Take It In Blood
Banned
Respect to the Teacha
He's very overrated by the general public. He doesn't have much in terms of a scientific record.
I don't understand this post, I guess you're expecting scientist to discover or create something new in order to obtain praise and appreciation.
He's a great teacher and opened alot of minds and exposed them to the scientific perspective through his books in the same vien Carl Sagan and now Neil Degrease has.
But from a philosophical perspective, he helped make atheism more acceptable to the general public. (which is also probably what he's most famous for)
So in that sense he's not overrated at all IMO
fair enoughSure, I get what you are saying.
I should have worded my post differently. My main complaint is that the average person on the street thinks Dawkins is a leading scientist. He's not.
The thing is that one of his biggest claims is that the scientific method reigns supreme over any other source of knowledge. And he plays off his credentials as a "scientist" who forms his opinions via scientific method.I don't understand this post, I guess you're expecting scientist to discover or create something new in order to obtain praise and appreciation.
He's a great teacher and opened alot of minds and exposed them to the scientific perspective through his books in the same vien Carl Sagan and now Neil Degrease has.
But from a philosophical perspective, he helped make atheism more acceptable to the general public. (which is also probably what he's most famous for)
So in that sense he's not overrated at all IMO
Too much of this is true.fair enough
but while we're on the topic, u know average people on the street who know who Dawkins is?
My homie thinks Dawkins and Darwin are the same person
and only knows him as being a random cac thats a threat to christianity
didn't even care enough to correct him, no point in ruining our NBA 2K friendship over that shyt
just shoot the ball nikka
Though Dawkins wasn’t a part of the interview process, and researchers didn’t ask about him, 48 of the 137 British scientists they spoke to mentioned Dawkins. Of those 48 that referenced him, 80 per cent said they thought that Dawkins misrepresents science and scientists in his books and public speeches, according to the study by Rice University, Texas.
Dawkins has been publicly criticised by colleagues before. In 2014, Harvard professor EO Wilson said that Dawkins wasn’t a scientist at all, instead calling him a “journalist” and implying that he didn’t do any work of his own.
“There is no dispute between me and Richard Dawkins and there never has been, because he’s a journalist, and journalists are people that report what the scientists have found and the arguments I’ve had have actually been with scientists doing research,” said Wilson during an interview on Newsnight.