This site is not maintained. Click here for the new website of Richard Dawkins.

Comment

← Q&A: Pell vs Dawkins - April 9, Easter Monday night

archway's Avatar Jump to comment 4 by archway

So Richard Dawkins is to debate the Guru of the Catholic Church, Cardinal George Pell of Sydney. Dawkins will love Australia, the land where the most outspoken and authoritative on any subject are those who know least about it. We've venerated such brash self-confidence since the landing at Botany Bay. The original inhabitants were too bright to go in for that sort of thing. Had we (white Australians) adopted their psychic culture instead of crushing it, we wouldn't need a debate between a redundant Medievalist and a redundant militant know-all, both certain of things they can know nothing about. When Richard denies the existence of a higher realm of existence, he's like an ant banging away on a street corner denying the existence of the differential calculus, and would be amusing if it were not so pathetic.

At the threshold of the 21st century, the debate should fly a lot higher than this. Erich Fromm got it right in describing our psychically blighted state and the need for "the emergence of new (and higher) forms of psychospiritual orientation and devotion, which are equivalents of the religious systems of the past." If there's one thing I can't abide more than a pre-historic God-squadder like Generaloberst Pell, it's a rank materialist sounding off on matters psychic or spiritual, especially denying the existence of such things. A Pom has adopted the Aussie approach where not knowing something makes one an expert in it. It's pure tedium. When can we have a debate between people who are up to the questions that need asking and answering? I feel sorry for people like Chris Hitchens whose Earthly existences have provided no insights into the invisible world the biologist J. B. S. Haldane spoke of, saying he had little time for those who remained ignorant of its existence. It's a pity Einstein isn't here to update his maxim:

"Thought is the highest form of matter; Matter is the lowest form of thought. The material is what is produced; Spirit is what does the producing."

We live in an age where that insight needs to be expanded and made general knowledge. That's something the bright ones amongst can relate to in a debate. As Professor H. S. D. Garven said: 'We have the strange situation that the man in the street has begun to believe thoroughly in science, while the man in the laboratory has begun to lose his faith in his science.' Neither Richard nor the Cardinal are up to the mark. It's not good enough. We can do much better than this. We have to. The status quo is going to make us extinct.

Fri, 06 Apr 2012 02:33:58 UTC | #932670