Dicky wants to convert Turkey. Remembers he's an Atheist.

[Beorn]

Professor Richard Dawkins wants to convert Islamic world to evolution


The author of The God Delusion and The Selfish Gene, whose new book, The Greatest Show on Earth, is serialised in The Times next week, has topped bestseller lists all over the world but never in a predominantly Muslim country.
None of Professor Dawkins’ books, on evolution as well as religion, has ever been translated into Arabic, and his work has been heavily censored in Turkey. In an interview with The Times, he said that popularising evolution in the Islamic world, where creationist beliefs are strong, was a challenge he is keen to take up. “To be a bestseller in a Muslim country would be a personal triumph,” he said.
“I would like to see my books translated into Arabic. They haven’t been. They are all translated into Hebrew. Persian, I’m not sure. My books are translated into Turkish and they regularly get censored and suppressed.
“The experience of my Turkish publisher of The God Delusion was that he was threatened with arrest for blasphemy. He may even have been arrested, and my website has been banned in Turkey. I feel amused really. There’s something to be said for being suppressed, it makes people want to read you.”

While most non-fundamentalist Christian traditions have largely accepted evolution, Islam was still much more hostile, he said. “It’s the fact that Islam teaches the Koran is the literal word of God, unlike most Christian sects, which say the Bible is largely symbolic. That could well be the cause.”
Professor Dawkins added that Islamic influence is the likely explanation for the growing popularity of creationist beliefs in Britain, where a recent poll found that 30 per cent of teenagers accept the rebranded idea of “intelligent design”.
“I think that’s pretty clear,” he said. “I hear that from colleagues at the coalface of teaching. There has been a sharp upturn in hostility to teaching of evolution in the classroom and it’s mostly coming from Islamic students.
“It is nothing like as serious as it is in America, where the hostility comes from Christians, but the consequence can be very poor scientific education. When I go to schools, as I occasionally do, I do get depressed when I see children coming out as evolution deniers. I don’t think they would have 30 years ago.”

Professor Dawkins’ new book, The Greatest Show on Earth, brings together the scientific evidence that shows the theory of evolution to be true. He hopes to convince those who espouse creationism because they are ignorant of science.
“I suppose anybody who reads it should no longer be capable of thinking that the world is 6,000 years old, should no longer be capable of thinking evolution isn’t a fact,” he said. “I’d like to think there’s got to be something wrong with people who finish the book and don’t think that.”
Creationists, he said, were ignorant about evolution in the same sense in which he admits to being ignorant about football. “Ignorant is just a factual statement. I’m ignorant about football and all sorts of things. And I don’t think you’d take it as an insult if I said you seem to know anything about football. It’s actually just a factual statement, it means you don’t know anything about it.
“I know quite a lot about evolution, and there are plenty of people out there who know nothing about evolution and who probably would enjoy learning something about evolution. Perhaps they can teach me about football.”Source (http://entertainment.timesonline.co.uk/tol/arts_and_entertainment/books/article6805889.ece)

[Freomæg]

He's an arrogant sort, and I don't necesarily agree with his message, but anything that serves to weaken Islam is fine by me.

[Beorn]

but anything that serves to weaken Islam is fine by me.

Would that be the 'weakening of Islam' in Europe or the 'weakening of Islam' outside of our concern?

[Loddfafner]

Turkey is cursed with an exceptionally aggressive and well-funded Creationist campaign (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adnan_Oktar) built around the premise that any resemblance between contemporary species and fossilized ones somehow refutes Darwin.

[Skandi]

weakening Islam anywhere would be good I think. those that are here hold fast to it because it is constantly reinforced outwith our borders.

Teach them chemistry and physics and then let them go and date rocks.

[Absinthe]

He shouldn't have much difficulty 'reaching out' in Turkey.

From my recent "research" there, the percentage of people in higher education, that speak english and that are non-religious, must be higher that in the average European country.

It is mostly the old people as well as the lower socioeconomic strata that are religious, and to the average Turk aged 25-35, the mosques and daily prayers are simply folklore.

Kemal made the Turks technocrats, practical-minded, go - getters and (surprisingly enough) more disciplined and hard-working than their average southeastern European counterparts.

Atheism, science and practicality in all aspects are flourishing in Turkey.

Turkey is no backward Islamic country no more...which is awesome for them, but for us, should they *ever* granted access in the EU, we should be afraid, be very afraid. :....

[Lutiferre]

I was tempted to call Dawkins the Grand Inquisitor of scientistic reductionism. But I was wrong. Not only that. It turns out he's the Grand Crusader.

[Poltergeist]

He wants -supposedly - to "convert" them to evolution or to atheism?

http://www.perfessorbill.com/covers/buffoon.jpg

[Beorn]

I was tempted to call Dawkins the Grand Inquisitor of scientistic reductionism. But I was wrong. Not only that. It turns out he's the Grand Crusader.

There is a delicious irony to the man.

[Lutiferre]

If Dawkins was just truly of the noble intention of furthering scientific knowledge (evolution) among all people of all faiths, including Muslims, not to mention Christians, he would not present it to them in a book entitled "The God Delusion".

That is obviously not going to work to the favour of spreading scientific knowledge, but to the contrary .. will only work to damage science and misrepresent science as ideological dogmatism, associating scientific theories with virulent and militant antitheism and reductionism.

[Poltergeist]

He shouldn't have much difficulty 'reaching out' in Turkey.

From my recent "research" there, the percentage of people in higher education, that speak english and that are non-religious, must be higher that in the average European country.

It is mostly the old people as well as the lower socioeconomic strata that are religious, and to the average Turk aged 25-35, the mosques and daily prayers are simply folklore.

Kemal made the Turks technocrats, practical-minded, go - getters and (surprisingly enough) more disciplined and hard-working than their average southeastern European counterparts.

Atheism, science and practicality in all aspects are flourishing in Turkey.

Turkey is no backward Islamic country no more...which is awesome for them, but for us, should they *ever* granted access in the EU, we should be afraid, be very afraid. :....

You are both right and wrong.

There is a difference between explicit and implicit atheism.

The implicit one is very present in Turkey, as you rightly point out. Although one can object to your remarks with the fact that the "highly educated" ones you are referring to aren't but a small minority of the population.

There is however some sort of cultural islam, understood as part of their national identity, widespread in Turkey, which means that a direct attack upon it in form of a Dawkinsian militant atheism could elicit negative reaction even from formal "atheists".

There is also Turkish nationalism, an ideology invented by Kemal Ataturk, traiditionally opposed to (pan)-islamism, but it seems that the two ideologies have come, with time, to a certain kind of synthesis. Especially under the rule of the nominally "Islamist" party of Recep Tayyip Erdogan (since 2001).

[Poltergeist]

He's an arrogant sort, and I don't necesarily agree with his message, but anything that serves to weaken Islam is fine by me.


weakening Islam anywhere would be good I think. those that are here hold fast to it because it is constantly reinforced outwith our borders.

Teach them chemistry and physics and then let them go and date rocks.

These kinds of campaigns could even strengthen islam.

[Absinthe]

You are both right and wrong.

There is a difference between explicit and implicit atheism.

The implicit one is very present in Turkey, as you rightly point out. Although one can object to your remarks with the fact that the "highly educated" ones you are referring to aren't but a small minority of the population.

There is however some sort of cultural islam, understood as part of their national identity, widespread in Turkey, which means that a direct attack upon it in form of a Dawkinsian militant atheism could elicit negative reaction even from the formally "atheist" ones.

There is also Turkish nationalism, an ideology invented by Kemal Ataturk, traiditionally opposed to (pan)-islamism, but it seems that the two ideologies have come, with time, to a certain kind of synthesis. Especially under the rule of the nominally "Islamist" party of Recep Tayyip Erdogan (since 2001).
That is valid argumentation in theory, but have you been to Turkey lately? ;)

I am not saying what you say is entirely wrong, but I am saying : do not underestimate your rivals.

If our stereotype of what Turks are like comes from the rugged kebab shop - owning immigrants that came to Europe in the 60s, then this idea is largely inaccurate as those immigrants represent an older generation of Turks that is now being replaced by bon viveurs, skilled proffesionals, doctors, lawyers and successful businessmen.

I am not praising them; I am trying to shake off the "scruffy anatolian goat herder" stereotype as this is not what we're up against today. ;)

This may be only a portion of the population as you say, but they're the dominant generation, and they're also the first ones that will flee to Europe with ease if their membership request is granted.

[Spaniard_Truth]

Turks are a really ugly nation, and I never care what ugly people think.

[Absinthe]

Turks are a really ugly nation, and I never care what ugly people think.
Now that is some valid geopolitical argument :rolleyes:

(This is why Europeans are losing)

[Lutiferre]

Turks are a really ugly nation, and I never care what ugly people think.
What a fantastically mature point of view.

[Freomæg]

Would that be the 'weakening of Islam' in Europe or the 'weakening of Islam' outside of our concern?
Fair point. I'd prefer to see Islam wiped from the face of the Earth, as with all the Abrahamic faiths. But, two points: 1) I don't see it as my personal obligation to oppose Islam outside of my country, and 2) I will always stand with Christians against Islam (and Atheo-Fascism - if that's a term!?).

[Spaniard_Truth]

What a fantastically mature point of view.

Actually ugliness is a sign of biological undesirability. Nothing exists for non-selective reasons, and therefore beauty, as all things, points to health, and ugliness to lack thereof.

The education and "civilisation" of filth reeks of Christianity, which lesser minds perpetuate because of religiously-tinged cultural socialization and their inability to think for themselves.

I, however, am not remotely interested in other people and their business. How filth live their lives is not my interest. I'd laugh a little if they died, but certainly wouldn't spend any more energy on them than that.

Oh, but hopefully they'll be converted and they'll respect women's feelings and recycle and plant trees and shit. That's what I really hope for.

[Spaniard_Truth]

Now that is some valid geopolitical argument :rolleyes:

(This is why Europeans are losing)

Caring about other people's affairs I find to be significantly correlated with stupidity ;)

Edit: And where was the argument? It was a statement of my opinion. Do you think I care about 'arguing' and attempting to convert people to my perspective? How primitive. I couldn't care in the least about such pedestrian matters. Nobody has ever affected my thoughts, and I have no desire to affect anyone else's.

[Poltergeist]

That is valid argumentation in theory, but have you been to Turkey lately? ;)

Yes.


I am not saying what you say is entirely wrong, but I am saying : do not underestimate your rivals.

I don't. My post was not written in the spirit of underestimation.

And I am also aware of the fact that Turks tend to be more hard-working, better professionals etc. than many eastern Europeans (who have been corrupted by Communism and are often lazy and incompetent).


If our stereotype of what Turks are like comes from the rugged kebab shop - owning immigrants that came to Europe in the 60s, then this idea is largely inaccurate as those immigrants represent an older generation of Turks that is now being replaced by bon viveurs, skilled proffesionals, doctors, lawyers and successful businessmen.

My stereotype doesn't come from that. And I generally dislike stereotypes.


I am not praising them; I am trying to shake off the "scruffy anatolian goat herder" stereotype as this is not what we're up against today. ;)

This stereotype is held by the most stupid and uneducated part of the western European population.


This may be only a portion of the population as you say, but they're the dominant generation, and they're also the first ones that will flee to Europe with ease if their membership request is granted.

Yes, they are dominant there. In fact, what I was saying doesn't run counter to what you were saying. My own observation was that in Turkey a unique synthesis of (very moderate) islamism, Turkish nationalism and modernity has been forged. I met people from this class you are referring to, who have nothing against the current variety of islam (the Erdoganian one) as practiced in Turkey today, who praise Erdogan as a wise leader etc. And I don't think they care in any way about silly stories and moralisations Richard Dawkins could offer to them, in the same way as they wouldn't give a hoot about preaching of some radical Saudi imam, who could eventually lambast them for being "bad Muslims".

[Spaniard_Truth]

Now that is some valid geopolitical argument :rolleyes:

(This is why Europeans are losing)

Interestingly, I know you're a Nietzsche fan:

"Socrates belonged, in his origins, to the lowest orders: Socrates was rabble. One knows, one sees for oneself, how ugly he was. But ugliness, an objection in itself, is among Greeks almost a refutation. Was Socrates a Greek at all? Ugliness is frequently enough the sign of a thwarted development, a development retarded by interbreeding."

-- Friedrich Nietzsche, Twilight Of The Idols, Aphorism 3



Can anyone say "Ouch"?

[Cato]

Droping hydrogen bombs on Mecca and Medina would weaken Islam. Also, pulling Dawkins' head out of his backside might make him think a bit clearer about his goals. He's basically a sideshow attraction, sort of like an atheist Pat Robertson.

[Spaniard_Truth]

Droping hydrogen bombs on Mecca and Medina would weaken Islam. Also, pulling Dawkins' head out of his backside might make him think a bit clearer about his goals. He's basically a sideshow attraction, sort of like an atheist Pat Robertson.

I agree. Does he even know why it's so important that the whole world should embrace atheism? I don't believe in God at all, but religion is an effective social adhesive that can strengthen communities. As long as it doesn't infect the intelligentsia of a culture, I don't see how it matters.

[Poltergeist]

Turks are a really ugly nation, and I never care what ugly people think.

Are you beautiful?

[Lutiferre]

Actually ugliness is a sign of biological undesirability. Nothing exists for non-selective reasons, and therefore beauty, as all things, points to health, and ugliness to lack thereof.

The education and "civilisation" of filth reeks of Christianity, which lesser minds perpetuate because of religiously-tinged cultural socialization and their inability to think for themselves.

I, however, am not remotely interested in other people and their business. How filth live their lives is not my interest. I'd laugh a little if they died, but certainly wouldn't spend any more energy on them than that.

Oh, but hopefully they'll be converted and they'll respect women's feelings and recycle and plant trees and shit. That's what I really hope for.
You are going to bring biology and heredity into it, are you?

If you are going to make that claim, then you will have to clearly define ugliness in a scientifically meaningful sense, so we can test genetically whether there is a correlation between this proposed ugliness and other qualities such as neurological and [nervous system] qualities of intelligence, coordination, vision, sense, speed of reaction, etc, and other qualities like strength.

To the contrary, such a correlation cannot exist so long as you are unable to genetically define ugliness. The problem is, it is not a valid or objective concept for microbiological validation. A persons ugliness need not say anything about any of their other [biological or spiritual] qualities.

And I think Nietzsche is ugly, anyway.

[Absinthe]

Caring about other people's affairs I find to be significantly correlated with stupidity ;)

Edit: And where was the argument? It was a statement of my opinion. Do you think I care about 'arguing' and attempting to convert people to my perspective? How primitive. I couldn't care in the least about such pedestrian matters. Nobody has ever affected my thoughts, and I have no desire to affect anyone else's.

Nobody cares about your primitive logic and moronic opinions, Spaniard, when we're having a discussion and you pop up out of the blue and write a childish, low-brow comment such as "I don't care about the opinions of ugly people".

Europe is in the shitty situation it is today exactly because of Eurotrash like you and their over-simplistic and juvenile way of thinking, underestimating and/or ignoring the enemy because they're not "goodlooking enough" :eek: :rolleyes2: for you to notice.

Then you go on by taking matters entirely off-topic to quote Nietzsche on Aristotle (as if I ever claimed to be Aristotelian :rolleyes2:) just to insult me personally because you have no arguments, and to insult my nation (since you hate Greeks according to the rep point you gave me). :rolleyes:

I, for one, know that you are not representative of your nation so I won't insult you on a national level, as I know that there's eurotrash in every country.

[Cato]

I agree. Does he even know why it's so important that the whole world should embrace atheism? I don't believe in God at all, but religion is an effective social adhesive that can strengthen communities. As long as it doesn't infect the intelligentsia of a culture, I don't see how it matters.

As much as I think his ideas were wrong, Marx was correct when he compared religion to an opiate for mankind.

Atheism is a weak belief, purely a form of intellectual nihilism that makes about as much sense as the degraded belief that the world is fallen and in need of Christian salvation.

I believe in God on a number of different levels: God in the singular as per monotheism, a stern and often demanding judge and ruler; God in the singular as per, say, Platonism, a passive guiding principle and first cause; God as personal; God as impersonal; God as "the entire race of gods," or the God of gods of polytheism; God as inner self; God as an idea or mental impression; God as moral argument; God as history.

Etc.

There's no real way to categorize an infinite being, but the atheists blunder into a metaphysical argument whilst claiming that it's not a metaphysical argument but, rather, a problem for science to solve. Atheists aren't equipped at all to deal with a metaphysical conundrum. Sure, they can analyze the Bible or whatever religious text in a purely physical manner (linguistics, or using corroborative history and comparative religion), but that's only the superficial aspect of it- they use their mind and not their spirit and intuition (things which they deny have any power). So, in the end of things, they're basically the proverbial blind leading the blind.

[Spaniard_Truth]

You are going to bring biology and heredity into it, are you?

If you are going to make that claim, then you will have to clearly define ugliness in a scientifically meaningful sense, so we can test genetically whether there is a correlation between this proposed ugliness and other qualities such as neurological and [nervous system] qualities of intelligence, coordination, vision, sense, speed of reaction, etc, and other qualities like strength.

To the contrary, such a correlation cannot exist so long as you are unable to genetically define ugliness. The problem is, it is not a valid or objective concept for microbiological validation. A persons ugliness need not say anything about any of their other [biological or spiritual] qualities.

And I think Nietzsche is ugly, anyway.

I never said it was objective. In fact, I implied quite strongly that it was subjective. Nothing relative to evolution is "objective".

Ugliness could be defined spatially as contours falling within certain parameters, using complex computer algorithms, and tested against various sample groups. This wouldn't mean that these features were actually ugly, but rather that it benefited organs (selectively) at a particular stage of development to perceive them as such.

Besides, I don't have to do anything on an internet forum.

Also, a simple correlation between beauty and health exists in that beauty and health correlate with youth. So even without research (which I wouldn't bother doing for you anyway), I've shown you up embarrassingly.

P.S. Nietzsche thinks you're ugly.

[Goidelic]

Turkey as a whole is pretty much Atheist, regardless of its old imperialist cultural Muslim national identity and history that took place only during the Ottoman times at the height of its power say 16th-17th century, rather than Paleolithic or archaic Neolithic time frame of its remarkable history. Turkey has much more ancient history before Islam existed in its country, such as ancient Galatia during 3rd century BC. (BC meaning "Before Christ" or BI "Before Islam" :p). At most Turks are secular harmless Muslims, leaning towards irreligion/Atheism. The Turks in Germany and elsewhere in Europe are from a non-assimilated bankrupt criminal ghetto rootless backwards generation selling döner and other kebab meat as well as organized crime, there of course like always exceptions and Turks that assimilate become respectful and become successful in those nations and elsewhere. In addition to that, there are crazy people in every nation or country which we all realize. I don't want Turkey to join the EU for mainly ancestral and geographic reasons. Culturally they have a rich diverse history. They have had terrible barbarism with the Armenian genocide and Ottoman Empire, but have also made significant major achievements in ancient Celtic Galatia, as well as Roman & Christian Galatia.

Other than that, they're fine. Most Germans and other western Euros vacation in Turkey anyway, and from myself talking with them they've had a great time. I really can't think of the last time I read of a beheading in Turkey. Turks don't wear burkas and other pro-Islamic clothing for that matter only a small minority. Crime will always happen doing the wrong thing at the wrong time. ;)

[Spaniard_Truth]

:clap:

Thank you for showing your true self! :D

I tend out to bring out that in people, must be the Socratic method I guess? Hi-ho! :laugh:

When was it concealed? Apart from never, that is.

[Absinthe]

When was it concealed? Apart from never, that is.
Except maybe the bit where you masturbate on people's photos :lol:

[Spaniard_Truth]

Except maybe the bit where you masturbate on people's photos :lol:

I'm asexual, but it was a funny thing to say. I amuse myself.

[Absinthe]

I'm asexual, but it was a funny thing to say. I amuse myself.
Well as of late, it's not just yourself that you're amusing! :clap:

[Spaniard_Truth]

Well as of late, it's not just yourself that you're amusing! :clap:

Meh, I just never fit in :D

Oh well, I guess it's time to pack my bags and try to fit in somewhere else.

Adieu :thumbs up

[Absinthe]

There goes our Monday night entertainment :puppy_dp:

Oh well, I guess I'll just have to go and see what's on TV xD

[Lutiferre]

Ugliness could be defined spatially as contours falling within certain parameters, using complex computer algorithms, and tested against various sample groups. This wouldn't mean that these features were actually ugly, but rather that it benefited organs (selectively) at a particular stage of development to perceive them as such.
Though there is only a consensus of ugliness in the extremes: people who are extremely deformed or riddled with disease.

You obviously couldn't claim that for an entire nation of Turks, especially considering the Turkish people is among the most genetically and ancestrally heterogeneous. But I'm sure you will, anyway.


Also, a simple correlation between beauty and health exists in that beauty and health correlate with youth.
Exactly. It's perfectly fine that Turks don't fall into your taste. But that doesn't make any difference to this basic correlation. Beauty correlates with youth in Turks just as well as any other race.

[Spaniard_Truth]

Though there is only a consensus of ugliness in the extremes: people who are extremely deformed or riddled with disease.

You obviously couldn't claim that for an entire nation of Turks, especially considering the Turkish people is among the most genetically and ancestrally heterogeneous. But I'm sure you will, anyway.

Exactly. It's perfectly fine that Turks don't fall into your taste. But that doesn't make any difference to this basic correlation. Beauty correlates with youth in Turks just as well as any other race.

Oh please stop talking to me so I can leave already!

Ugliness is nothing but an instinctual reaction against traits that historically have proven negative in reproductive terms. It is nothing but a trend. Evolution is nothing but statistical probability plus millennia. The reason is that a certain general combination of characteristics is indicative of health, not in every case, but in general. This health can be physical adeptness, lack of disease, youth etc. Variation in taste exists, but within parameters, as you say. Closer to the fringes of those parameters, the more likely it is that one is considered unattractive.

This isn't objective. It exists in the consciousness of humans, only for humans, and not even in every case, but as a general tendency.

Now it's easy, given the common ancestry of humans, to propose that all humans share a basic consensus of beauty. If a race, purely for example, is descended from a tribe of lepers (pretend that it's genetic for the sake of argument), the gene-pool will repeatedly produce the traits considered unattractive to other nations.

Relatively within the group, certain individuals will be considered more or less attractive (closer or further from the ingrained ideal), but relative to other nations, they will be less attractive. Youth would make members relatively more attractive than their elders, but in contrast to other races, not so.

I find instances of symmetry less frequent among Turks, as well as other features usually preferred. A computer program may prove me right, or may prove me wrong.

Of course, over this there's a significant cultural element to our preferences. To unravel this facet of our taste from that which is primeval, well, that's a challenge I won't be sticking around to endeavour to solve.

[Poltergeist]

Didn't you say: adieu?

[Spaniard_Truth]

Yes, but somebody addressed me, and you addressed me too.