This website uses cookies to store information on your computer. Some of these cookies are essential to make our site work and others help us to improve by giving us some insight into how the site is being used.
btw, I don't think Dawkins answers the question in the clip very well, though I'd love to have wiped the smirk off Sach's face. Not, let me hasten to add, becuase he is Jewish, but because IMHO, he is being a pompous ass!
Watched the "Sacks Show" last night -- what a pompous, sanctimonious twerp! One thing that immediately struck me, and was a message throughout, is that it is the religionistas who are trying to get science to "meet us half-way" rather than vv; I got the impression that the three cherry-picked scientists didn't really care that much either way. As science explains more and more, the "space" for religion is shrinking, despite what Sacks said to the contrary.
Other things that lurched to mind:
* Just because scientists can't explain everything, that doesn't give anyone the right to fill in the gaps with his/her own species of irrationality and pretend it has some sort of validity.
* It's a pity that the Jewish tradition (emphasised by Sacks in his conversation with RD) of not sacrificing children doesn't extend to Palestinian (and, presumably, Iranian) children.
* Whoever did RD's make-up didn't go to Specsavers: he looked like he was either sunburnt or permanently blushing.
Steve
Quantum Theory:The branch of science with which people who know absolutely sod all about quantum theory can explain anything.
Tetenterre wrote:Watched the "Sacks Show" last night -- what a pompous, sanctimonious twerp!
My thoughts exactly!
One thing that immediately struck me, and was a message throughout, is that it is the religionistas who are trying to get science to "meet us half-way" rather than vv; I got the impression that the three cherry-picked scientists didn't really care that much either way. As science explains more and more, the "space" for religion is shrinking, despite what Sacks said to the contrary.
The scientists were just being nice. The programme was completely pointless.
Other things that lurched to mind:
* Just because scientists can't explain everything, that doesn't give anyone the right to fill in the gaps with his/her own species of irrationality and pretend it has some sort of validity.
Just watched it on Sacks' youtube page (I'm sure he would have got copyright permission...):
I commented below it, but it's held for moderation. I wonder if he'll publish such a 'militant' comment?
Very poor and superficial with the Rabbi clutching at straws - mainly from the straw men he built in the first place.
Alan Henness
There are three fundamental questions for anyone advocating Brexit:
1. What, precisely, are the significant and tangible benefits of leaving the EU?
2. What damage to the UK and its citizens is an acceptable price to pay for those benefits?
3. Which ruling of the ECJ is most persuasive of the need to leave its jurisdiction?
Only listened to about half-way through and didn't hear much that was new - will listen to rest later. I reached the point where Sachs said something like, "God wanted us to investigate the Universe to better appreciate His greatness." That indicates no change in attitude from the standard one, merely a way of shoe horning the supernatural into the natural, as usual! The exercise seems to be one of merely a re-run of the justification of religion in the physical world.
"Look forward; yesterday was a lesson, if you did not learn from it you wasted it."
Me, 2015
stevenw888 wrote:I will report this to the internet police immediately!
No need - they already know. Big Brother is watching...
Alan Henness
There are three fundamental questions for anyone advocating Brexit:
1. What, precisely, are the significant and tangible benefits of leaving the EU?
2. What damage to the UK and its citizens is an acceptable price to pay for those benefits?
3. Which ruling of the ECJ is most persuasive of the need to leave its jurisdiction?
jaywhat wrote:A bit off topic but just before this morning's 'prayer for the day' got switched off I heard it was by an Alison Twaddle. (She's summat in Scotland)
She sometimes does TFTD on GMS. She's a church elder and was General Secretary of the Church of Scotland Guild. I suspect she was a contemporary of mine at St Andrews.
There are three fundamental questions for anyone advocating Brexit:
1. What, precisely, are the significant and tangible benefits of leaving the EU?
2. What damage to the UK and its citizens is an acceptable price to pay for those benefits?
3. Which ruling of the ECJ is most persuasive of the need to leave its jurisdiction?
It's not just an English problem (R4 being a predominantly English radio station despite the claims of the BBC). If it were to be stirred up again, we have the same problem here. I occasionally hear it on GMS but if it's a working day, I should be up and in the shower.