Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
In 2021, the American Humanist Association stripped Richard Dawkins of the award and title which was previously bestowed on Dawkins, "Humanist of the Year" in 1996.
The American Humanist Association said that Richard Dawkins had “over the past several years accumulated a history of making statements that use the guise of scientific discourse to demean marginalized groups, an approach antithetical to humanist values.”
The AHA honoured Dawkins, whose books include The Selfish Gene and The God Delusion, in 1996 for his “significant contributions” in communicating scientific concepts to the public. On Monday, it announced that it was withdrawing the award, referring to a tweet sent by Dawkins earlier this month, in which he compared trans people to Rachel Dolezal, the civil rights activist who posed as a black woman for years.
“In 2015, Rachel Dolezal, a white chapter president of NAACP, was vilified for identifying as Black,” wrote Dawkins on Twitter. “Some men choose to identify as women, and some women choose to identify as men. You will be vilified if you deny that they literally are what they identify as. Discuss.”
Dawkins later responded to criticism, writing: “I do not intend to disparage trans people. I see that my academic ‘Discuss’ question has been misconstrued as such and I deplore this. It was also not my intent to ally in any way with Republican bigots in US now exploiting this issue.”
One of the big problems with today: Instead of 'discussing' issues as requested here, everybody is automatically cancelled as a knee jerk reaction.
I'm as leftist and liberal as probably anybody on this forum and supportive of all minorities and people's rights to live however they choose.
If the AHA cannot discuss the issues of our day in an educated way and instead jump on the cancel culture bandwagon then that's their choice. Dawkins was awarded a medal by the Humanists UK association in 2019 so there's probably not much love lost.
Atheism is a big tent. All you have to do is not believe in Gods.
You can think that Humanists are "irrelevant, moronic hypocrites" but if you don't believe in Gods... you are in the same boat.
Sounds like Primaltech is politically conservative and comes down on the same side of many issues with the religionists. Primaltech is not unusual among atheists that have that "rugged individualist" type of mentality.
They don't need God and.... they don't need anybody taking their hard earned money and spending it on deadbeats either one. LOL.
so the view expressed above acknowledges that "atheism is a big tent" which encompasses many views.
yet in the same breath characterizes and dismisses "religionists" as the monolithic (small tent) of "politically conservative" "same side of many issues with the religionists."
so diversity among atheists is acknowledged by atheists, but diversity among believers is not acknowledged. they are seen as "conservative." or worse. an earlier post flat out said that "religious people are such heinous immoral murderers"
Quote:
Originally Posted by primaltech
Yeah, I think it was the Piers Morgan interview he did. It is a shame that religious people are such heinous, immoral murderers, and that the world just seems to be cool with that, in the name of "tolerance", or "diversity" or whatever.
it is reasonable to recognize that there is diversity among atheists.
it is not reasonable, and is a double standard, to fail to extend the same recognition of diversity among believers, but instead pigeonhole them. Typically using a pejorative.
Last edited by Tzaphkiel; 10-01-2023 at 02:57 PM..
Whatever your view about trans people, there's nothing wrong with what Dawkins said, which was literally a call for discussion about the matter- exactly what the world needs.
"Some men choose to identify as women, and some women choose to identify as men. You will be vilified if you deny that they literally are what they identify as. Discuss."
"I do not intend to disparage trans people. I see that my academic 'Discuss' question has been misconstrued as such and I deplore this."
"It was also not my intent to ally in any way with Republican bigots in US now exploiting this issue."
Similar to how he and Harris get the same push back whenever they discuss Islamism, etc., from the far-left Politically Correct woke brigade, who want to outlaw rationality, thinking, and discourse.
Dawkins has screwed up before following humanitarian principles. I am linking an article as a jumping off point if you want to know what I am speaking of. I have already debated this once with Transponder. It didn't go well when I suggested maybe the reason he couldn't see my point was because he was in the same age range as Dawkins.
Dawkins has screwed up before following humanitarian principles. I am linking an article as a jumping off point if you want to know what I am speaking of. I have already debated this once with Transponder. It didn't go well when I suggested maybe the reason he couldn't see my point was because he was in the same age range as Dawkins.
It's true he's said some dumb things in the past. Some he's apologized for. Some others I suspect he regrets.
I don't think it's so much of an age range thing as it is an evolution (in the right direction) of cultural norms, combined with the fact that every single thing a prominent figure said in the past is memorialized through social media. Thankfully post metoo, we live in a better world. Most people probably said some dumb things in their lifetimes. Some people who say particularly dumb things go on to be President. We're very cherry picky about which comments we ignore and which sets our hair on fire, according to our own personal agenda.
Yeah, including me. What does that have to do with the American Humanist Association being cancel culture morons?
I didn't do a deep dive into this but as a humanitarian I do see a huge problem with that tweet. He said: "if you disagreed you would be vilified." That is not acting in good faith. Acting in good faith is a high standard because it is necessarily ancillary to compassion. no? Compassion is first principle, no? For the comments about sexual assault, he did finally apologize years later. I think that one tweet was a bit much to strip him of the title so maybe some of his previous statements came into play.
I do have a sense of what he meant as I listened to a podcast with Harris and the Editor of Vox where they Vox guy went overboard with the emotions during a discussion. Harris wasn't understanding the guy's point but the guy got preachy instead of hanging in and continuing a reasonable discussion with Harris that the guy should have known Harris was capable of. The Vox Editor was not acting in good faith. It gets hard when someone starts taking whacks at principles. Harris may or may not have been a little dense depending on your perspective, but Harris was not acting in bad faith.
It's true he's said some dumb things in the past. Some he's apologized for. Some others I suspect he regrets.
I don't think it's so much of an age range thing as it is an evolution (in the right direction) of cultural norms, combined with the fact that every single thing a prominent figure said in the past is memorialized through social media. Thankfully post metoo, we live in a better world. Most people probably said some dumb things in their lifetimes. Some people who say particularly dumb things go on to be President. We're very cherry picky about which comments we ignore and which sets our hair on fire, according to our own personal agenda.
I didn't do a deep dive into this but as a humanitarian I do see a huge problem with that tweet. He said: "if you disagreed you would be vilified." That is not acting in good faith. Acting in good faith is a high standard because it is necessarily ancillary to compassion. no? Compassion is first principle, no? For the comments about sexual assault, he did finally apologize years later. I think that one tweet was a bit much to strip him of the title so maybe some of his previous statements came into play.
I do have a sense of what he meant as I listened to a podcast with Harris and the Editor of Vox where they Vox guy went overboard with the emotions during a discussion. Harris wasn't understanding the guy's point but the guy got preachy instead of hanging in and continuing a reasonable discussion with Harris that the guy should have known Harris was capable of. The Vox Editor was not acting in good faith. It gets hard when someone starts taking whacks at principles. Harris may or may not have been a little dense depending on your perspective, but Harris was not acting in bad faith.
yes, that is correct, the title was NOT stripped for "just one tweet" but for a pattern seen over many years.
"The American Humanist Association said that Richard Dawkins had “over the past several years accumulated a history of making statements that use the guise of scientific discourse to demean marginalized groups, an approach antithetical to humanist values.”
Yeah, the more I look at this the more I see his error. This is the tweet.
“In 2015, Rachel Dolezal, a white chapter president of NAACP, was vilified for identifying as Black,” wrote Dawkins on Twitter. “Some men choose to identify as women, and some women choose to identify as men. You will be vilified if you deny that they literally are what they identify as. Discuss.”
Rachel Dolezal is a scam artist who claimed to be black for her benefit. Comparing her to trans people is unacceptable. He might as well just call all Trans people scammers.
Yeah, the more I look at this the more I see his error. This is the tweet.
“In 2015, Rachel Dolezal, a white chapter president of NAACP, was vilified for identifying as Black,” wrote Dawkins on Twitter. “Some men choose to identify as women, and some women choose to identify as men. You will be vilified if you deny that they literally are what they identify as. Discuss.”
Rachel Dolezal is a scam artist who claimed to be black for her benefit. Comparing her to trans people is unacceptable. He might as well just call all Trans people scammers.
Dawkins is criticized as well for: "His latest statement implies that the identities of transgender individuals are fraudulent, while also simultaneously attacking Black identity as one that can be assumed when convenient."
"He was widely condemned for this “bad faith” take which equated race with gender, one of many unsolicited comments he’s made on trans people over the years. Dawkins returned to this controversial point in an interview with The Sunday Times in which he characterised race as “much more of a human construct” than sex. “Race is very much a spectrum… Sex on the other hand is pretty damn binary,” he claimed, ignoring the existence of intersex people, who make up as much as 1.7 per cent of the population."
Dawkins is criticized as well for: "His latest statement implies that the identities of transgender individuals are fraudulent, while also simultaneously attacking Black identity as one that can be assumed when convenient."
"He was widely condemned for this “bad faith” take which equated race with gender, one of many unsolicited comments he’s made on trans people over the years. Dawkins returned to this controversial point in an interview with The Sunday Times in which he characterised race as “much more of a human construct” than sex. “Race is very much a spectrum… Sex on the other hand is pretty damn binary,” he claimed, ignoring the existence of intersex people, who make up as much as 1.7 per cent of the population."
I know Dawkins has a streak. That doesn't negate anything.
Last edited by L8Gr8Apost8; 10-01-2023 at 04:45 PM..
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
