Richard Dawkins - Letter to his daughter

[noblehead]

Hitchens of course was just as avidly atheist as Dawkins and he didn't renounce his views on his death bed. It would seem a bit futile repenting at the end; because if there were an omnipotent God he'd see through that wouldn't he? So, you may as well stick to your guns...

Oh I don't know it's never to late to change one's mind Dillinger.....either way!!!

 

[xyzzy]

I was listening to a debate on the radio a few years back about people believing/not believing in God, they interviewed a Vicar who said that those who went through life as atheists often changed their mind when on their deathbeds.

That's the famous 'no atheists in a fox-hole' statement, but who knows how true it is? I always liked the story about David Hume the 18th century Scottish Enlightenment philosopher who was widely held to be an atheist. On his death bed he received many letters challenging his views and opinions on this and instead of answering directly he would just correct the spelling and grammar and send them back.

Hitchens of course was just as avidly atheist as Dawkins and he didn't renounce his views on his death bed. It would seem a bit futile repenting at the end; because if there were an omnipotent God he'd see through that wouldn't he? So, you may as well stick to your guns...

Best

Dillinger

Dawkins response to that criticism is that he rationalises the time after he is dead as no different from the time before he was born from his perspective. It is why he says he is unafraid of dying as far as I read it.

 

[Paul1976]

Hitchens of course was just as avidly atheist as Dawkins and he didn't renounce his views on his death bed. It would seem a bit futile repenting at the end; because if there were an omnipotent God he'd see through that wouldn't he? So, you may as well stick to your guns...

Oh I don't know it's never to late to change one's mind Dillinger.....either way!!!

That's true Nigel but I'm not sure if it would carry much weight with God if you only started to believe when you were minutes from carking it! :lol:

 

[borofergie]

I was listening to a debate on the radio a few years back about people believing/not believing in God, they interviewed a Vicar who said that those who went through life as atheists often changed their mind when on their deathbeds.

Well if a Vicar said it, it must be true.

It's kind of self biasing though, wouldn't you agree? I doubt that many "unrepenting" atheists would ask to see a Vicar on ther deathbed.

 

[noblehead]

That's true Nigel but I'm not sure if it would carry much weight with God if you only started to believe when you were minutes from carking it! :lol:

I know what your saying Paul, but I do take the view that if God does truly exist then you'd be judged on whether you've been a good person all your life and done no harm to your fellow man rather than if you've been to church every Sunday.

Before my oldest was christened we had to meet with the vicar to discuss the christening, he said ''I've not seen you in church before''.....to which I replied 'I don't need to go to church to pray Vicar'.....he agreed reluctantly :wink:

 

[noblehead]

It's kind of self biasing though, wouldn't you agree? I doubt that many "unrepenting" atheists would ask to see a Vicar on ther deathbed.

I do agree Stephen although I don't know how many atheists do actually change their mind when staring death in the face.

 

[Paul1976]

That's true Nigel but I'm not sure if it would carry much weight with God if you only started to believe when you were minutes from carking it! :lol:

I know what your saying Paul, but I do take the view that if God does truly exist then you'd be judged on whether you've been a good person all your life and done no harm to your fellow man rather than if you've been to church every Sunday.

Before my oldest was christened we had to meet with the vicar to discuss the christening, he said ''I've not seen you in church before''.....to which I replied 'I don't need to go to church to pray Vicar'.....he agreed reluctantly :wink:

Actually,that's quite a good and fair point!

 

[borofergie]

There is, of course, a significant risk to repenting on one's deathbed. If you accidentally repent to the wrong God, you might end up getting yourself into more trouble than by remaining atheist.

Since humans have worshipped over 2800 different gods (and many more that we don't know about), your chance of picking the right god to repent to is very, very, small.

 

[Paul1976]

I suppose you could try all 2800 and hope you get the right one without annoying the right one too much in the process :think:
Then again,Theology was never a strong point of mine TBH

 

[noblehead]

There is, of course, a significant risk to repenting on one's deathbed. If you accidentally repent to the wrong God, you might end up getting yourself into more trouble than by remaining atheist.

Since humans have worshipped over 2800 different gods (and many more that we don't know about), your chance of picking the right god to repent to is very, very, small.

Trust you to complicate things further!

I would imagine a way round this would be to repent to the God that your parents/guardians worshiped, if they didn't believe or you can't remember then don't bother :lol:

 

[Mileana]

I think there is a difference between 'blindly' trusting what you have been told - tradition - and then making a choice of your own at some point in your life whether you wish to include the spiritual dimension in your life.

For me, life is true on many levels. Life as a biological being, a social being, a psychological being, a spiritual one...

For my purpose, I don't need positivism, - I guess I am more of a postpositivist. My philosophy is more or less based on falsification, my religion is I suppose a 'confirmed agnostic'. I believe that something is there, I believe my brain is not big enough to understand it entirely, I believe that 'something' is there to provide for us, I believe I cannot describe that something as it is above and beyond my words - like speaking German in China or explaining snow to an Inuit... I am not a pan-theist, but it comes close in that I believe that the presence of this entity is there whenever we live in accordance with this 'purpose'. I believe that all religions are trying to grasp the meaning of this realm if you will and that they all have certain aspects that are true. I am not a conformist - I will not let a tradition, an authority or anything else decide what is true - it would mean limiting the unlimited. I do believe that certain things come as close to describing it as the human mind can follow at this present time - and God is Love is one of them.

But that said, I don't believe in fear - actually sometimes I think having an open mind and being able to cope with questions unanswered is the braver move.

 

[Debloubed]

Funny think, beliefs. We all have them - but it seems that the stronger certain people hold their own, the less likely they are to allow others to do the same...

:thumbup:

:thumbup: :thumbup:

 

[Patch]

This thread is brilliant. Really, REALLY interesting.

"Good people will do good things, and bad people will do bad things...
...But for good people to do bad things — that takes religion."

 

[sip]

What I have found funny (through experience) was an incident involving a proselytizing, hard-core athiest (a bit like Dawkins actually), who was up an untethered ladder (before health & safety days). He fell some 8 or 10 feet to the ground and the first thing to come out of his mouth wasn't a scream or anything -- he simply called out "Oh God, Oh my Lord" (I'm sure he wasn't cursing or being blasphemous).

He stopped preaching his own brand of fundamentalist atheism after that.

The point is that, very deep in our conscience or psyche, human beings are programmed to believe in a superior or supreme being. Human arrogance suppresses that need to "have faith", and my own take on this is that atheism is as much a belief system (or faith) as any other. The other issue regarding religion/faith is that our world is very materialistic and religion teaches against this.

I blame Margaret Thatcher for promoting the self...

 

[witan]

It seems strange to me that someone who (apparently) has just one daughter, who he admits he saw infrequently should be writing about how to bring up children!! In those first few years of life a child's mind is a sponge, absorbing so much it is impossible to stop them falling prey to unhealthy doctrines - was he hoping to isolate her on a desert island? Rather than write her a tenth birthday letter, that it seems she didn't even get until she was eighteen, why didn't he try to be a proper dad and be there to explain and guide her as these things came up? Mind you looking at his comments on tradition and authority perhaps it was a blessing in disguise!

Just like the religious fanatics that he is (rightly) condemning he is confusing art and science, many of the traditional stories of the Bible and other religious works are simply that, artistic, descriptive stories to embellish a point, whether the story is 100% true or not is not important it's the moral code, the message that is important. There are many true records in the Bible (certainly as true as time and translations can possibly allow) but after thousands of years these stories and the example of Jesus' life (regardless of the details of whether Mary rose into Heaven or not) are still a solid foundation for modern life. If you read them with an open mind it is easy to relate them to the world today - fundamental truths that have withstood the passage of time.

I have worked with many scientists over the years, and met many at the leading edge in genome studies, particle physics and astrophysics, many of them are committed Christians, because they understand the limit of human knowledge, that regardless of their next great breakthrough there are many things that we will never understand - controlled by a far greater power whatever you might call him/her. they seem to grasp the difference between fact, belief and faith and the place each has in their lives.

For many Christians the divisions that once tore them apart are becoming less important, like all parts of society there will always be those that seek to exploit differences for their own benefit and power - religion is no different - we all get to hear about the leaders and the extremists, for the real truth listen to the ordinary man/woman and you'll understand what faith is and how it can transform your life.

I'm sorry Mr Dawkins you have a lot to learn about life.

 

[Momblegoose]

You know, I am a very religious person and yet, I didn't really feel that Dawkins was condemning religion in his letter. I felt that he was encouraging his daughter to always have an open mind, not to just blindly believe anything she was taught/told. Surely this is a good thing? I have not always been a religious person .. and it took a lot of learning, searching, looking for evidence before I was convinced.

 

[borofergie]

It seems strange to me that someone who (apparently) has just one daughter, who he admits he saw infrequently should be writing about how to bring up children!!

I have no idea about Dawkin's personal situation, but perhaps you shouldn't pass judgement. I never saw my only son for 6 months of his life, through no fault of my own. There are many excellent fathers who are placed in similarly difficult situations.

Rather than write her a tenth birthday letter, that it seems she didn't even get until she was eighteen, why didn't he try to be a proper dad and be there to explain and guide her as these things came up? Mind you looking at his comments on tradition and authority perhaps it was a blessing in disguise!

:thumbdown: John 8:7

Just like the religious fanatics that he is (rightly) condemning he is confusing art and science, many of the traditional stories of the Bible and other religious works are simply that, artistic, descriptive stories to embellish a point, whether the story is 100% true or not is not important it's the moral code, the message that is important.

Yeah? I missed the bit in the Bible which says "And I say to thee verily, you don't have to take any of this literally, especially the bits that science has proved to be completely wrong."

I have far more respect for the fundamentalist creationist christians, who accept every word as fact, than the ones that pick and choose the bits that suit them (or that haven't been disproved).

There are many true records in the Bible (certainly as true as time and translations can possibly allow) but after thousands of years these stories and the example of Jesus' life (regardless of the details of whether Mary rose into Heaven or not) are still a solid foundation for modern life. If you read them with an open mind it is easy to relate them to the world today - fundamental truths that have withstood the passage of time.

A solid foundation for modern life? Have you read Leviticus 19?

 

[Dillinger]

my own take on this is that atheism is as much a belief system (or faith) as any other.

I'm glad people are enjoying having a think about this; I didn't intend it to be a disruptive thing, but more a good perspective on evidence, in the particular context of what we as diabetics are often presented with.

On the above though, might I refer you to the eminent philosopher Ricky Gervais; 'talking about atheism as a belief is like talking about not going downhill skiing as a sport'.

Best

Dillinger

 

[borofergie]

The point is that, very deep in our conscience or psyche, human beings are programmed to believe in a superior or supreme being. Human arrogance suppresses that need to "have faith", and my own take on this is that atheism is as much a belief system (or faith) as any other.

A lack of belief is not a "belief system". I don't believe in fairies, does that mean that I have a whole belief system that supports my lack of belief?

Human beings aren't programmed. We evolved. As I mentioned yesterday, there are over 2500 recognised deities. You don't believe in 2499 of them. Atheists just believe in one less than you do.

The other issue regarding religion/faith is that our world is very materialistic and religion teaches against this.

I'm not sure what your point is here. Atheism is simply a lack of belief in (any) God(s). It doesn't have anything to do with materialism.

 

[Mileana]

Nothing like a good discussion, lol.

I do believe that you can be an atheist anti-materialist just as well as a religious one. The Bible hardly tells you to not enjoy wealth and prosperity. It just tells you to not base your life on it.

You can be a completely atheistic or non-christian hippie flipper living in a collective where you share the same mug too, though.

Whether we consider religion as the traditional interpretation of a particular belief system and scriptures as the basis for something or rather the result is an interesting discussion, though.

If your statement hadn't been about the result (churches, religions...) but rather the basis, the philosophy, the teachings, the viewpoint of one or more scriptures that are considered 'holy' or 'inspired', I would agree. The error of many people deciding to reign and rule over many more people does however often tend to lead to accumulation of wealth, not seldomly at expense of the actual message they are trying to convey or preach.

-M