PodBlack Cat Blog

Richard Dawkins On Andrew Denton’s ‘Elders’

by podblack on December 21, 2009

You can read the transcript here, if you missed the show / couldn’t get the show!

ANDREW DENTON: You’ve described science rather beautifully actually as the poetry of reality. Where is the poetry in science?

RICHARD DAWKINS: Science is opening your eyes to the wonderfulness of what’s there. It’s, it’s as though you’ve got tiny little, I’ve used the analogy of a burka, you know those dreadful ghastly black tents that Muslims wear, and you’ve got this tiny slit, rip open the burka. That’s what science does, and the light floods in, and that’s poetry. The poetry of the expanding universe, the poetry of geological time, the poetry of the deep complexity of life, all these things, which we’re not normally equipped to understand and the science gives it to us.

Make Me Purr - Click To Tell Others! These icons link to social bookmarking sites where readers can share and discover new web pages.
  • bodytext
  • E-mail this story to a friend!
  • del.icio.us
  • Facebook
  • StumbleUpon
  • Technorati
  • Google
  • blogmarks
  • Fark
  • Reddit
  • TwitThis

{ 9 comments }

andrew December 22, 2009 at 4:08 am

I was impressed by Richard Dawkins,he was very humble and somewhat embarrassed when Andrew Denton asked him about himself and what defines him as a person,he handled it very well by preferring to focus on the world around us,and how beautiful life is instead of a need to preach about his personal and professional achievements on camera.

retrogrouch December 22, 2009 at 4:17 am

I was very disappointed with Dawkins. He’s not a hero of mine although I share his skepticism of religion. He has no understanding of myth, does he? Wondering out loud here: Is RD a high functioning autistic? He did not understand any of Denton’s questions relating to self-reflection or more complex emotions.

Roger Lennon December 22, 2009 at 5:42 am

I am very very disappointed with Denton. His “supposed” ability to get to the heart of the interviewee emotionally fell flat. The shallow questions that would have been lapped-up by some pseudo-celebrity seeking audience acceptance through false humility were cast aside by Dawkins; as they should have been. Has Denton even read any of Dawkins works? Does he understand where Dawkins and other free-thinking individuals come from when they openly challenge us to think? Denton projected as frivolous and whimsical in failed attempts to impress Dawkins with Denton’s own supposedly deep and meaningful musings on philosopy. Thumbs down ABC and Denton. This viewer expected more from you. Apologies to Dawkins.

Jackie December 22, 2009 at 11:45 am

While not an avid fan of Richard Dawkins and his tirade on religion, I watched the program interested to see his response to Denton’s questions. How disappointing. Dawkins has the humour of an amoeba. I can’t say from the program I find the man humble at all, (granted I haven’t read copious books by him). I have to side with retrogrouch here – is he autistic?

Hope December 22, 2009 at 3:11 pm

The interview started off really well. Once Dawkins was confronted with ‘personal questions’ the interview became uncomfortable to watch. I personally think that Denton’s questions were not inappropriate given the show’s theme, but he should have realised that Richard was quite uncomfortable with that line of questioning, and should have just stuck to the science. Denton perhaps took it personally that Dawkins did not simply follow his lead. Dawkins’s social anxiety and inability to discuss his emotional experiences as they relate to aspects outside of his professional field surprised me. He also seemed to lack the ability to comfortably deflect those questions, but instead became visibly upset. It is one thing not wish to discuss the notion of wisdom, but entirely another when you have a strong emotional reaction to such questions instead of politely ignoring them. Not sure he has Asperger’s like someone suggested, but maybe challenged in some aspects of emotional intelligence.

Mike December 22, 2009 at 9:25 pm

[deleted due to being unable to articulate]

podblack December 22, 2009 at 9:43 pm

Mike – starting off your comment on my post by using an insult like ‘ladies’?

Welcome to being on my spam list….

Gary December 22, 2009 at 9:48 pm

Hope and Jackie are ladies. That is not an insult.

podblack December 22, 2009 at 10:03 pm

Gary / Mike / Matilda / Hope / Faith / Charity Whoever you are – you have just demonstrated the flaw in showing how you yourself can alternate names and make gender irrelevant. If you want to be reasonable, attack the argument, not the person making the argument. Leave sex out of it.

Comments on this entry are closed.

Previous post: Stephen Fry On The Importance Of Unbelief

Next post: Little Kitten – Atheists Love Christmas Too