Science, the Poetry of Reality, Jewel in Humanity’s Crown | Richard Dawkins
Richard Dawkins provides his thoughts in this wonderful lecture. The lecture will extol science as perhaps humanity's greatest and proudest achievement. That invites accusations of “scientism” and arrogance. Science knows what it knows (a lot) but it also humbly knows what it doesn’t know (also a lot). There may be questions too deep even for science. But if science can’t answer them, no other human endeavor can either. Given that we were designed simply to survive and reproduce, the wonder is that we have produced the geniuses that we have.
Science comes under attack from the fashionable belief that it is no more true than indigenous tribal myths and alternative, subjective “ways of knowing.” These attacks are influential but easily rebutted. Science has well-developed methods-for example, the double-blind trial-to eschew subjectivism.
The human benefits of science need no listing. But they're not the main reason I would stand up for science as a sublime triumph of our species up there with Shakespeare and Beethoven. We uniquely know how, where, and why we came into existence.
Richard Dawkins is one of the most respected scientists in the world and an internationally best-selling author. Among his books are The Selfish Gene, The God Delusion, and his autobiography A Brief Candle in the Dark. He is a fellow of the Royal Society and of the Royal Society of Literature.
This talk took place on Thursday, October 26
Пікірлер: 24
Tbh I cried listening to this… I tried myself to pass this on to my children and thankfully I have amazing little humans who completely get it! May it forever be payed forward 😊
😭😭, Dwakins have grown much older. We don't want to loose him. He is a great personality. Please Mr. Dwakin take care of your health and please cryopreserve yourself and also record your memories, so can later when science advances so much then you can be regenerated😁. I know I have said weird things but we all love you Mr. Dawkins ❤. Loosing personality like you is a terrible thing for mankind. People like you makes the world better for living.
@debopamsil6965
2 ай бұрын
Ekbar Kolkatay ana dorkar enake
@koushikkumarghosh5887
2 ай бұрын
@@debopamsil6965 Exactly. Wow, 1st time dekhchi kono doctor praise korche Dawkins k❤️ otherwise to doctor rai sob theke besi science er field e hoa sotteo help koreche god er believe k hold kore rakhar jonno. Doctor der vitor e scientific temperament joto fast develop hbe toto taratari society change hbe.
@debopamsil6965
2 ай бұрын
@@koushikkumarghosh5887 ekhono ekta porikkha pass kora baki for mbbs degree 😅...kintu ha, eta amar o biswash
@KendalSmithy
2 ай бұрын
He will go the way of all humanity. His body will die and rot or be cremated and his soul will go to oblivion and his words will largely be forgottem. Or at least that's his understanding of reality, but others prefer to grant themselves some hope, based on the unrivalled evidence of the Christian Bible.
thank you so much for making this available to me. I am very gratfeful! Brilliant lecture!
I think this is a must-listen-to for every scientist who has been discovering and adding to the accumulative knowledge even the tiniest bit!
Sir Richard Dawkins the Greatest Exponent of Critical and Rational thinking, Reasoning for the development of Scientific thought towards the eternal search for Truth ...Sir You have really changed the world..Thank you very much...
❤
Well Richard; just call me the Department of Discontinued Lines. Near to closing down.
❤❤👌👌👍👍🙏🙏
I hesitate to argue with RD but I believe our common ancestor with chimpanzees lived 5-7 million years ago, rather than our common ancestor with a rat. Can someone else correct me if i am mistaken..
@user-kf3ld5pv3j
2 ай бұрын
I said 75 million years ago". Admittedly it sounds a bit like "7 to 5". I'm reminded of an occasion in New York when I had been invited to speak, as I thought, for "four to five" minutes, and that's what I prepared. I had a terrible shock when my introducer stood up and said I'd be speaking for "forty five" minutes. In a panic, I managed to ad lib for the full forty five. Richard Dawkins.
@debopamsil6965
2 ай бұрын
@@user-kf3ld5pv3j that's such an interesting anecdote...big fan of your work.
@carmenmccauley585
2 ай бұрын
@@user-kf3ld5pv3jof course you did. ❤❤❤
The big problem for Dawkins, something that he by now must be fully aware of and is having trouble to cope with, is the fact that the simplistic dogma that has made him famous is now being compehensively debunked by sound scientific facts. The post-Darwinist dictum is that spontaneous mutations in DNA create some individuals with superior adaptability who then dominate through selective pressure. This mechanism works beautifully within a given species, but cannot explain speciation. Speciation is a mystery and Dawkins must know this, and yet he keeps pushing his theory because his entire fame is based on it.
Did Richard Dawkins talk about transpeople or was he on a short leash?
Sokal's hoax was published in 1996. Everybody has moved on since then but dawkins is still at it with his lame take on philosophy and phony attitude towards arts. This man never evolves.
Richard, I love you so much. You had such a positive influence on my life but if something is non binary by 0.02 it's enough to not call it binary. Then it's becoming almost binary. Ech, too long to write. Even if someone is doing it for fun, it's not your problem unless it's harming you in some way.
I am a big fan of Richard Dawkins, but he makes errors like other great minds. Errors like knowing which arguments to bother with. Yes, sex is (almost) completely binary. But it isn't completely. There are (very few) people with the sex organs of both male and females. And people who have different genders have been recognized for millennia. Truly, this goes back thousands of years. But the real question for Dawkins should be, why this battle? If a person tells me they are a woman, what difference does it make to me if they are or aren't? At what point could that matter to any of us? Why is he triggered by these claims? It is utterly immaterial what the biological "fact" is, to any of us who hear the claim. Dawkins errs in addressing this with such fervor, and only appears transphobic and bigoted.
@KendalSmithy
2 ай бұрын
I prefer to say there are only two genders. There are men and women but there are some effeminate men and some masculine women. If we separate biology from behaviour things are more straightforward. Transphobic and bigoted? I don't think so!