Articles 文章 Bible 圣经

武装无神论|理查德·道金斯

Written by joyfulbible



生物学家理查德·道金斯(Richard Dawkins)向无神论者发出呼吁,宣扬他们的信仰,积极打击宗教入侵政治和教育。道金斯轻蔑的语气引起听众的强烈反应。一些人站起来,鼓起勇气。其他人则想知道他的咄咄逼人的做法是否会造成更多的伤害。道金斯继续发表“神妄想”,成为世界上最知名的无神论者。

TEDTalks是TED会议上最好的演讲和演出的日常视频播客,世界顶尖的思想家和实干家在18分钟内讲述了他们的生活。 TED代表技术,娱乐,设计和TEDTalks涵盖这些主题以及科学,商业,发展和艺术。隐藏式字幕和多种语言的翻译字幕现已在TED.com网站上公布

在推特上关注我们

 
查看我们的Facebook页面TED独家
  

About the author

joyfulbible

25 Comments

  • Richard Dawkins is so fucking full of it. Having worked at both Bell Labs and JPL I can assure you there's no incursion of religious ideas in science. It's quite the opposite. Now, maybe atheists are not well liked in social circles, the media, etc. but within scientific circles nobody is interjecting or accepting any religious ideas. In fact most religions are being attacked nearly daily on websites, shows (like Bill Maher) and obviously youtube is a virtual galaxy of atheist trolls. But incursion into science? Leave the paranoia at home Dawkins.

  • science brings a high speed camera to a con mans table and naturally the con man will be hostile to the science and those that put trust in its unwavering honest ideal

    soon the biggest con of all "religion" will have no trick to hide, no con to control as science pulls the vale away to show the true beauty that religion has made efforts to hide

  • Should the scientist, who is aware of the natural causes and of the factors determining each step of creation towards perfection, of mankind's evolution, of the minute accuracy and exactitude that rules every change in the nature that surrounds us, come to believe that these wondrous laws and amazing interactions have somehow fortuitously emerged out of mindless matter?

    Have his discoveries and insights merely brought him to a stage of thought which sees only blind concomitance and chance conjunctures in the exactly interacting phenomena?

    Where is the logic in claiming that belief in God is confined to persons unaware of the processes of creation?

    For further research – click >>> http://www.al-islam.org/god-and-his-attributes-sayyid-mujtaba-musawi-lari

  • Why does Dawkins, if he is such an upstanding atheist, so "moral" in his own eyes, why does he not be aggressive against the lying text books who printed fake "human" embryos with gills to indoctrinate kids in schools with the religious dogma of evolution???????? That is because he loves lies he is immoral and not subject to the To'rah of Yah'uah like the suspected paedophile Stephen Fry. He believes if he has enoug hliars on his side that will somehow help him when he stands before the All Consuming fire YAH'UAH who will destroy this earth too.

  • Free will was given with an advisory included. Yah'uah said : you may eat of any tree you choose ( FREE WILL!!!) but of this tree YOU MAY NOT EAT because it will kill you. It was free will but Chuwah ( Eve) could not stick to it because of a lie from a deceiver satan a deceiver like Sam harris who says no you will not die (lose eternal life) and that this is not really free will. SHAME they never learn these atheists do they not even from History. CHOOSE SIN AND DEATH OR RIGHTEOUSNESS AND ETERNAL LIFE FREE WILL. Sam Harris cannot be moral since he does not bow to the Law giver who defines morality.

  • Someone designing something complex doesnt require something more complex to create it. Humans create things far more complicated than we ourselves are.

    There's a difference between attacking religion and criticizing it. You can criticize them but to attack religion because you think there ideas are factually incorrect than you are either being misguided or bigoted.

    There's a difference between Christianity today and in the Old days. You can try to reform the faith, but to condisendingly try to fight against it is both foolish and bigoted.

  • Didn't the science community regect evolution until they died and the next generation just excepted it. It's a good theory, and the best we have so far but man were the scientists dense back then

  • Every time I have heard Dawkins use the word "homosexual" in one of his talks, he has uttered the word with a tone of condescension bordering on disgust. I fear that if "militant atheists" of Dawkins' stripe were running the show, the US would not have made anything like the enormous progress in marriage equality and toward general social equality for LGBT people that we have seen in the past several years.

  • Why beeing atheist instead of agnostic? I´m not religious at all and I don´t believe in an christian or islamic kindly omniscient almighty god. BUT maybe there COULD be some sort of transcendent power. We don´t know and we never will. So saying dogmatically " I know, there is no god" is as stupid and narrow-minded as saying "there is a god and I know it".
    Only thing we know for certain is that we know nothing 😉

  • Fabulous yet again. The only criticism I have is in him not qualifying IQ v religious belief giving the impression that higher IQ's make it more likely to be Atheist. I do not have a particularly high IQ or formal education but am fairly worldly wise and am an atheist because I can reason. This therefore gives the impression that atheism is somewhat elitist. Perhaps being British we are a little more cynical and so more likely to question things which are not supported by evidence.

Leave a Comment