Sopho wrote:
JakeG wrote:
Other faiths or beliefs then if you will; I can understand having an opinion on a god concept not existing but to be absolutely sure is an un-scientific belief.
I am sure anyone who has read Dawkin's books (read: diatribes) and seen him on TV or his general publicity circus wouldn't have much trouble in agreeing that he is evangelising atheism...just look at some of his sheep like followers who hang on to his every word.
Evangelism in todays day and age doesn't just mean knocking on doors...
Atheism is not a faith. I don't have 100% faith in there being no god. I simply think it's so unlikely that it's practically complete sh*te....
By definition it is a faith, a belief that god doesn't exist; if you don't feel 100% sure that god doesn't exist then I would call that agnosticism. I don't know how one can broach the issue in terms of evidence as to the question of assigning an exact likelihood as it seems beyond scientific method in most instances. My personal intuition concerning the approach is twofold; I don't feel most of the god concept is an accurate representation of life and the question of existence seems something entirely irrelevent to me and not worthy of too much thought.
Sopho wrote:
I completely agree with everything I've heared/read from Dawkins. He has even said himself that he has no way of PROVING there is no god so he's not claiming to know for a fact that none exist, but that it is about as likely as the Tooth Fairy. I stopped believing in Santa when I was a kid. I would assume most intelligent people would do the same with 'God.' That's just my opinion though, and I'm not a sheep, I don't follow Dawkins, I just happen to agree with him. I had formed my own opinions on religion before I had even heard of him.
Good for you that you read his rants (I mean books) critically but the fact remains that:
a) many people don't and just buy into the whole Church of Dawkins in the manner that they buy into any other fashion or religeon.
b) his whole publicity-whoring approach to book authoring is designed to convert people to atheistic beliefs which is a form of evangelism. I think that he is just as (if not more) aggressive in this evangelism as people who knock on the occaisional door.
Just to clarify, I agree with much of what Dawkin's says/writes etc. It is rather his
approach that I am against.