> > On Dec 10, 2007 6:59 AM, John G. Rose <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > > Dawkins trivializes religion from his comfortable first world > perspective > > ignoring the way of life of hundreds of millions of people and offers > little > > substitute for what religion does and has done for civilization and > what has > > came out of it over the ages. He's a spoiled brat prude with a glaring > > self-righteous desire to prove to people with his copious superficial > > factoids that god doesn't exist by pandering to common frustrations. > He has > > little common sense about the subject in general, just his > > > > > > > Wow. Nice to see someone take that position on Dawkins. I'm > ambivalent, > > but I haven't seen many rational comments against him and his views. > > Nice? Why? I thought you wanted rational comments. "Rational" by > definition means comments giving reasons, which the above do not. >
Well I shouldn't berate the poor dude... The subject of rationality is pertinent though as the way that humans deal with unknown involves irrationality especially in relation to deitical belief establishment. Before we had all the scientific instruments and methodologies irrationality played an important role. How many AGIs have engineered irrationality as functional dependencies? Scientists and computer geeks sometimes overly apply rationality in irrational ways. The importance of irrationality perhaps is underplayed as before science, going from primordial sludge to the age of reason was quite a large percentage of mans time spent in existence... and here we are. John ----- This list is sponsored by AGIRI: http://www.agiri.org/email To unsubscribe or change your options, please go to: http://v2.listbox.com/member/?member_id=8660244&id_secret=79875428-48610a
