[Lady Bracknell] To speak frankly, I am not in favour of long engagements. They give people the opportunity of finding out each other’s character before marriage, which I think is never advisable.
-- Oscar Wilde, The Importance of Being Earnest
Saw Richard Dawkins talking about faith schools (on TV).
Thu, 19/08/2010 - 9:28am — Irisha
Okay, I do wholeheartedly agree with Dawkins' view that kids should *unbiasedly* be told about various religions so that, having acquired enough knowledge and maturity, they can choose for themselvels. But, particularly given that the man likes the word "evidence" so much, surely this should apply to evolution and related issues? I mean, how is persuading a little kid that humans and apes have the same ancestor any less brain-washing than telling them that this is not the case?
*******
I actually met Dawkins a couple of years ago.
I was having lunch at New College, where I was teaching (and he was a fellow) at the time. The person I was with introduced me to a man called Richard who was sitting next to us. "Richard" held out his hand and said "Hi, I am Richard Dawkins". One short sentence, which was enough for me to form a still unchanged opinion. Having been though quite a few Oxford's SCR's, I can say that you don't use your surname when you are casually introduced to other people. No matter how famous you are. In fact, particularly when you are famous. [And, not that I am trying to sound snobbish, but there are quite a few famous people here, even if they are not shown on TV.]
Funnily enough I must have been one of the worst candidates to meet Dawkins because I didn't really know who he was. The only reason I'd heard of him before was that one of my facebook friends joined an anti-Dawkins group and this appeared in my mini-feed (now, this probably sounded really sad...). But I knew enough in order not to have asked what he was doing (although now I wish I did :)
Anyway, I am not against what he does, it's more *how* he does it. When I switched the TV on and saw an aggressive man making fun of creationism, my first thought was - "ouch, this must be Dawkins" (yeah, alright, I know I met him but when it comes to faces I have a memory of a goldfish). I am under the impression that he became famous not because he came up with clever ideas, but because he makes sure he is talked about. A bit like certain scandalous celebrities ;)
Comments
Ну я на самом деле не читала
Ну я на самом деле не читала его книг(у), так что по этому поводу ничего сказать не могу :) Просто из того что я видела, у меня создалось впечатление, что в первую очередь он очень агрессивный ("ну понятно же, что это бред") , а уж во вторую он взывает к каким-то аргументам. ("это бред потому что...").
Насчет фамилий - ну да, ты прав, конечно, - иногда они действительно используются. Просто после того как нас *уже* друг другу представили по именам, представляться ещё раз самому, да ещё и по фамилии, да ещё и по такой, мне кажется лишним. Но возможно я просто к Докинсу предвзято отношусь ;)
Actually, I am not sure about
Actually, I am not sure about not using your surname: I can recall a few occasions when surnames were used during introductions at High Table. I sometimes did it myself even though my surname is pretty hard for native English speakers to pronounce. I guess if this had a purpose, it was done mainly for future reference (so that people would know who their fellow members of the SCR were). However, if you are famous, this does become a bit iffy.
I don\'t know if Dawkins had many original ideas, but the way he explains things in "The Selfish Gene" (the only one of his books on evolution that I read) appeals to me as a mathematician. Also, he is one of few people to challenge the notion that religious belief deserves special respect, and that, I think, is very important. One may say that he overdoes it, but generally the points he makes are not made often enough.