At it again

Owen Jones has another article in the Independent. Quite a lot of the comments remark that Dawkins only speaks for Dawkins, which is true so Jones is wrong to blether on about "not letting" Dawkins speak 'in his name'. He doesn't, Jonesy; he doesn't; he speaks for himself and people listen (or don't really listen but get cross anyway). Other comments berate Jones for entirely missing the point about freedom of speech (which still holds even if one doesn't like how something is said). I'm with those commenters. This does not make me or any of them racist. Dawkins isn't a racist either. He does more to try and improve things for oppressed muslims than the whole of gransnet membership put together.

One of my daughter's students was a muslim girl. She was doing a biochemistry degree covered from head to foot right down to the black gloves, which made the practical lab work fairly difficult. I don't know what happened when she went home but it didn't seem likely that she would be allowed to go much further with a scientific career.

nanaej I also found your comment very interesting. MiceElf made another interesting point, that important discoveries have been made at different times, in different places often when cultures come together and people are open to new ideas. I'm not really interested in Dawkin's motives, I just note his crass opinions. Being respected in your academic discipline doesn't make you an expert in every field of human endeavour!

Can you think of a better response to such things, lily? If that's all they say, and it appears to be, then they do rather give the impression of being mindless yobs, though until you used that phrase I hadn't thought of it quite like that.

RD seems happy to engage with people who disagree with him but who use proper argument. In fact, he seems to thrive on it.

Nanaej - I found your post interesting, and agree with your comments

There are not many people who are awarded Nobel prizes, there are a disproportionate number from the Western world. Perhaps that also reflects the panels that make the decisions. I do not know much about the process nor place a lot of value on the prizes and perhaps I should. I cannot disagree with facts about who has been awarded a Nobel Prize but are there many other religions represented in significant numbers other than 'christians' & 'jews' It might be interesting to know how many of the recent of the Nobel Laureates consider themselves religious/ of faith at all and does it matter??

I am more interested in what prompts anyone with such a high profile (as Dawkins) to make provocative remarks. What was he hoping would happen? He is surely not playing faux naive?

Religious fundamentalists, of any flavour, tend to be repressive towards women and have closed and narrow communities. I think Dawkins is being disingenuous when he says his comments cannot be seen as racist because Islam is not a race.. well neither is Judaism but who would suggest that those who denigrate Jews are not racist? I feel his comment is fuelling Islamaphobia. There is a definite movement to undermine Islamic history and the positive historical impact it has had in maths/science etc. It is easier to de-humanise a group of people if you deny their positive contribution. It is what the Nazis did .

Not sure possible to have a debate or an argument on Twitter.

My point is feetlebaum that you cannot generalise about Muslim countries - they are very diverse. I have met many female Pakistani graduates .Also Iraqi, Iranian and Egyptian. It is a bit like making a sweeping statement about all christian countries based on, say, Ireland, such as. "Women aren't able to have abortions in Christian countries"

That's sarcasm, though, isn't it, Bags? With the slightest suggestion that those who disagree with him are mindless yobs?

lily, I very much doubt if Dawkins thinks the rude remarks that are directed at him "validate his opinions" as you suggest. I wonder why you do suggest it? Does he say so anywhere? I suspect he rather thinks that they don't validate anything. His actual response to being called a dick and a piece of shit is this:
"Oh dear, you’ve got me there. Devastating arguments, no come-back."

JessM - Well, good for Malaysia. But on the other hand there are many African states, there's Pakistan, there's the rise of Islamists in Turkey and there's always Saudi Arabia. there are burnt schools, dead schoolgirls, floggings, mutilations, beheadings...

Of course five hundred years ago there were the Christians misbehaving in similar ways, I suppose...

Bit like the jews in banking and finance micelf - not allowed to do much else so they became experts in a narrow field. You're right that the industrial revolution gave science a leg up in this country.
A couple of hundred years before that the likes of Newton and Hook took up the baton that had been wrenched from the hands of the andalusians. No coincidence that the UK was protestant at the time.

Interesting post Jess M covering so many points. It's certainly true that the fundies,of whatever persuasion, have had a malign influence on freedom of thought and advancement of knowledge. However, I think it's simplistic to assign 'progress' or the lack of it, to any one ethnic, national or religious group. Frequently, advancement is the consequence of a complex set of factors - economic, political, social, environmental and so on, for example, the start of the industrial revolution in England. So many developments there were led by Nonconformists who were barred from the traditional professions because of their religious beliefs.

Anyone out there read The Physician (Noah Gordon)? As an historical romance, it gives what I think is a good fictional version of what early medieval medicine must have been like. And I note that Dawkins thinks that because people counter his arguments with insults, it somehow validates his opinions.

Just not true feetlebaum Malaysia for instance lots of muslim women go to university. And many others.
Bit of a ramble that essay bags.
Giving the Greeks all the credit is possibly part of the whole "lets not give the Muslim's credit" thing. When Ferdinand and Isabella drove the arabs and their learning out of Andalus they completed the anti-scientific dominion of the vatican in Europe (and of course the victors write history). Dissection was not allowed. Doctors examined urine not patients. Surgery was considered a low calling to be undertaken by barbers not physicians.
They paved the way for the Inquisition and we all know their attitude to science - look what they did to Gallileo.
The Arabs invented zero I think, without which most maths pretty impossible. Also - where did the word al-gebra come from?
It is very sad that this great tradition of learning was ethnically cleansed 600 years or so ago.
It is an interesting question - why has the islamic world lagged so far behind. Suspect that one of the factors is the dominance of religious power structures - if education equals learning the scriptures it is not a great starting point. Apparently there are orthodox Jews in Israel that hold the same line re educating their children - Torah only, nothing else in the curriculum.

And here is Dawkins' reply to the Twitter storm. Some tweeters seemed to understand all that right from the start.

An interesting essay on the history of medicine in the islamic world

Sorry, vegasmags, I should have read the thread with more attention.

Another interesting comment on the Dawky www.newstatesman.com/religion/2013/08/why-do-so-many-nobel-laureates-look-richard-dawkins I particularly like Nelson Jones' point that the USA has more Nobels than any other category of winners AND more fundamentalist Christians. But it is a more thoughtful article than that would suggest.

Well for a start, 50% of potential achievers in Islamic countries are not even permitted to learn - the women, of course.

I know that there are many 'moderate' muslims in this country, but as someone said recently in a video, until they stop giving refuge to the criminals in their mosques they are complicit in the horrific and barbaric acts that are carried out.

I think it is not possible to say that Islam has gone backwards. There are some truly horrific attitudes and ideas promulgated by the fundamentalists, but, equally, there are many many adherents of Islam who are distinguished scientists and medical practitioners. A quick trawl through university departments and hospitals will be enlightening.

The great tragedy is that for a small golden moment in early modernity, in academia, scientists, philosophers and other academics from Islam, Judaism and Christianilty often worked together, respecting the different traditions and backgrounds of all.

I've always felt that denigrating a belief or position by focussing on its odder manifestations simply makes people dig in their heels and become more entrenched and resentful.

In this instance Bags, it's got people sneering at him. Not good.

Indeed and now - Why do so many Nobel laureates look like Richard Dawkins?

www.newstatesman.com/religion/2013/08/why-do-so-many-nobel-laureates-look-richard-dawkins

I have to say that the parody in Private Eye is absolutely priceless

I make it 11 !!!!!!!!!!!!!!

He must be regretting tweeting that! Even he must realise how silly, and desperate sounding, it was.

Nothig to say just fancied getting 7 in a row ! LOL