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

anonquick's Profile

anonquick's Avatar Joined over 6 years ago
Gender: Male

Latest Discussions Started by anonquick

More Discussions by anonquick

Latest Comments by anonquick

Go to: Daniel Dennett Debates Dinesh D'Souza

anonquick's Avatar Jump to comment 259 by anonquick

When "Distort D'Newza" first talked after Dennett he was PANICKED. Anyone who has seen him in other debates would have noticed. I suspect that this was because Dennett's opening was full of points for the affirmative "God is a manmade invention." If you have seen the other debates you will have noticed that "Distort D'Newza" desperately moved away from the content of Dennett's opening and moved onto ground he was more comfortable on.

I CAN'T BELIEVE IT WORKED!!!! Dennett was so flustered by all the army of straw men that "Distort D'Newza" created that the debate shift onto the negative side of the assertion "God is a manmade invention", and hardly touched on the affirmative.

Am I the only one who sees that forcefully and articulately presenting the affirmative for the assertion "God is a manmade invention" is far more important than attacking the weaknesses in the arguments on the negative side?

This is a debate, the strategy has to match!

The challenges have to all end with something simple and "on message" such as "and that exactly what you would expect when the Christian God is imaginary", or "what Stalin shows is the danger of ideas. Do you get that God is an idea, and invention like Sherlock Holmes?"

Sun, 02 Dec 2007 09:36:00 UTC | #88840

Go to: Turkey probes atheist's 'God' book

anonquick's Avatar Jump to comment 90 by anonquick

How do you insult a value, sacred or otherwise?

Thu, 29 Nov 2007 07:41:00 UTC | #87539

Go to: Why Science Will Triumph Only When Theory Becomes Law

anonquick's Avatar Jump to comment 60 by anonquick

People like levels, grades, or scales.

The fact of evolution should graded the highest level, and this level should mean something like 'certainty'. 'The earth is 6000 years old should be graded in the level which means something like 'completely rejected because it is no where near the truth'.

Evolution by natural selection should get a grade that means something like: "Everyone agrees that this is the truth, we are now fighting over some of the details".

What do people think?

Thu, 15 Nov 2007 04:53:00 UTC | #84160

Go to: Can we at least demand 'Secular Communion'?

anonquick's Avatar Jump to comment 22 by anonquick

Great article. The Mediocre as well as the Extreme can be a valid target of criticism.

This site needs to evolve to the next level - a platform that helps the proponents of reason perform COLLECTIVE acts of reason.

Sat, 10 Nov 2007 18:59:00 UTC | #83018

Go to: The good that comes from belief

anonquick's Avatar Jump to comment 39 by anonquick

This post is for the more philosophical in the audience, you Godless evil doers.

There is an ape on the planet that can use language to:
1. Think.
2. Communicate.
3. Do things.

I think this is useful for thinking about beliefs, thoughts, memes, etc. (particularly 1 and 3).

Various religious communities have a body of thinking, the the individual tenets can be put before the rational mind and interrogated for truth or falsity. That is ONE thing you can do.

Another thing you can do is look at how these tenets individually and collectively modulate and drive behaviour.

I think you can do the same thing with the threads or the fabrics of secular thinking - look at them for determine their truth value, or you can judge them in terms of action.

So you unbelieving devils! Who is with me in demanding that the Richard Dawkins Centre for Science and Reason organised us cats to give money to good causes and do good works?

Sat, 10 Nov 2007 03:37:00 UTC | #82807

More Comments by anonquick