What do you think of this Richard Dawkins quote?

Question

"When you are actually challenged to think of pre-Darwinian answers to the questions 'What is man?' 'Is there a meaning to life?' 'What are we here for?', can you, as a matter of fact, think of any that are not now worthless except for their (considerable) historical interest? There is such a thing as being just plain wrong, and that is what, before 1859 [when the Origin of Species was first published], all answers to those questions were."

The Selfish Gene 30th Anniversary Edition. Footnotes to Chapter 1. Page 267.

Answer 1

He is probably a brilliant scientists who strongly opposes religion, but at the same time is not really better than religioius people.

What do I mean by that? What I mean is it all comes down to belief. We can't prove whether God does or does not exist, so therefore we all have to place a belief in one or the other.

He places a belief that God does not exist, and then evangelizes that idea. He criticizes others who do believe God exists, and he is no better because it is all based on belief without total evidence (as in, he wasn't there at the point of creation, so he can't know any more than anyone else).

Nothing against him, again-he is probably a brilliant scientists, but evangelizes his belief, and is no better off than any other person that evangelizes their faith (whatever faith that may be).

Answer 2

I think Dawkins basically got it right.  People can wholeheartedly believe something and still be dead wrong.  The thing is, most people don't really care if their answers are actually correct.  They just want to believe what makes them feel good and just assume their beliefs are correct as a means to that end.  

Answer 3

Dawkins is a small-minded twit with laughable arguments who was given late-night exposure on the BBC for no better reason than his hatred of Christianity, which the BBC is devoted to. Then he started writing trashy books, and it all took off in the way that this insane world does things. He would not dare debate with me or any Christian biologist. It would be so embarrassing.

But carry on, folks! Suckers!

.

Answer 4

Why should what my ancestors thought of the world have anything to do with "right" and "wrong"?  The truth was always there.  It was the people who argued with it who were wrong.  As you can tell, most people thoroughly accepted and welcomed Darwin's works because truth is a wall against which stubborn and prideful people bash themselves against.

Dawkins, on the other hand is impatient and snobbish in his remarks.  If Darwin hadn't come along, Dawkins would be just as stupid as the rest of us, except feeling superior anyways using some other argument.

Answer 5

Not really sure I care about his dreamed up thoughts and speculations dreamed up out of thin air.

He already lost to Bill OReily in a debate I watched.  

Answer 6

I think he's right.  I tried to think of a pre-Darwinian answer to those questions, and everything I came up with was bollocks.

Answer 7

Sounds about accurate.

Answer 8

Good.

Answer 9

As a Christian, I normally don't answer questions about Atheists but in this case I feel that I should.  I find Richard Dawkins and the other well-known Atheistic philosophers boring. They are cookie-cutter Atheists. No originality.  If I had the choice to talk to any Atheist from any time period I would have to go with Friedrich Nietzsche.  

   In a sense, Nietzsche was the first western philosopher to face up fully to man's loss of faith in religion. He put down in black and white what many around him felt to be true, but were unwilling to acknowledge as the logical end of their belief. In pronouncing the death of God, Nietzsche not only stepped right into the eye of the storm, he went further, and admitted that the storm clouds were even more devastating and violent than any of God's undertakers had imagined. The paralyzing darkness that fell was not so much an exterior phenomenon crowding inward but rather an inner blinding that spread outward.  Sorry but Dawkins and the rest are weak Atheists compared to the man who basically started it all. Do I respect Nietzsche? no, not as an Atheist or a man but I give him a lot of credit for living what he believed, I mean really living it.   Atheists today parrot what others say rather than thinking for themselves, hence, are easily refuted. They no longer have what it takes to be an unbeliever.

Answer 10

Dawkins is awesome.