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.
|
I get what you're saying. Sometimes there's just no argument left, and yet people will still argue for the sake of it. It turns from a debate to a really tedious battle that gets further and further away from the point.
Dawkins knew what he was doing when he posted that comment. He knew exactly which words he would choose and the reaction they'd get. It's the trouble with the Internet, it gives a platform for free speech to the stupidest, the cruellest, the most ill-informed people on the planet in a way no other medium has ever done before and there are an
army of people determined that those stupid, ill-informed, cruel people have a right to spout their bullshyte however ridiculous it might be. Pre-Internet those people would be reduced to standing on a box in Speaker's Corner so we can all laugh at them, now, they're taken seriously and their "opinion" must be protected. Protected on a forum which is moderated and where we're not allowed to give our full and unbiased opinion on some things. The Internet is both a blessing and a curse.