Richard Dawkins cytaty
strona 10

Richard Dawkins, właściwie Clinton Richard Dawkins – brytyjski zoolog, etolog, ewolucjonista i publicysta. Do końca 2008 był profesorem katedry Public Understanding of Science na Uniwersytecie Oksfordzkim.

Jest teoretykiem ewolucji biologicznej. W wydanej w 1976 książce Samolubny gen opisał koncepcję ewolucji, w której jednostką doboru naturalnego jest gen. Wprowadził tam również pojęcie memu oraz zainicjował powstanie memetyki. W 1982 w książce Fenotyp rozszerzony dowodził, że działanie fenotypu nie ogranicza się do ciała danego organizmu, ale rozciąga się na środowisko, włączając w to także ciała innych istot.

Jest antyteistą, działa w ruchu "The Brights", wspiera Great Ape Project – ruch, który wyznaczył sobie wywalczenie niektórych praw dla wszystkich hominidów. Jest też inicjatorem akcji Out Campaign.

Krytykuje religię jako "niebezpieczny nonsens, który uczy wrogości wobec innych ludzi". Po zamachach na World Trade Center i Pentagon wezwał do ostrzejszej krytyki światopoglądów religijnych: "Skończmy wreszcie z tym cholernym szacunkiem!". Krytykuje również kreacjonizm, wiarę w zjawiska nadnaturalne i tzw. medycynę alternatywną.

Jest doktorem honoris causa uniwersytetów: Westminster, Durham, Hull i Walencji oraz laureatem l Nagrody Literackiej "Los Angeles Times" oraz Srebrnego Medalu Londyńskiego Towarzystwa Zoologicznego . Czasopismo "Prospect" umieściło go na trzecim miejscu na liście najwybitniejszych współczesnych intelektualistów znanych szerokiej publiczności .

Jest krytykiem religii instytucjonalnej, zwłaszcza chrześcijaństwa, judaizmu i islamu.

✵ 26. Marzec 1941
Richard Dawkins Fotografia
Richard Dawkins: 344   Cytaty 2   Polubienia

Richard Dawkins słynne cytaty

Richard Dawkins Cytaty o religii

Richard Dawkins cytaty

„Rozważmy ideę Boga. Nie wiemy, skąd się wzięła w puli memów. Przypuszczalnie powstała wiele razy na drodze niezależnych mutacji. W każdym razie z pewnością jest bardzo stara. W jaki sposób się replikuje? Słowem mówionym i pisanym, wspomaganym przez wspaniałą muzykę i wielkie dzieła sztuki. Czemu ma tak wysoką przeżywalność? W tym przypadku przeżywalność nie jest oczywiście własnością genu w puli memów, ale memu w puli memów. Pytanie to znaczy w istocie tyle: co w idei Boga stanowi o tak wielkiej jej stabilności i zdolności do penetrowania środowiska kulturowego? Zdolność przetrwania memu Boga w puli memów wynika z tego, że przemawia on bardzo silnie do psychiki. Udziela prawdopodobnie brzmiącej odpowiedzi na głębokie i drażniące pytania o sens istnienia. Zdaje się obiecywać, że niesprawiedliwości tego świata zostaną naprawione na tamtym. Nieśmiertelne zastępy łagodzą dotkliwość doczesnych niedostatków, i choć istnieją tylko w naszej wyobraźni, nie są przez to ani trochę mniej skuteczne, będąc w tym podobne do placebo podanego przez lekarza. Oto niektóre z powodów łatwości, z jaką idea Boga jest kopiowana przez mózgi kolejnych pokoleń. Bóg istnieje, przynajmniej jako mem o dużej zdolności przetrwania, czy tej wybitnej zaraźliwości, w środowisku tworzonym przez kulturę człowieka.”

Cytaty z książek, Samolubny gen (1976)<span id=Samolubny gen>&nbsp;</span>

„Całe stworzenie, wszędzie we Wszechświecie, jest bezpośrednim lub pośrednim wynikiem kumulatywnego procesu, którego ziemskim odpowiednikiem jest to, co na Ziemi nazywamy darwinowskim doborem naturalnym.”

Cytaty z artykułów
Źródło: Karol Jałochowski, W cieniu zakwitających teorii, „Polityka” wydanie specjalne, 6/2010.

Richard Dawkins: Cytaty po angielsku

“What's to prevent us from saying Hitler wasn't right? I mean, that is a genuinely difficult question.”

"Richard Dawkins, the Atheist Evangelist", by Larry Taunton, byFaith (18 December 2007) http://byfaithonline.com/page/in-the-world/richard-dawkins-the-atheist-evangelist

“You know you've won the argument when the only counter argument they can find is that you are white or male or old.”

https://twitter.com/richarddawkins/status/626999005747220480 (30 July 2015)
Twitter

“Natural selection is all about the differential success of rival DNA in getting itself transmitted vertically in the species archives.”

Richard Dawkins książka The Blind Watchmaker

Źródło: The Blind Watchmaker (1986), Chapter 5 “The Power and the Archives” (p. 122)

“I’ve seen a dog & bitch indulging in full 69. Males of many species including Drosophila lick female genitals before copulation.”

https://twitter.com/RichardDawkins/status/448240882710757376 (24 March 2014)
Twitter

“The God of the Old Testament is arguably the most unpleasant character in all fiction: jealous and proud of it; a petty, unjust, unforgiving control-freak; a vindictive, bloodthirsty ethnic cleanser; a misogynistic, homophobic, racist, infanticidal, genocidal, filicidal, pestilential, megalomaniacal, sadomasochistic, capriciously malevolent bully.”

Richard Dawkins książka The God Delusion

Źródło: The God Delusion (2006), p. 31 of the hardcover edition and p. 51 of the paperback edition; see also: Dan Barker, God: The Most Unpleasant Character in All Fiction, foreword by Richard Dawkins, 2016

“The meme for blind faith secures its own perpetuation by the simple unconscious expedient of discouraging rational inquiry.”

Richard Dawkins książka The Selfish Gene

Źródło: The Selfish Gene (1976, 1989), Ch. 11. Memes: the new replicators

“However many ways there may be of being alive, it is certain that there are vastly more ways of being dead.”

Richard Dawkins książka The Blind Watchmaker

Źródło: The Blind Watchmaker (1986), Chapter 1 “Explaining the Very Improbable”

“I don't withdraw a word of my initial statement. But I do now think it may have been incomplete. There is perhaps a fifth category, which may belong under "insane" but which can be more sympathetically characterized by a word like tormented, bullied, or brainwashed.”

Sincere people who are not ignorant, not stupid, and not wicked can be cruelly torn, almost in two, between the massive evidence of science on the one hand, and their understanding of what their holy book tells them on the other. I think this is one of the truly bad things religion can do to a human mind. There is wickedness here, but it is the wickedness of the institution and what it does to a believing victim, not wickedness on the part of the victim himself.
2001
Summer
Ignorance Is No Crime
Free Inquiry
21
3
0272-0701
http://www.secularhumanism.org/index.php?section=library&page=dawkins_21_3
Regarding his 1989 statement "It is absolutely safe to say that if you meet somebody who claims not to believe in evolution, that person is ignorant, stupid or insane (or wicked, but I'd rather not consider that)." (see above)

“Thus the creationist's favourite question "What is the use of half an eye?"”

Actually, this is a lightweight question, a doddle to answer. Half an eye is just 1 per cent better than 49 per cent of an eye.
Part 2: "The Virus of Faith"
The Root of All Evil? (January 2006)

“Never say, and never take seriously anyone who says, "I cannot believe that so-and-so could have evolved by gradual selection". I have dubbed this kind of fallacy "the Argument from Personal Incredulity."”

Richard Dawkins książka River Out of Eden

Time and again, it has proven the prelude to an intellectual banana-skin experience.
River out of Eden (1995)

“I don't believe you until you tell me, do you really believe, for example, if they say they are Catholic, "Do you really believe that when a priest blesses a wafer, it turns into the body of Christ? Are you seriously telling me you believe that? Are you seriously saying that wine turns into blood?"”

Mock them. Ridicule them. In public. Don't fall for the convention that we're all too polite to talk about religion. Religion is not off the table. Religion is not off limits. Religion makes specific claims about the universe which need to be substantiated and need to be challenged and, if necessary, need to be ridiculed with contempt.
Reason Rally, National Mall, Washington, DC,
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Dq7rHRplZKU
YouTube
Richard Dawkins and his Foundation at the Reason Rally
2012-04-07

“Our ethics and our politics assume, largely without question or serious discussion, that the division between human and 'animal' is absolute. 'Pro-life', to take just one example, is a potent political badge, associated with a gamut of ethical issues such as opposition to abortion and euthanasia.
What it really means is pro-human-life. Abortion clinic bombers are not known for their veganism, nor do Roman Catholics show any particular reluctance to have their suffering pets 'put to sleep'. In the minds of many confused people, a single-celled human zygote, which has no nerves and cannot suffer, is infinitely sacred, simply because it is 'human.”

No other cells enjoy this exalted status.
But such 'essentialism' is deeply un-evolutionary. If there were a heaven in which all the animals who ever lived could frolic, we would find an interbreeding continuum between every species and every other. For example I could interbreed with a female who could interbreed with a male who could ... fill in a few gaps, probably not very many in this case ... who could interbreed with a chimpanzee.
We could construct longer, but still unbroken chains of interbreeding individuals to connect a human with a warthog, a kangaroo, a catfish. This is not a matter of speculative conjecture; it necessarily follows from the fact of evolution.
A successful hybridisation between a human and a chimpanzee. Even if the hybrid were infertile like a mule, the shock waves that would be sent through society would be salutary. This is why a distinguished biologist described this possibility as the most immoral scientific experiment he could imagine: it would change everything! It cannot be ruled out as impossible, but it would be surprising.
Richard Dawkins Chimpanzee Hybrid? The Guardian, Jan 2009 https://www.theguardian.com/science/blog/2009/jan/02/richard-dawkins-chimpanzee-hybrid?commentpage=2

“Don’t ever be lazy enough, defeatist enough, cowardly enough to say “I don't understand it so it must be a miracle - it must be supernatural - God did it”. Say instead, that it’s a puzzle, it’s strange, it’s a challenge that we should rise to. Whether we rise to the challenge by questioning the truth of the observation, or by expanding our science in new and exciting directions - the proper and brave response to any such challenge is to tackle it head-on. And until we've found a proper answer to the mystery, it's perfectly ok simply to say “this is something we don't yet understand - but we're working on it.””

Richard Dawkins książka The Magic of Reality

It's the only honest thing to do. Miracles, magic and myths, they can be fun. Everybody likes a good story. Myths are fun, as long as you don't confuse them with the truth. The real truth has a magic of its own. The truth is more magical, in the best and most exciting sense of the word, than any myth or made-up mystery or miracle. Science has its own magic - the magic of reality.
Duke University, 01/03/2012 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rYcOoqxuroI&t=54m51s
The Magic Of Reality (2012)

“I agree that it's very difficult to come to an absolute definition of what's moral and what is not. We are on our own, without a god, and we have to get together, sit down together and decide what kind of society do we want to live in. Do we want to live in a society where people steal, where people kill, where people don't pull their weight paying their taxes, doing that kind of thing? Do we want to live in a kind of society where everybody is out for themselves in a dog-eat-dog world? And we decide in conclave together that that's not the kind of world in which we want to live. It's difficult. There is no absolute reason why we should believe that that's true - it's a moral decision which we take as individuals - and we take it collectively as a collection of individuals. If you want to get that sort of value system from religion I want you to ask yourself - whereabouts in religion do you get it? Which religion do you get it from? They're all different. If you get it from the Judeo-Christian-Islamic tradition then I beg you - don't get it from your holy book! Because the morality you will get from reading your holy book is hideous. Don't get it from your holy book. Don't get it from sucking up to your god. Don't get it from saying “oh, I'm terrified of going to hell so I'd better be good””

that's a very ignoble reason to be good. Instead - be good for good reasons. Be good for the reason that's you've decided together with other people the society we want to live in: a decent humane society. Not one based on absolutism, not one based on holy books and not one based on sucking up to.. looking over your shoulder to the divine spy camera in the sky. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=roFdPHdhgKQ&t=59m29s
Richard Dawkins vs. Jonathan Sacks - BBC's RE:Think Festival (2012)

Podobni autorzy

William Somerset Maugham Fotografia
William Somerset Maugham 32
pisarz angielski
Aldous Huxley Fotografia
Aldous Huxley 36
pisarz angielski
Virginia Woolf Fotografia
Virginia Woolf 68
angielska pisarka
George Orwell Fotografia
George Orwell 69
pisarz i publicysta angielski
Rudyard Kipling Fotografia
Rudyard Kipling 32
angielski pisarz, poeta i prozaik
Clive Staples Lewis Fotografia
Clive Staples Lewis 52
angielski pisarz, historyk, filozof i teolog
Agatha Christie Fotografia
Agatha Christie 82
pisarka angielska
John Ronald Reuel Tolkien Fotografia
John Ronald Reuel Tolkien 22
angielski filolog-germanista, filozof chrześcijański, pisarz
James Joyce Fotografia
James Joyce 21
irlandzki pisarz
Aleister Crowley Fotografia
Aleister Crowley 27
okultysta angielski