Search by Subject
Video
Cast
BlogThe trouble with Richard Dawkins
Click here for more videos with Professor Ruse or here for all the videos in our video library.
Subscribe to our iTunes Vodcast/Podcast - If you have a podcast reader other than iTunes click here
| 13-Mar-2009 04:19 PM Anonymous |  |
| All credit to you, John, for presenting the views of an 'avowed unbeliever' like Ruse on your website. But it’s hard to see how his views will be particularly encouraging for Christians feeling besieged by the atheist onslaught. After all, isn’t this Ruse’s perspective in a nutshell? - “Christians are much more intellectually sophisticated than Dawkins makes out, so most of his objections miss the mark. But I have examined Christianity in its most sophisticated form, and I still find it implausible.” In other words, Christianity is false, but not for the reasons given by Dawkins. Not much to celebrate about, I would have thought. Cheers, Anon. | |
| 20-Mar-2009 04:32 AM Anonymous |  |
| Ah, but it IS encouraging for those of us who were beginning to doubt that there was such a thing as a friendly atheist. Obviously we all know that there are plenty of them out there, but it seems like people only like to pay attention to the vitriol-driven ones. I think you hit the nail on the head with "atheist onslaught". The "New Atheists" are characterized by aggressive attitudes, willful ignorance of theology, and the belief that religion cannot even coexist with science. What I personally see in Michael Ruse (among others) is the possibility of atheism without arrogance. He does not think that you are a scourge on mankind. He may not agree with Christians on all things, but he won't necessarily hold that against them, or assume that they're simply too weak or stupid to be atheists. It may not be worth celebrating, but only because it shouldn't be considered the exception to the rule. | |
| 23-Mar-2009 11:54 PM Anonymous |  |
| No feedback was left by this visitor. | |
| 27-Mar-2009 02:07 PM Anonymous | |
| Here's a scandalous thought: Perhaps the "New Atheists" are actually covert theological super-sophisticates on a mission. They want to expose and uproot the "aggressive attitudes, willful ignorance of theology, and the belief that religion cannot even coexist with science" that characterise, well, probably 80-90% of Christians. Their methods may not be pleasant, but hey, didn't Paul say "I became weak, that I might win the weak"? Maybe these guys are just fighting fire with fire: a kind of back burning enterprise – cleansing Christianity of its most embarrassing adherents. (You know, the sort of Christian that makes you want to hesitate from calling yourself a ‘Christian’ on national radio.) Hang on, isn't that kinda the rationale behind CPX? . . . Ah, so THAT’s why you give Dawkins so much publicity! :) Best wishes, Anon. | |
| 15-Apr-2009 12:24 PM Mark |  |
| theological super-sophisticates on a mission... :-) anyway, yeah i concur with the guy | |
| 17-Apr-2009 01:00 AM Anonymous | |
| NOT the University of Florida!!!! Florida State University. Go Seminoles! | |
| 19-Oct-2009 12:13 PM siric17 | |
| I strongly disagree with Ruse in this clip. The Christian cannot "articulate a reasoned defense," as Dawkins repeatedly and systematically demonstrates throughout his book. In response to the implied statement that no sane Christian believes the bible should be taken literally, Dawkins answers: "By what criterion do you decide which [biblical] passages are symbolic, which literal?" Dawkins shows that the Christian religion is based on a fictional book that far too many people take as unadulterated truth. How can anything based on a completely fabricated book, (that millions of people delude themselves into believing) be a worthwhile use of mankind's time and effort? | |
| 24-Dec-2009 04:34 PM Steve Watt | |
| @ siric17 But that's Ruse's point. Dawkins doesn't systematically demonstrate anything. He just arrogantly asserts the wrongness of his take on what Christians believe and then moves on. He doesn't really actually understand or engage with the arguments. Thank you Professor Ruse for your lack of arrogance. It's refreshing to see a atheist who doesn't assume all Christians must be ignorant raving loonies. | |
| 28-Dec-2009 12:30 AM @siric17 | |
| "a completely fabricated book" |
|
| 05-Jan-2010 03:08 PM Joey | |
| Dawkins is strange. He is a man with his mind made up. It really doesn't matter what you present to him, if it clashes with what he has predetermined. Christianity today may not be what it should be, but with people like Dawkins trying to break the foudations of a people's faith it can be surprising that it flourishes at all. I have rarely seen Dawkins give an informed presentation. He seems more attuned to brainwashing those who lack depth of knowledge. I really don't think Ruse is on target. | |
| 19-Mar-2010 03:40 PM David | |
| But of course this is precisely Dawkins' point: the best way to demolish theism and Christianity is to refuse to even admit they have an argument! I don't think it's a good approach or a good argument on Dawkins' part (in fact it's a non-argument), but I suspect that it's what he's up to! It's worse than argumentum ad hominem; it's argumentum non existum!! | |
Comment