Richard Dawkins on the Late Late

Morbert

Dades wrote: »

Anyone catch Jimmy Carr?

Their brief chat about God and atheism made up for the Dawkins disaster.
Great stuff altogether.

DAMMIT! I switched over. Why was it good, out of curiosity?

Roro4Brit

Even Jimmys jokes on religion were wasted on that audience...seriously what was with that fukin audience...

Agricola

fisgon wrote: »

Also, not sure why all the hands of the theists going up is depressing, what should we expect? It's simply the default setting for this society, for people who dont' really think about it a belief in god is just what is normal. Doesn't mean any of them are actually religious.

Exactly. The idea of even having a show of hands was moronic. Would anyone actually think it would be any other result. And how many people put up their hands because its the default position which doesnt make them an outsider with their family and friends.

Dawkins on the late late show should mean an interesting and informative debate about a fundamentally interesting subject. We should make good use of the opportunity of having such a fierce intellect in Ireland - Im surprised he even came on tbh. Instead RTE goes for the usual predictable rubbish.

Handsome Bob

Dades wrote: »

Anyone catch Jimmy Carr?

Their brief chat about God and atheism made up for the Dawkins disaster.
Great stuff altogether.

I saw it, that's how I found out Dawkins was on it earlier. Jimmy surprisingly was not smug or in major "comedian mode" when talking about religion, very likeable chap all together.

hullaballoo

Naikon wrote: »

Science:

(1 It does not explain everything...yet
(2 It'š far more logical to assume we do not have an explanation
for something yet, than to pretend 'god done it'

I'm not having a go at you here but the tenor of your post implies that you feel it is necessary to be blunt and explain the nature of science and logic to me.

Simply because I think Dawkins was unnecessarily fervent in his views does not mean that I believe in God. I even said I don't in my post. I was pointing to his lack of courtesy to the beliefs of others.

It's important to remember that most people in Ireland are brought up, being taught in school and often at home that God exists. Many of them are wise enough not to believe in the teachings of the established church anymore, but if you take God away from them, they will have too many questions. Just because you have I have my answers in relation to the soul and what happens after death, doesn't mean I'm ever going to try and take God away from someone else.

People will embrace those beliefs that are most sensible to them at any given time. Some change their beliefs over time, but many are happy to blindly accept what's been given to them and won't think about them until they need to.

Aldebaran

Dades wrote: »

Their brief chat about God and atheism made up for the Dawkins disaster.
Great stuff altogether.

+1

"If we're all God's children then what makes Jesus so special?"

YFlyer

T.W.H Byron wrote: »

Evolution is what he is most well known for along with his theory of a gene centred form of evolution and natural selection. The whole God thing comes along later.

Yes but he does spend a significant amount of time on the whole God thing

liamw

Agricola wrote: »

Dawkins on the late late show should mean an interesting and informative debate about a fundamentally interesting subject. We should make good use of the opportunity of having such a fierce intellect in Ireland - Im surprised he even came on tbh. Instead RTE goes for the usual predictable rubbish.

Very true. That interview was just annoying...

Dave!

I'm 3 minutes into this interview and it's already 1000 x more intelligent than Tubridy's

http://timesonline.typepad.com/science/2009/09/richard-dawkins-in-conversation-with-james-harding-editor-of-the-times.html

Worth a watch

GhostInTheRuins

What a terrible interview, "Have you thought about your funeral?" Come on...

This is the first time I've seen the LLS with Tubs, and I don't plan on watching it anytime soon either.

Really shocked how many people raised their hands though, but in fairness, the people that go to the LLS probably aren't like the rest of us.

ironingbored

Tubridy was unbelievably childish in his questioning and came across as deluded as the audience. What should have been an engaging debate on evolution, Darwin, religion and the beauty of the natural world turned into a village hall kerfuffle about the easter bunny.

Jimmy Carr is an absolute legend who rose above a sickening lethargic public.

Having said that I do think Richard could try to better understand the audience he has in front of him. He can come across as condescending to a group of ill-informed people from a scientific point of view. I think certain audiences need to be met half way and coaxed into further reading and enquiry.

Although not overtly surprised by the show of hands my heart did sink somewhat. We have a lot of work to do!

Giggy

Tzetze wrote: »

When Dawkins made the point for brain-size to continue increasing in humans' future evolution requiring intelligent people to pump out the most offspring, I hoped for the question 'Who in the audience have large numbers of kids?' Guaranteed that all the same hands would have went up!

Doubt it!

ironingbored

ironingbored wrote: »

We have a lot of work to do!

Yes, a lot of work.

YFlyer

ironingbored wrote: »

We have a lot of work to do!

Why bother, everyone to themselves

hullaballoo

-JammyDodger- wrote: »

Yes, a lot of work.

Though, looking at it this way, far fewer people are querying the existence of RD.

stevejazzx

How is it smug of Dawkins to confirm his (utterly well known) beliefs when he is childishly challenged by a moronic interviewer? Only people that are not familiar with Dawkins call him smug. Watch a lecture or long interview, he is humble, he is down to earth and he does come across as a throughly nice guy. He simply does not entertain an intermediary, illogical moderation of his belief for the sake of people who are offended by his view.

Roro4Brit

Defending truth is important. Agnostics are under threat in many part of the world...the simple attitude of the audience towards this man tonight provides a good example of the attitudes of many.

From what I see is that for every person who becomes enlightened to the truth, there are four more who move closer to their religious beliefs...

It's funny how people are so quick to defend their religious beliefs which agnosticism/atheism is the real belief under threat

Dave!

Watch this interview
http://timesonline.typepad.com/science/2009/09/richard-dawkins-in-conversation-with-james-harding-editor-of-the-times.html

Funny bit at about 17 mins when he discusses the atheist's nightmare

ironingbored

YFlyer wrote: »

Why bother, everyone to themselves

Well,

1) because it's true.
2) because religious moderates enable fundamentalists
3) because we have one life and should do everything we can to dissuade others from wasting theirs preparing for eternal adulation of a non-existent entity.

As I said in another thread: I ask myself how different the world would be if all the wasted energy that religious people put into reading scripture, praying, going on pilgrimmages, etc. wasn't redirected towards scientific inquiry, research and learning. If every priest, imam and rabbi were a doctor, scientist or researcher.

Zamboni

I am just back from the Late Late show.

I can't believe I had to sit through the Nolans and the Corona's for that interview.

I was one of (I think around 8 of us) the ones who put up the hand for not believing in God.
I was actually shocked because there were a fair few young people.

Tubridy was a disgrace. Dawkins probably waived the appearance fee to publicise his new book and Tubridy played the god card going on about TGD.

10/10 to Jimmy Carr. I had read previously he was an atheist so I am glad he came out with some good one liners.

Dawkins left in a hurry, probably despondent at the state of Ireland...

Handsome Bob

ironingbored wrote: »

Well,

1) because it's true.
2) because religious moderates enable fundamentalists
3) because we have one life and should do everything we can to dissuade others from wasting theirs preparing for eternal adulation of a non-existent entity.

As I said in another thread: I ask myself how different the world would be if all the wasted energy that religious people put into reading scripture, praying, going on pilgrimmages, etc. wasn't redirected towards scientific inquiry, research and learning. If every priest, imam and rabbi were a doctor, scientist or researcher.

Ah yes Sam Harris. Do you care to elaborate?

Agricola

Zamboni wrote: »

I am just back from the Late Late show.

I can't believe I had to sit through the Nolans and the Corona's for that interview.

I was one of (I think around 8 of us) the ones who put up the hand for not believing in God.
I was actually shocked because there were a fair few young people.

Tubridy was a disgrace. Dawkins probably waived the appearance fee to publicise his new book and Tubridy played the god card going on about TGD.

10/10 to Jimmy Carr. I had read previously he was an atheist so I am glad he came out with some good one liners.

Dawkins left in a hurry, probably despondent at the state of Ireland...

I doubt it. Im sure he has been on countless TV shows promoting books where he was been in front of even more conservative audiences. I imagine if he ever saw a show of hands where atheists were in the majority, he would be shocked.

Its Tubridys who dragged us down to the level of village idiots. He has a duty to be an impartial interviewer whos supposed to argue both sides. In fairness to Pat Kenny, that was one thing he excelled at.

"So whats the Vatican?? Toy Town?"

- Well if thats not a defensive believer talking I dont know what is. I really thought Tubridy was a bright, intelligent guy who would love the opportunity to have someone like Richard Dawkins on the show. Looks likes hes just another ratings whore who knows how to play into the hands of his largely middle-aged Catholic television audience.

lostexpectation

Agricola wrote: »

Its Tubridys who dragged us down to the level of village idiots. He has a duty to be an impartial interviewer whos supposed to argue both sides. In fairness to Pat Kenny, that was one thing he excelled at.

"So whats the Vatican?? Toy Town?"

- Well if thats not a defensive believer talking I dont know what is. I really thought Tubridy was a bright, intelligent guy who would love the opportunity to have someone like Richard Dawkins on the show. Looks likes hes just another ratings whore who knows how to play into the hands of his largely middle-aged Catholic television audience.

amen

ironingbored

LZ5by5 wrote: »

Ah yes Sam Harris. Do you care to elaborate?

Religious fundamentalists just take their beliefs one step further.

I agree entirely with Harris that it is the same doctrine that sanctions the Shia ritual of self-flagellation drives the faithful to strap explosives to their bodies and enter shopping centres and fly planes into skyscrapers.

How would the foot soldiers of the pro-life movement here react if abortion were to be introduced into Ireland. Would the Catholic notion of a soul compel individuals to cross the line and physically prevent doctors from performing abortions?

If so-called moderates can believe in flying horses, walking on water, eating flesh and drinking blood why not in 72 virgins for martyrdom?

Apparently there exists a group in the US called Christians for Israel and supported by some well known member of Congress, whose goal is to support holy war in the Middle East because of their belief that this is what will precipitate the rapture and the second coming of Christ. No most "moderate" Christians also believe that Jesus will "come again" so the leap is not that great.

Rb

That was horrendous. I'm glad I watched it though, as it merely confirmed my thoughts in Tubridy as a presenter and journalist.

He just is not up to the job. He might be able to interview such wonderful guests as the Nolans, but when faced with Dawkins and Jimmy Carr he was well out of his depth.

He came merely proved what a smug, ignorant waste of sperm he is with his shallow, stupid questions such as "Have you thought about your funeral hurr hurr hurr". How convenient it is that the managed to find one of the few relatively progressive priests in the country to talk to Dawkins.

I truly felt for Dawkins being subjected to that.

The audience were nothing short of pathetic and I hope, I really do hope, that they aren't a true representation of the average group in Irish society otherwise we are ****ED. Fair play to the few who stuck their hands up about not believing anyway.

Jimmy Carr was excellent though and I loved every minute of his jibes at the audience and their beliefs, really rescued the night for me, particularly since I didn't win the Top Gear prize ( )

YFlyer

ironingbored wrote: »

Well,

1) because it's true.
2) because religious moderates enable fundamentalists
3) because we have one life and should do everything we can to dissuade others from wasting theirs preparing for eternal adulation of a non-existent entity.

As I said in another thread: I ask myself how different the world would be if all the wasted energy that religious people put into reading scripture, praying, going on pilgrimmages, etc. wasn't redirected towards scientific inquiry, research and learning. If every priest, imam and rabbi were a doctor, scientist or researcher.

You will be hitting your head against the wall. If they are not ready to change the view point its a waste of time. Sure you can give your agrument but don't force it if their is resistance to it.

I have came across hostile responds from both religious and non-religious people when I promote Transcendental Meditation even with the hundreds of scientific papers on it benefits.

People will believe what they believe

drkpower

Zamboni wrote: »

Tubridy was a disgrace. Dawkins probably waived the appearance fee to publicise his new book and Tubridy played the god card going on about TGD.

Not to pick on Zamboni's comment but what would you expect Tubs to do?
He had Dawkins on. While Dawkins is a reknowned evolutionary biologist, the reason for his fame is his voews and advocacy on behalf of atheism; in short, he is famous for "The God Delusion". Only a piss poor interviewer would have not taken the opportunity to ask him predominantly about tat.

It would be like having George Foreman on and talking to him about his grill all night instead of about boxing....

ironingbored

drkpower wrote: »

It would be like having George Foreman on and talking to him about his grill all night instead of about boxing....

I think the analogy is brilliant yet misplaced.

Tubridy tonight did nothing except talk about Dawkins' grill.

Zamboni

drkpower wrote: »

Not to pick on Zamboni's comment but what would you expect Tubs to do?
He had Dawkins on. While Dawkins is a reknowned evolutionary biologist, the reason for his fame is his voews and advocacy on behalf of atheism; in short, he is famous for "The God Delusion". Only a piss poor interviewer would have not taken the opportunity to ask him predominantly about tat.

Fair enough but look at the ignorance Tubridy shows as an interviewer.
He had absolutely no idea what to talk to the CEO from Quantas during the earlier interview and essentially blanked him.
All he knew about Robinson was the 'NHS hospital' thing.

I suppose my point is, I can bet that he didn't even flick open the front cover of TGSOE. Which would be like Jonathon Ross interviewing Tom Cruise without watching the film that Cruise is publicising.

drkpower

ironingbored wrote: »

I think the analogy is brilliant yet misplaced.

Tubridy tonight did nothing except talk about Dawkins' grill.

I see what you are saying but while Dawkins is first and foremost a biologist, the perception of Joe Public is that he is a 'celebrity atheist' first and foremost. And the Late Late is about satisfying Joe Public.