Quote:
Originally Posted by Hasbinlulz
[You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]
This video is really good. I don't usually like Dawkins outside of his work in biology, but he is straight up in this debate. Furthermore, C. Pell has the most astute arguments and public conception of "god" that I have ever seen. If you like Dawkins, you've probably seen this, but here you go.
<object width="560" height="315"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/g4oMfY7q-Uo?version=3&hl=en_US"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/g4oMfY7q-Uo?version=3&hl=en_US" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" width="560" height="315" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true"></embed></object> |
Great video. Dawkins needs some work on his interpersonal skills, though. I found it awkward when he kept asking why the audience was laughing. Also, while I understood what he meant when he said something to the effect that asking "why" (I believe he was thinking purpose) is "not a valid question" (I think he meant not scientifically relevant), I thought he could have stated this better. "Why" is obviously a pretty important question to most people.
I also found some of C. Pell's responses to be a bit insincere to appear more moderate (at least not representing the Catholic church's core values). He basically said atheists can get to heaven, we evolved from lower primates (thus allowing for an older earth and acceptance of evolutionary principles), and that much of the old testament isn't necessary litteral. He did, however, say that the wafer/wine at communion DOES transform to the blood and body of Christ, although he admits that physically there is no change. He was almost unintelligible when he described this as metaphysical and refused to say it was symbolic.
Anyway, thanks for the view.