As you may have heard Richard Dawkins suffered a stroke and recently was interviewed on the BBC. The interviewer even asked him about whether the stroke caused him to think about the afterlife. He affirmed there that he does not believe that there is anything else. That, in itself, is sad as he does not have too long left in this life.
But when asked about challenging religion and people who hold to religion, he said he only uses intellectual arguments. He said the way to argue is
“to always to do it on intellectual grounds, always to do it using argument, evidence, rather than insult.” (emphasis added)
(Watch between 3:54 – 4.01 mark in the video below) But he even went on in that interview to agree that it doesn’t matter to him if someone feels insulted by what he said.
What a total hypocrite! Previously on several occasions he has said that the way to argue is to use ridicule, which is the same as insults. See the video below.
Or this one where he promotes ridicule, satire etc, which is hardly intellectual argumentation. Even the example he reads out does not address an intellectual argument but makes jokes, so much so his audience of atheists is in hysterical laughter.
This is typical of the new atheists. They can’t win the argument on intellectual grounds with polite argumentation and evidence so they have to resort to ridicule and insults. Also it is typical that they ‘speak with forked tongue’. They don’t believe in a Creator God to be accountable to, so why even a bother to tell the truth? Afterall, for them nothing is absolute — it’s all relative. Tell an audience which might have some who believe in God one thing, but tell an audience of atheists the opposite–what they really believe. Such hypocrisy. One thing this does prove, is that it is not about science. They try to win converts with ridicule and insults.
The following is one of those occasions when Dawkins was using his intellectual argumentation, on the subject of whether evolution has been observed. Considering the fact that one cannot do experiments, or even observe what happened, in the past, Richard Dawkins said:
“Evolution has been observed. It’s just that it has not been observed while it’s happening.”*
Which, of course, makes no sense at all.
(*Bill Moyers interviews Richard Dawkins, Now, 3 December 2004, PBS network)