Augustus
…
Earlier today, arch-buffoon Richard Dawkins tweeted these:
Richard Dawkins @RichardDawkins 10h10 hours ago
Religious faiths such as Stalinism, Nazism & Islam are dangerous because they teach that pie-in-the-sky Ends justify horrific Means.
Richard Dawkins @RichardDawkins 9h9 hours ago
Evidence-free ideologies such as Stalinism, Nazism & Islam are dangerous because they teach that pie-in-the-sky Ends justify horrific Means
These are classic examples of why he is far less rational than he believes himself to be.
The first one labels Stalinism and Naziism 'religions' to support his ideological assumptions. His arguments about the "unique danger" of religious belief have to come up against the major flaw that some non-religious ideologies have been even more murderous than the religions he hates. To solve this, hey why not just just say that they are religions instead?
But don't they have the characteristics of religions?
Well, it is certainly arguable, but the problem, from his perspective, is that if these are 'religions', then you have to conclude that ideologies such as humanism or Western liberalism are also religions.
These are ideologies that contend that they are universal and innate to 'humanity', humanity itself is a religious construct as it universalism. They place a mystical value on something, in this case the individual and its inalienable human rights. They also preach salvation, for Dawkins, salvation comes through science, reason, democracy and respect for individual rights. As with religious people, he believes that there is one correct way of living, which, by happy coincidence, just happens to be the same as the one as he believes in.
So, on to the 2nd tweet. Instead of religion, it is now "evidence free ideologies" that are the problem. All of the world's problems are cause by people's lack of reason. It is important to note that he didn't refer to utopian ideologies being problematic, just "evidence free" ones. Irrational, unscientific thinking again is the cause of all evil.
Unfortunately for Mr Dawkins, he is a humanist, and if any ideology meets the criterion of being "evidence free", it is humanism. Yet again, he fails to realise that his own beliefs are disproved by any scientific criteria and are wholly irrational.
There is no humanity, no universal human rights, no salvation through reason. Yet he is entirely confident in the fact that his beliefs are perfectly rational and evidence based. Not only is there no evidence to support his views, but there is a mountain of evidence to disprove them.
The problem is not with "evidence free" ideologies, but utopian ones. Radical Islam, Stalinism and Naziism were indeed utopian, and this quest for utopia justifies the cruellest means. Unfortunately for him, Dawkins own ideology is also utopian. For example, a significant number of Humanists supported the neo-conservative/liberal interventionist wars. Fighting wars to establish human right and Western values is utopian. Any ideology that sees itself as universal is utopian.
But, the problem with utopian thinkers is that they can see the irrational utopianism in the ideas of others, but not within themselves.
This is not to say that humanism or liberalism are 'bad' or comparable to Stalinism, radical Islamism, etc., it's just that if you want to attack these ideologies you need to understand the basis for your own belief system.
Some ideologies are preferable to others, it's just that people are never going to agree on which ones. In the modern world, we have the problem that these competing belief systems are brought into contact with each other too much.
No matter how desirable it may be though, you aren't going to convince everybody that they must adopt your value system because it more 'factual'. This is not because they are blind to the evidence, but that you are blind to your utopianism.
Ideologies are how you explain to yourself how the world works. They are myths, not evidence based truths.
History very clearly shows us that we are never all going to believe in the same myths.
There is no solution to this problem, but accepting that our own myths are not universal at least might prevent us from further stoking the flames.
Richard Dawkins @RichardDawkins 10h10 hours ago
Religious faiths such as Stalinism, Nazism & Islam are dangerous because they teach that pie-in-the-sky Ends justify horrific Means.
Richard Dawkins @RichardDawkins 9h9 hours ago
Evidence-free ideologies such as Stalinism, Nazism & Islam are dangerous because they teach that pie-in-the-sky Ends justify horrific Means
These are classic examples of why he is far less rational than he believes himself to be.
The first one labels Stalinism and Naziism 'religions' to support his ideological assumptions. His arguments about the "unique danger" of religious belief have to come up against the major flaw that some non-religious ideologies have been even more murderous than the religions he hates. To solve this, hey why not just just say that they are religions instead?
But don't they have the characteristics of religions?
Well, it is certainly arguable, but the problem, from his perspective, is that if these are 'religions', then you have to conclude that ideologies such as humanism or Western liberalism are also religions.
These are ideologies that contend that they are universal and innate to 'humanity', humanity itself is a religious construct as it universalism. They place a mystical value on something, in this case the individual and its inalienable human rights. They also preach salvation, for Dawkins, salvation comes through science, reason, democracy and respect for individual rights. As with religious people, he believes that there is one correct way of living, which, by happy coincidence, just happens to be the same as the one as he believes in.
So, on to the 2nd tweet. Instead of religion, it is now "evidence free ideologies" that are the problem. All of the world's problems are cause by people's lack of reason. It is important to note that he didn't refer to utopian ideologies being problematic, just "evidence free" ones. Irrational, unscientific thinking again is the cause of all evil.
Unfortunately for Mr Dawkins, he is a humanist, and if any ideology meets the criterion of being "evidence free", it is humanism. Yet again, he fails to realise that his own beliefs are disproved by any scientific criteria and are wholly irrational.
There is no humanity, no universal human rights, no salvation through reason. Yet he is entirely confident in the fact that his beliefs are perfectly rational and evidence based. Not only is there no evidence to support his views, but there is a mountain of evidence to disprove them.
The problem is not with "evidence free" ideologies, but utopian ones. Radical Islam, Stalinism and Naziism were indeed utopian, and this quest for utopia justifies the cruellest means. Unfortunately for him, Dawkins own ideology is also utopian. For example, a significant number of Humanists supported the neo-conservative/liberal interventionist wars. Fighting wars to establish human right and Western values is utopian. Any ideology that sees itself as universal is utopian.
But, the problem with utopian thinkers is that they can see the irrational utopianism in the ideas of others, but not within themselves.
This is not to say that humanism or liberalism are 'bad' or comparable to Stalinism, radical Islamism, etc., it's just that if you want to attack these ideologies you need to understand the basis for your own belief system.
Some ideologies are preferable to others, it's just that people are never going to agree on which ones. In the modern world, we have the problem that these competing belief systems are brought into contact with each other too much.
No matter how desirable it may be though, you aren't going to convince everybody that they must adopt your value system because it more 'factual'. This is not because they are blind to the evidence, but that you are blind to your utopianism.
Ideologies are how you explain to yourself how the world works. They are myths, not evidence based truths.
History very clearly shows us that we are never all going to believe in the same myths.
There is no solution to this problem, but accepting that our own myths are not universal at least might prevent us from further stoking the flames.
