General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: Kick if you agree with this assessment about the influence of religion on people. [View all]struggle4progress
(118,542 posts)I did not "dismiss" the naturalistic PoV: I said There's quite a lot that's important and interesting to say about human affairs from a purely naturalistic PoV but noted that I did not hear Dawkins himself saying things I considered important or interesting
Nor will you find me on this site, or anywhere else, saying anything in opposition to teaching the theory of evolution: I was raised by a molecular biologist who specialized in some DNA chemistry, and in my view evolutionary theory offers a breath-takingly beautiful unification of various facts ranging from the earth sciences to biochemistry
I also happen to think Dawkins is so blinded by his ideology that he is unable to conduct genuinely adult conversations with persons who disagree with him on certain philosophical or metaphysical issues. In particular -- and this is actually an important point -- I believe the ability, to do good scientific work, involves the ability, to completely set aside one's philosophical and metaphysical predilictions: science collaboration is possible, between persons with different cultural backgrounds and different philosophical or metaphysical views, simply because one can discuss the phenomena without tangential discussion of any philosophy or metaphysics one might attach to the phenomena. Dawkins' failure, in this regard, is that he presupposes no one could possibly discuss the phenomena in an adult way, without first agreeing on certain philosophical or metaphysical points that Dawkins considers important