Richard Dawkins And Love

From Conservapedia

The new atheist Richard Dawkins declared: "If it's bleak too bad. I mean, why should it be anything other than bleak? I mean there is no caring about the universe. Why should there be? Why should the universe care about what happens to us? But we can make our own world. We can make our own purposes. Our own warmth. Our own affections. Our own loves. We can lead a life that is anything other than bleak."^[1]}}

Richard Dawkins has divorced three wives.

Vox Day wrote in the his book The Irrational Atheist about Dawkins's claim that teaching children about Hell is more harmful to children than "mild child abuse":

“

Richard Dawkins is perhaps one of the last men on Earth who should be discussing what is the right and proper way to raise children, given that the number of his wives outnumber his offspring.

In his letter to his daughter Juliet, addressed to her at the age of ten and published in A Devil’s Chaplain, there is little mention of love, no admission of regret, and no paternal promises. As one British journalist noted, the letter is “coldly impersonal” and “authoritarian.” There is no expression of interest in what might be important to her.^[2]

”

Richard Dawkins on erotic love[edit]

Dawkins wrote in an article entitled Banning the Green-Eyed Monster:

“

Even sticking to the higher plane of love, is it so very obvious that you can't love more than one person? We seem to manage it with parental love (parents are reproached if they don't at least pretend to love all their children equally), love of books, of food, of wine (love of Chateau Margaux does not preclude love of a fine Hock, and we don't feel unfaithful to the red when we dally with the white), love of composers, poets, holiday beaches, friends . . . why is erotic love the one exception that everybody instantly acknowledges without even thinking about it?^[3]

”

Richard Dawkins' and his three ex-wives[edit]

See also: Atheism and love

In 1984, Dawkins divorced his wife of 17 years, Marian Stamp; later that same year, he married Eve Barham. Dawkins also divorced Barham, though the precise circumstances of this divorce are unclear.^[4] He married science fiction actress Lalla Ward in 1992 and they separated after 24 years of marriage.^[5]

Vox Day wrote in the his book The Irrational Atheist about Dawkins's claim that teaching children about Hell is more harmful to children than "mild child abuse":

“

Richard Dawkins is perhaps one of the last men on Earth who should be discussing what is the right and proper way to raise children, given that the number of his wives outnumber his offspring.

”

Richard Dawkins and anger[edit]

See also: Richard Dawkins and anger

Richard Dawkins has encouraged his supporters to go beyond humorous ridicule.^[9] He wrote, "I lately started to think that we need to go further: go beyond humorous ridicule, sharpen our barbs to a point where they really hurt."^[10] See: Atheism and mockery

The Apostle Paul wrote: Love is... not easily angered, it keeps no record of wrongs." (1 Corinthians 13:5).

Richard Dawkins has a reputation of being an angry man (see: Richard Dawkins and anger).

Richard Dawkins is one of the principle founders of the New Atheism movement. Dawkins flip-flops between atheism and agnosticism as far as his public persona (see: Richard Dawkins and agnosticism).

New Atheism is a form of militant atheism/antitheism.

As far as their interactions with the religious, Dawkins has encouraged his supporters to go beyond humorous ridicule.^[11] At the Reason Rally he exclaimed, "Mock them. Ridicule them! In public."^[12] He also wrote, "I lately started to think that we need to go further: go beyond humorous ridicule, sharpen our barbs to a point where they really hurt."^[13] See: Richard Dawkins and intolerance and Atheism and mockery

Social science research indicates that antitheists score the highest among atheists when it comes to personality traits such as narcissism, dogmatism, and anger.^[14]^[15] Furthermore, they scored lowest when it comes to agreeableness and positive relations with others.^[16]

Using special text analysis software, the social psychologist Jonathan Haidt found that New Atheists very often wrote in dogmatic terms in their major works using words such as “always,” “never,” “certainly,” “every,” and “undeniable.”^[17] Of the 75,000 words in Sam Harris's The End of Faith, 2.24% of them connote or are associated with certainty.^[18] See also: Atheism and arrogance

The National reported concerning the agnostic and evolutionist Richard Dawkins:

“

There was a time when the British scientist Richard Dawkins was widely admired...

More recently, he has shifted his attention to religion and has become known as one of its fiercest opponents. His insistence on allowing for none of the shade and subtlety that characterise the works of scholars such as Karen Armstrong, author of acclaimed books on Islam and the history of the monotheistic religions, have offended and infuriated millions. But they also have thrilled his followers who wish all discussion of faith to be banished to the fringes of the public square.

Mr Dawkins has always been pugnacious. When I interviewed the philosopher Daniel Dennett, a professor at Tufts University and a fellow leading member of an atheist group that calls itself the Brights, he described himself as being the “good cop” to Mr Dawkins’s “bad cop”. Mr Dennett conceded: “Richard is so hostile and aggressive that he’s unsympathetic.”

But now, Mr Dawkins’s unwillingness to treat anyone who disagrees with him as though they had even half a functioning brain cell is putting off even his own supporters.

“Richard Dawkins, whatever happened to you?” read a recent headline in The Guardian, the British newspaper whose readers and staff are generally among the most sympathetic to him. What does it say when a home to some of the most ardent atheists wants Richard Dawkins, frankly, to put a sock in it?^[19]

”

Christianity Today indicated about Richard Dawkins:

“

Some atheists have sought to distance themselves from Dawkins because they feel the combative way in which he argues against faith is doing more harm than good for the atheist cause.

Dawkins appears to care little about what others think about his approach, atheist or otherwise, as after all these years he's still gunning for the religious.

In his own eyes at least, "aggressive" would be too strong a term for his stinging attacks on faith.

"I'm not aggressive!" Dawkins exclaimed in last week's appearance at the College of Liberal Arts and Sciences (University of Connecticut), when Dean Jeremy Teitelbaum asked him why he had come to take "quite an aggressive stand against God and promote atheism".

On second thoughts, "Well, perhaps I'm angry," he admitted, before dropping the pretences altogether and making clear what he thinks about anyone who teaches children anything other than his beliefs on evolution.^[20]

”

Oliver Burkeman wrote in The Guardina about Dawkins:

“

Why are atheists so angry? The question – regularly flung around in debates about religion – is a self-fulfilling one, since atheists get pretty irritated whenever they’re asked it. But it’s revealing, too, because it pinpoints a surprising zone of agreement between believers and non-believers: many on both sides accept the premise that atheists are angrier than average.

Naturally, their reasoning differs. Evangelical Christians sometimes assert that atheists secretly believe in God and fear he’s judging them; atheists retort that religion gives them plenty of things to be angry about. Either way, it’s difficult to examine Richard Dawkins’s Twitter feed (to pick the most unfairly obvious example) and fail to conclude that tetchiness and faithlessness go hand in hand...

But the “angry atheist” cliché is also another reminder of just how far the celebrity New Atheists have shortchanged the rest of us who identify, more broadly, with the causes of secularism and rationalism. Because the New Atheists really do seem unusually angry.^[21]

”

Dawkins' comment concerning Adolf Hitler[edit]

The evolutionist and agnostic Richard Dawkins said in an interview: “What’s to prevent us from saying Hitler wasn’t right? I mean, that is a genuinely difficult question."^[22]

As noted earlier, when asked in an interview, "If we do not acknowledge some sort of external [standard], what is to prevent us from saying that the Muslim [extremists] aren’t right?", Dawkins replied, "What’s to prevent us from saying Hitler wasn’t right? I mean, that is a genuinely difficult question, but whatever [defines morality], it’s not the Bible. If it was, we’d be stoning people for breaking the Sabbath."^[22]

The interviewer wrote in response, "I was stupefied. He had readily conceded that his own philosophical position did not offer a rational basis for moral judgments. His intellectual honesty was refreshing, if somewhat disturbing on this point."^[22]

For additional information, please see:

Richard Dawkins' commentary on Adolf Hitler

Atheists, Adolf Hitler and the no true Scottsman fallacy

Richard Dawkins' comment about aborting Down syndrome babies[edit]

In August 2014, Richard Dawkins caused a firestorm by claiming an unborn baby with Down’s syndrome should be aborted and that it would be “immoral to bring it into the world.”^[23] Dr. Michael Brown wrote in the Christian Post about this matter: "It is becoming increasingly clear that Dawkins is something of an embarrassment, even to other atheists (although he is still revered by many). The only question that remains is this: Are his irrational and immoral positions unique to him, or are they the logical outcome of his Darwinian evolutionism?"^[24] See also: Social effects of the theory of evolution

A British father whose Down's syndrome daughter passed six General Certificate of Secondary Education (GCSE) tests called Richard Dawkins an "ignorant idiot".^[25]