Quote:
Originally Posted by Toy Soldier
Yes, they are entitled to that, but opinions based on moral and ethical reasoning are not scientific. If Wayne Rooney goes out for a game of tennis, he cannot be described as playing football just because "he's a professional footballer".
A scientist Dawkins may be... But he did not have his scientists hat on when he made this tweet. As you say: it's an opinion based on ethics and morals. It is not a theory based on experimentation or scientific observation. It isn't science.
It's a scientist giving a bog-standard human opinion and dressing it up as anything else is just false.
In many people's eyes (including my own) , the opinion he is offering absolutely stinks and is perfectly fair game for criticism.
|
Whatever you or anyone else thinks is irrelevant here, we're not discussing what the general consensus on twitter/forums are.
You have reduced it to a 'bog standard opinion' which based on his career I don't think it could be.
How you can differentiate what 'hat' he was wearing is as a man or as an evolutionary biologist, where is it written that in place of moral/ethical debate science only has logic?
I don't know how Wayne Rooney fits in even as an analogy, Again I think that unlike maybe other branches of science biologists are more likely to include moral and ethical considerations as they're sometimes accused of 'playing god'?