Comments on: Richard Dawkins On Andrew Denton’s ‘Elders’

By: podblack

podblack — Tue, 22 Dec 2009 14:03:05 +0000

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.

By: Gary

Gary — Tue, 22 Dec 2009 13:48:26 +0000

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

By: podblack

podblack — Tue, 22 Dec 2009 13:43:20 +0000

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

Welcome to being on my spam list….

By: Mike

Mike — Tue, 22 Dec 2009 13:25:06 +0000

[deleted due to being unable to articulate]

By: Hope

Hope — Tue, 22 Dec 2009 07:11:43 +0000

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.

By: Jackie

Jackie — Tue, 22 Dec 2009 03:45:39 +0000

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?

By: Roger Lennon

Roger Lennon — Mon, 21 Dec 2009 21:42:47 +0000

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.

By: retrogrouch

retrogrouch — Mon, 21 Dec 2009 20:17:10 +0000

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.

By: andrew

andrew — Mon, 21 Dec 2009 20:08:27 +0000

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.