Dawkins on Alien Rubbish

[HomerJay]

This is a reminder to Zilla regarding personal attacks for this post: http://rationalia.com/forum/viewtopic.p ... 48#p997948

Also please consider this a general reminder to all in this thread to avoid personal attacks and to play nice.

Yes, I had problems with that too, "tonight"???

The Times Educational Supplement's website has a community area. I found this thread there: http://community.tes.co.uk/forums/p/524342/7045229.aspx

Oh, an unsolicited link with no context or explanation. How unhelpful.

You're really in Dick mode tonight.

[Gawdzilla Sama]

[Pensioner]

Charlou, even though I think Gawd and Exi have gone too far, I am worried by RD's choice of terminology. Whether meant or not, the "alien" tag will resonate with the racist and anti-immigrant fringe. I am prepared to give him the benefit of the doubt, and accept that it wasn't cynical spin to assist his agenda, but at the least, it was a poor choice of words.

Basically, it makes it that much harder for a reasoned critique of Islam and its educational perversions to escape the clutches of the Gert Wiilders of this world...

What Jim said, bye the way, I think Dawkins is an elitist tosser.

[Magicziggy]

Charlou, even though I think Gawd and Exi have gone too far, I am worried by RD's choice of terminology. Whether meant or not, the "alien" tag will resonate with the racist and anti-immigrant fringe. I am prepared to give him the benefit of the doubt, and accept that it wasn't cynical spin to assist his agenda, but at the least, it was a poor choice of words.

Basically, it makes it that much harder for a reasoned critique of Islam and its educational perversions to escape the clutches of the Gert Wiilders of this world...

What Jim said, bye the way, I think Dawkins is an elitist tosser.

I think Dawkins comes across that way. He decided a long time ago to have no truck with irrational beliefs. The thing is, if Jamie Oliver were spouting Dawkins' message, he would be branded a jumped up oik. The message is hard to sell and the messenger has to have a pretty thick skin.

On the OP, the article reads pretty clearly to me. He is commenting on the plight of British children now being abused by the creationist teachings in (as it happens) Muslim faith schools.

"I spoke to a group of girls, and to a senior science teacher who believes the world is 6,000 years old.

"It's just utterly deplorable. These are now British children who are having their minds stuffed with alien rubbish."

That the word alien has caused so much grief is surprising. It seems an appropriate use of the word and in no way has anything to do with the particular faith school he had visited. Dawkins can do no right in some people's eyes. However on the single issue of rational thought, he has held his own over a number of years. IMO

[Bella Fortuna]

The Times Educational Supplement's website has a community area. I found this thread there: http://community.tes.co.uk/forums/p/524342/7045229.aspx

Re: this link - the link from that site to the Telegraph crashes my browser, and when I go to the Telegraph directly I cannot find that article/page... Can anyone find it and post a link to the Telegraph page for me here, please, since I'm having trouble?

[Thinking Aloud]

Richard Dawkins attacks Muslim schools for stuffing children's minds with 'alien rubbish'
Richard Dawkins claims Muslim schools are having a "pernicious" influence on children who are having their minds "stuffed with alien rubbish" such as claims the world is only 6,000 years old

Dawkins said that while he opposed faith schools as a whole, it was the Muslim ones that worried him the most. Photo: REX FEATURES
By Richard Alleyne5:00AM BST 08 Oct 201179 Comments
The author of The God Delusion, who has previously described religious education provided by faith schools as a form of child abuse, said that the effect was "utterly deplorable" especially as it lasted until their university years.
The prominent atheist said he could live with some faith schools that are vaguely religious and saved his fire for the schools that were teaching "total nonsense".
Mr Dawkins, former Oxford University professor and evolutionary biologist, made his comments as he spoke to the Times Educational Supplement about the launch of a new science book.
He said that while he opposed faith schools as a whole, it was the Muslim ones that worried him the most.
"Occasionally, my colleagues lecturing in universities lament having undergraduate students walk out of their classes when they talk about evolution – this is almost entirely Muslims," he said.
RELATED ARTICLES
Islamic fundamentalism websites at some Muslim schools 20 Feb 2009
Ofsted praises Islamic schools opposed Western lifestyle 06 Nov 2010
"So I think there's a very, very pernicious influence that is lasting up to the university years. That must be coming from certain schools."
He said that he noticed the "utterly deplorable" effect they were having first hand after visiting a Muslim school in Leicester as part of a documentary he made last year called Faith Schools Menace?
"Every single person I met believes if there is any disagreement between the Koran and science, then the Koran wins," he said.
"I spoke to a group of girls, and to a senior science teacher who believes the world is 6,000 years old.
"It's just utterly deplorable. These are now British children who are having their minds stuffed with alien rubbish."
Mr Dawkins said he was not so worried about the expansion of faith schools if they were the kind that "vaguely" have a kind of Church of England-style assembly.
But he was holding "his fire" for the ones that are teaching "total nonsense".
"There is a difference between faith schools which just vaguely have a kind of Church of England assembly and faith schools that actually teach nonsense like this school in Leicester," he said.
Mr Dawkins, who last year said he was thinking about setting up an atheist school, does, however, see the value of teaching religion but only as a way of putting the modern world into context.
He said it was important to learn for example about the Greek Gods to appreciate the poetry of Keats, the Norse Gods to relate to Wagner, and Judaism and Christianity to understand literature.
The fellow of New College, Oxford, said the lessons like his new book – The Magic of Reality – should teach children about the thousands of myths from around the world which were part of education to learn.
"I do think it valuable to teach comparative religion as a sort of anthropological study and that's sort of what all my comparative myths in The Magic of Reality are about," he said.
"If there's one thing I wanted to do in the book, it was that I don't want to downgrade myths, but the science is even more wonderful," he said.
The Magic of Reality is published by Bantam Press priced £20.

[Bella Fortuna]

Ta.

Richard Dawkins claims Muslim schools are having a "pernicious" influence on children who are having their minds "stuffed with alien rubbish" such as claims the world is only 6,000 years old

Well, the paper seems to know what he meant by that term.

[Jason]

Dawkins is not known for dumbing his ideas down to suit the lowest denominator. That might be considered as elitist, but I don't think that's the case. I think he simply expects people to make some intellectual effort rather than have every detail spelled out for them.

Let's face it, Dawkins isn't stupid. Islamophobia has become a substitute for racism in our politically correct times, and Dawkins will squeeze every gram of advantage out of such an ambiguity in order to raise his profile.

Yours is an opinion I don't share.

I think you might be looking at this a little naively. I rather do think RD deliberately played on the ambiguity of the word, my personal feelings on that tactic I've already expressed. It does take a higher intelligence to do what he did (rather than simply being the poor intellectual lacking in social savvy), but it's still despicable. I highly doubt Richard is so ignorant as to the 'alien' situation in the UK as to have made a genuine oversight.

[Exi5tentialist]

Well, the paper seems to know what he meant by that term.

That's not a paper, it's the Torygraph

[Hermit]

I think as ever he relies on an ambiguity to drive home an islamophobic point, and the ambiguity is the one you have referred to - is Richard Dawkins saying muslim women are trash, or is he saying that islam makes muslim women trash? Of course, you have plumped for the latter explanation, but with no evidence. Richard Dawkins has not as far as I am aware been explicit on that ambiguity

Dear o dear. From talking rubbish about faith schools you have now retreated to trash about the muslim burka. If you were not interested for some reason in misrepresenting Dawkins, you would have had no trouble working out what he meant when in an article titled Richard Dawkins compares burqa to 'bin liner' Dawkins defended his description of the burka as "the full bin-liner thing" thus: "I do feel visceral revulsion at the burqa because for me it is a symbol of the oppression of women."

There is no ambiguity, and good luck with trying to engineer one into it. Next, if calling young earth creationism as taught in faith schools on the authority of the Koran 'alien rubbish' constitutes driving home an islamophobic point, I'm all for it. Same for the bin-liner description of the burka, come to think of it.

[Atheist-Lite]

Being right isn't enough - the truth must be expressed wisely, intelligently and with foresight. There is a larger picture here. Population dynamics, ghettoisation and social attitudes. Without tact there is a real risk of inflaming a situation, unleashing forces that can not be readily or easily put back in their boxes. Any damn fool can start a war(of words and worse).

[colubridae]

I think as ever he relies on an ambiguity to drive home an islamophobic point, and the ambiguity is the one you have referred to - is Richard Dawkins saying muslim women are trash, or is he saying that islam makes muslim women trash? Of course, you have plumped for the latter explanation, but with no evidence. Richard Dawkins has not as far as I am aware been explicit on that ambiguity

Dear o dear. From talking rubbish about faith schools you have now retreated to trash about the muslim burka. If you were not interested for some reason in misrepresenting Dawkins, you would have had no trouble working out what he meant when in an article titled Richard Dawkins compares burqa to 'bin liner' Dawkins defended his description of the burka as "the full bin-liner thing" thus: "I do feel visceral revulsion at the burqa because for me it is a symbol of the oppression of women."

There is no ambiguity, and good luck with trying to engineer one into it. Next, if calling young earth creationism as taught in faith schools on the authority of the Koran 'alien rubbish' constitutes driving home an islamophobic point, I'm all for it. Same for the bin-liner description of the burka, come to think of it.

exi5's posts on such threads have always been blatant (though I'm sure he thinks 'subtle') islamic apologetics.

So now you have psychic powers. So now you have psychic powers. So now you have psychic powers.

No just a reasonable assumption based on you posting history.

Provide evidence. Provide evidence. Provide evidence. Provide evidence.

Don’t need to, it’s there for all to see.

[Hermit]

Being right isn't enough - the truth must be expressed wisely, intelligently and with foresight. There is a larger picture here. Population dynamics, ghettoisation and social attitudes. Without tact there is a real risk of inflaming a situation, unleashing forces that can not be readily or easily put back in their boxes. Any damn fool can start a war(of words and worse).

Dawkins was clearly and unambiguously talking about religious fundamentalism when referring to creationist teachings in muslim faith schools as "alien rubbish". He was also clearly and unambiguously referring to the oppression of women in islamic societies when he described to the burka as 'the full bin-liner thing'. If you require more "tact" than that, it becomes indistinguishable from accomodationism. That did not work under Neville Chamberlain, and it is just as likely to fail in this instance. Dawkins is focused full-time on fighting institutionalised, organised, primitive, superstitious forces that try to overturn secularism, humanism and a scientific approach to knowledge in favour of theocracy. I think it's a bit much to expect him to focus directly on racism, poverty, capitalism and crime as well.

[Atheist-Lite]

Being right isn't enough - the truth must be expressed wisely, intelligently and with foresight. There is a larger picture here. Population dynamics, ghettoisation and social attitudes. Without tact there is a real risk of inflaming a situation, unleashing forces that can not be readily or easily put back in their boxes. Any damn fool can start a war(of words and worse).

Dawkins was clearly and unambiguously talking about religious fundamentalism when referring to creationist teachings in muslim faith schools as "alien rubbish". He was also clearly and unambiguously referring to the oppression of women in islamic societies when he described to the burka as 'the full bin-liner thing'. If you require more "tact" than that, it becomes indistinguishable from accomodationism. That did not work under Neville Chamberlain, and it is just as likely to fail in this instance. Dawkins is focused full-time on fighting institutionalised, organised, primitive, superstitious forces that try to overturn secularism, humanism and a scientific approach to knowledge in favour of theocracy. I think it's a bit much to expect him to focus directly on racism, poverty, capitalism and crime as well.

I wouldn't call it accomodation to take a look at the wider situation.

[Bella Fortuna]

Well, the paper seems to know what he meant by that term.

That's not a paper, it's the Torygraph

Oooohhhhhhhh. I see.

Not really. But the Daily Mail is OK? I don't know all these nuances of British publishing.