed books, such as The Selfish Gene, The Blind Watchmaker, Unweaving the Rainbow, The Devil's Chaplain, and The Ancestor's Tale. The New York Times Book Review has hailed him as a writer who "understands the issues so clearly that he forces his reader to understand them too."

In this discussion with D.J. Grothe, Dawkins talks about his new best-selling book, The God Delusion, addressing challenges from his critics to his assertion that it is very unlikely that there is a God, and that religion is a form of child abuse, among other topics. He also addresses the question of whether science and religion are really at war.

Part 4:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5ENi2pB_Lag

Category:

Nonprofits & Activism

Tags:

• Richard
• Dawkins
• The
• God
• Delusion
• Atheism
• Point
• Inquiry
• Religion
• Christianity
• Jesus
• Bible
• Evolution
• Intelligent
• Design

[rockytreadway]

GOD PREFERS AN ATHEIST!!!

[tool987ja]

@09205479428

I concur. His argument of "who created God?" is irrelevant because if God is who He says He is, then we will DEFINITELY not be able to rationalize everything pertaining to God and His power.

[09205479428]

1/3

"Any sufficiently advanced tech......... "

> I agree

"life was planted.... not be god..."

> if tat remote notion is proven to be a fact... those who implanted us are the gods i'm refereing, the Higher Intelligence.

" From what simplicity did god spring ? "

> We do not have a scientific fact to answer that, neither the theory of evolution can answer that.

[09205479428]

2/3

"Complexity springs from simplicity "

I agree. Simplicity from complexity, self organization( Gestalt psychology) from Chaos. Life is Fractal. Evolution answers the level at which self organization occurs but it fails on the aspect of the origin of the starting point simplicity.

[09205479428]

Thermodynamics you need external energy to keep an isolated system going on- life.

A.I you need continuous data for a program to keep going

Simplicity you need another chaos for self organization or simplicity

[09205479428]

3/3

God is simply the higher Intelligence that is beyond Human Rationality. That I believe, I do not subscribe to Christian Dogma.

[waperboy]

To conclude that there is no god is not narrowmindedness. Evidence has shown that complexity springs from simplicity. Lifeforms on earth are the most complex structures we know.

God would have to be much more complex, turning the question to - from what simplicity did god spring?

There's the remote notion that life was planted on earth by a more advanced intelligence, but then again they would not be god.

"Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic" (Arthur C Clarke)

[09205479428]

Now where does God fit in the model ? Read and understand my previous statements. I would love to make discussion with you.

[09205479428]

If we use Fractal to model our "reality", science crumbles at a certain extent but absolute when dealing with our immediate environment. We can calculate energy to push a block or a bullet trajectory for example. In the values that we get, there is however decimal points unaccounted. In our immediate environment, they are negligible but in the quantum, it is significant.

[09205479428]

Science is neither absolute nor changing. It depends on what relative observation you are look'n into it. Science may become absolute when dealing with the the "micro" like our immediate environment. Our equations in physics works, the small decimal points our our experimental results is negligible. However in the quantum level such small value is significant to say that our science had just collapsed.