|
Nominations and Campaigning for the 2024 RationalWiki Moderator Election are now open |
Talk:Richard Dawkins
|
This Atheists related article has been awarded SILVER status for quality. We like it, and you should too! See RationalWiki:Article rating for more information. |
| ||
|
| ||||
|
This article contains information about one or more living persons. Articles about living people must be handled carefully, because they are more open to legal threats. |
"Left of reason" - NOT![edit]
I vehemently disagree with the category "Left of reason" being applied here. Dawkins is far from a reasonable person. His attacks on religion boil down to strawmanning many times, he went way too far in Elevatorgate, he's defended pedophilia, goes into Islamophobia territory, has expressed support for eugenics, has said some racist things about multiculturalism, and often makes rather bizarre rants on Twitter. He does not, in any sense, fall under "Left of reason", because of his insults towards so many different groups of people. There's being a skeptic, and then there's being an asshole. Dawkins is the latter, not the former. I'm removing the "Left of reason" tag. Sailor Haumea (talk) 04:26, 21 February 2018 (UTC)
- He's also stated that race has a biological basis. Not rational. --Sailor Haumea (talk) 19:14, 13 June 2018 (UTC)
Support for Jordan Peterson's defiance of Bill C-16[edit]
This article fails to mention that he supports Jordan Peterson's insistence that he will misgender people in defiance of Bill C-16. The proof is here: https://youtu.be/0R18wYAuS1k?t=224 80.233.16.223 (talk) 18:14, 23 September 2019 (UTC)
- I would support your adding a reference to that, but there are more explicit criticisms. He has turned more reactionary since then, and has gone to an event hosted by the Sovereign Nations, an evangelical organization, so he could attack leftist millennials and post-modernists. I have created a new paragraph to shed light on this troubling development as Dawkins takes a step closer toward being a carded member of the Intellectual Dark Web.
--Hitchensiniraq (talk) 23:23, 9 October 2019 (UTC)
- Actually, I don't think he went, my bad, that would be Peter Boghossian who went. Dawkins promoted the event, but then deleted the tweet. For now I'll fix that part, because his tweet still indicates the company he partners with. It shows his willingness to attack "post-modernists" that he thinks are infecting the academy. Hitchensiniraq (talk) 16:42, 10 October 2019 (UTC)
Expansion upon Richar dawkins section for transphobia[edit]
so it looks like his section on transpobia needs to be expanded, as he stated, that he has signed the extremly transphobic WHRC-declaration, see https://twitter.com/RichardDawkins/status/1465324057277173772 --2A02:908:1985:200:E43F:181F:6E61:E634 (talk) 11:47, 1 December 2021 (UTC)
Alt-lite vs alt-right[edit]
Having Dawkins be classified as "alt-right" is redundant when we already have the "alt-lite" category. Dawkins is a reactionary piece of shit, but he's not openly calling for genocide and has on record stated that "nationalism is a great evil." Carthage (talk) 07:16, 20 July 2023 (UTC)
- I'm not so sure I'd even call him alt-lite. What kind of alt-lite person is anti-nationalist? Isn't "alt-lite" basically supposed to mean an alt-right type who utilizes national-conservatism for practical reasons? Chillpilled (talk) 08:43, 20 July 2023 (UTC)
- That's the problem with labels. They are a shorthand for complicated stuff, and the real world often doesn't conform to them.Bob"Life is short and (insert adjective)" 15:23, 20 July 2023 (UTC)
- He may think nationalism is a great evil, but he also apparently thinks it's important for Substack to give Nazis a platform. Pilcrowman (talk) 02:50, 9 January 2024 (UTC)
Richard Dawkins' star is fading?[edit]
This is interesting :-))):
- British scientists don't like Richard Dawkins
- Richard Dawkins gives science a bad name, say fellow UK scientists
I am not sure that we have covered this concrete survey in the article.--ʘ ౪ ʘ °°° 05:42, 7 September 2023 (UTC)