What do you think about Dawkins?

[El_Machinae]

Winner, if he's not a jerk, why do so many people say he's a jerk? Just 'cause you're not offended by him, it doesn't mean that he's going about it the right way

 

[Bei1052]

I think the phrase, "DIAF" adequately describes what I think of him.

He gets paid to troll religious people in real life. How's that any different than the action he claims to hate?

Edit: I do have to say, though, that he's a genius when it comes to evolutionary biology and the like. His books are really easy to read and understand, as well. He should stick to that instead of trying to debate theology (Which he fails at miserably).

 

[REDY]

I have only read two books and the way how he writes is quite provocative. I personaly liked it but I am not suprised that someone is offended.

 

[Winner]

Winner, if he's not a jerk, why do so many people say he's a jerk? Just 'cause you're not offended by him, it doesn't mean that he's going about it the right way

I'll repeat what I said earlier:

no matter how nice you are, no matter how much you try to avoid unnecessary offense, you WILL offend some believers. That's a sad reality.

If you went to some Muslim gathering in Mecca (provided they'd let you into the holy city as a kuffar) and tried to tell them in a hyper-polite way that their religion is irrational, that it treat women poorly etc. etc., you'd be happy to get out alive.

Christians in the West are not nearly as dangerous, but some of them will react in a similarly dismissive and verbal-aggressive way.

Therefore, it would be wrong to conclude that Dawkins is a jerk only because some people are hypersensitive about their beliefs.

 

[aelf]

I think we need to be careful what we mean when we say "jerk". He's polite, true. And he's quite good at popularisation (a valuable skill!). But after having him answer a question, you'll feel like you've just been condescended, and the manner in which he speaks don't lead to engaging in self-reflection, but in offense.

It's an important skill, to learn that how you say something is going to convince people to not listen to you.

Here's a good example of how not to answer the question. He's being a jerk, even though it's funny. Please note: there's no point in arguing with me whether he's being a jerk in this clip, because what I'm reporting is the perception of others. And 'jerkiness' is somewhat in the eyes of the beholder.

I think that was fair, but it certainly didn't answer the question at all.

This clip seems to reinforce the idea that the man is not as much about reasoned arguments as he might like to seem. As a messenger of a cause, it's important that you don't present yourself in a way that undermines the cause.

 

[Narz]

Doesn't seem like much of a man, severely lacking in humor & personality but I guess he's successful enough even without it. If he's so smart it's a shame he's wasting his energy arguing about the non-existence of God, you don't need a genius to see there is no bearded judgmental dude in the clouds.

 

[Winner]

I think the phrase, "DIAF" adequately describes what I think of him.

He gets paid to troll religious people in real life. How's that any different than the action he claims to hate?

Edit: I do have to say, though, that he's a genius when it comes to evolutionary biology and the like. His books are really easy to read and understand, as well. He should stick to that instead of trying to debate theology (Which he fails at miserably).

Link to video.

Troll, yeah. Then I guess every each one of us is a troll in real life, since we all want to have ourselves heard, we all want to talk about our ideas and get other people to understand us.

How evil of him, he should shut up and lock himself in a monastery somewhere in Ireland, I guess that would make the religious people happy. After all, silencing their opponents is their cherished tradition.

 

[uppi]

Rambling? Seriously? Give us an example of this "rambling" - accusation without evidence is kinda pointless.

Evidence? Just listening to him talking about religion shows that he doesn't know what he is talking about.

 

[Seon]

Aren't that bothered about Dawkins. He is not as bad as other Atheists I saw, but he isn't the best of us either. He's works on evolution and genes are pretty impressive though. If he just leave out the anti-theological aspects of it.(This guy. I felt sorry for the Christian dude)

 

[Mowque]

I read his book. Found it entertaining, and he made some good points. Free Speech and whatnot is good!

(Practicing Roman Catholic)

 

[El_Machinae]

Therefore, it would be wrong to conclude that Dawkins is a jerk only because some people are hypersensitive about their beliefs.

It's not just 'some people', though. Lots of people find him to be a jerk. Your arguments to me on this don't matter, Winner, because it's unlikely that you're going to change my impression of him. And you're not going to change the general perception of him. The trick is to figure out why he's seen as a jerk, and then not make those mistakes (if you don't want to).

 

[SS-18 ICBM]

I think the phrase, "DIAF" adequately describes what I think of him.

Way to keep this discussion classy.

 

[Phlegmak]

I loves Dawkins.

But he could be nicer.

 

[Winner]

It's not just 'some people', though. Lots of people find him to be a jerk. Your arguments to me on this don't matter, Winner, because it's unlikely that you're going to change my impression of him. And you're not going to change the general perception of him. The trick is to figure out why he's seen as a jerk, and then not make those mistakes (if you don't want to).

I strongly disagree with you that it is a general perception that he's a jerk. And even if it was, most of people who say that probably didn't even bother to read his books or watch his TV programmes. But hey, the priest in our congregation told us he is an arrogant jerk who mocks our faith, let's hate him!

/sarcasm

Maybe it's my Czech bias, but I think that he'd be applauded if he made a tour around this country. Perhaps the amount of people who call him a jerk is related to the number of easily offended fundamentalist believers...?

 

[Winner]

Evidence? Just listening to him talking about religion shows that he doesn't know what he is talking about.

Actually he seems to know it pretty well. Give me a particular example and we can discuss it - a video on youtube where he's "rambling" or something similar.

 

[Lillefix]

I like him. He's very straight forward and he speaks English as opposed to Hitchens.

 

[RedRalph]

El Machine, his enormous popularity and notoriety show that a HELL of a lot of people don't think hes a jerk. I'm surprised that you seem to think saying "a lot of people consider him a jerk" is enough to definitively classify him as a jerk. Look at the poll results, look at the amount of people who buy his books on religion, watch his documentries on religion, etc. He's extremely popular, the burden of proof is not on us.

 

[Kerozine]

I read his book. Found it entertaining, and he made some good points. Free Speech and whatnot is good!

(Practicing Roman Catholic)

I have only read two books and the way how he writes is quite provocative. I personaly liked it but I am not suprised that someone is offended.

El Machine, his enormous popularity and notoriety show that a HELL of a lot of people don't think hes a jerk. I'm surprised that you seem to think saying "a lot of people consider him a jerk" is enough to definitively classify him as a jerk. Look at the poll results, look at the amount of people who buy his books on religion, watch his documentries on religion, etc. He's extremely popular, the burden of proof is not on us.

I really like him. He's intelligent and wrote a book on biology that I can understand

Hmm, I should pickup his book sometime.

 

[Flying Pig]

I really like him. He's intelligent and wrote a book on biology that I can understand

 

[Mise]

He's a jerk, but he's right.