Richard Dawkins quote
#1
http://richarddawkins.net/articles/2014

"Hinduism and Buddhism offer much more sophisticated worldviews (or philosophies) and I see nothing wrong with these religions." Richard Dawkins

I think he is wrong in assuming that Hinduism and Buddhism are benign. Many of us can see plenty of wrong in these religions.
[+] 1 user Likes Sajit's post
Reply
#2
Sajith, what's the context behind this quote? I'm unable to find it. Also, what is Dawkins' position now (since this is over 2 years old). I would want to ask these questions before reading too much into it. I read through the comments on that thread and it is pretty clear that most freethinkers disagree with it.

In any case, it's just an unsupported statement. Dawkins may be a great thinker, but you and I are much more familiar with the virulent and repressive set of ideologies that constitute the institutionalized superstition known as Hinduism. On this subject, we are the authority, not Dawkins.

(25-Aug-2010, 11:02 AM)Sajit Wrote: http://richarddawkins.net/articles/2014

"Hinduism and Buddhism offer much more sophisticated worldviews (or philosophies) and I see nothing wrong with these religions." Richard Dawkins

I think he is wrong in assuming that Hinduism and Buddhism are benign. Many of us can see plenty of wrong in these religions.
"Fossil rabbits in the Precambrian"
~ J.B.S.Haldane, on being asked to falsify evolution.
Reply
#3
The quote has been given as a debating point. Did he really say this in a serious work?
Reply
#4
So???!!!!!
Do I smell an appeal to authority here? I am afraid that, even if it is Dawkins, we can (& must) differ from his opinion IF we know it to be wrong!
[+] 1 user Likes gunniboy's post
Reply
#5
(25-Aug-2010, 11:02 AM)Sajit Wrote: http://richarddawkins.net/articles/2014

"Hinduism and Buddhism offer much more sophisticated worldviews (or philosophies) and I see nothing wrong with these religions." Richard Dawkins

I think he is wrong in assuming that Hinduism and Buddhism are benign. Many of us can see plenty of wrong in these religions.

I agree with Dawkins on this one. smile
Reply
#6
First of all it is unclear if Richard Dawkins himself made that quote. I for one am unable to find the lecture, speech or presentation where this supposed comment was made.
Two, judging from the thread on the website, it looks like a debate exercise rather than something explicitly stated.
Three, the veracity and context of a statement is vital. Some time ago someone posted an Obama quote as a meme on /r/atheism without anybody bothering to check the source.
Finally, Richard Dawkins is NOT the Pope( ayotollah, Hindu priest etc etc) of atheism. He is just as likely to have made such a comment (whether or not he did in this case is arguable) and be dead wrong. Remember that his erudition of Hinduism or other Eastern religions may not be up to what his knowledge of Christianity, Islam and Judaisim may be.
I find it sad that an apologist like yourself finds such glee in a single quote (made by an atheist) that apparently lends some shred of credit to your world-view.
"It's alright, I rarely meet anyone who's able to read it properly. Although personally, I never thought that it to be an odd of a name. Once I give people the pronunciation, they tend to remember my name by easily associating me with it. A unique face, a unique moniker."
[+] 4 users Like nick87's post
Reply
#7
Let's assume for a moment that Richard Dawkins did indeed say that. (Sam Harris is guilty too, occasionally, in my opinion.) I'll risk sounding just like a Hindu-apologist, with the only difference being in the side I'm arguing for: The problem, for Indian freethinkers, with 'western' critiques of religion is that they are all mostly centered around Abrahamic religions. There isn't enough criticism of 'eastern' beliefs partly because of the social context in which Dawkins, etc. live and write. To state the obvious, Nirmukta contributors, FIRA affiliates, and any number of literary figures and academicians such as Meera Nanda, UR Ananthamurthy, etc. are the most reliable critics of Indian belief systems.
[+] 2 users Like karatalaamalaka's post
Reply
#8
Well the above quotation is from the old site of Richard Dawkins where this was posted as a point of Debate.It is not certain whether he said this in some speech. I am currently reading the book 'The God Delusion',in this he called the ' monotheism in the disguise of polytheism ' concept in Hinduism as sophistry.basically he is against any religion that considers a Supernatural Being called God.The mainstream and the currently followed Hinduism in an average Hindu family believes such a God.That God is not very different from Abrahamic God.Even in Vedas the God is said to have three qualities:-

1)Omnipotent
2)Omniscient
3)Omnipresent

and yes of course Hindus philosophies do have many unprovable concepts.
Reply
#9
(30-May-2013, 11:14 PM)Swati Bhatt Wrote: Well the above quotation is from the old site of Richard Dawkins where this was posted as a point of Debate.It is not certain whether he said this in some speech. I am currently reading the book 'The God Delusion',in this he called the ' monotheism in the disguise of polytheism ' concept in Hinduism as sophistry.basically he is against any religion that considers a Supernatural Being called God.The mainstream and the currently followed Hinduism in an average Hindu family believes such a God.That God is not very different from Abrahamic God.Even in Vedas the God is said to have three qualities:-

1)Omnipotent
2)Omniscient
3)Omnipresent

and yes of course Hindus philosophies do have many unprovable concepts.

well its very wrong to say that god in the hinduism is not different from abrahamic god....the problem occurs when u dont read the vedas completely......vedas are a collection of belief systems.....atheism has always had a part in hinduism read http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atheism_in_.........9/10 schools of thought in hinduism are atheistic....and they have no value for superstition or faith.....
but the problem lies in the people who practice it.....unfortunately almost all hindus never bother to read their religion....and stick on to irrational beliefs/superstitions etc......

and so if Dawkins has made that comment its pretty correct.....
Reply
#10
(23-Jun-2013, 12:20 AM)Shank1112 Wrote: well its very wrong to say that god in the hinduism is not different from abrahamic god....the problem occurs when u dont read the vedas completely......vedas are a collection of belief systems.....atheism has always had a part in hinduism read http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atheism_in_.........9/10 schools of thought in hinduism are atheistic....and they have no value for superstition or faith.....
but the problem lies in the people who practice it.....unfortunately almost all hindus never bother to read their religion....and stick on to irrational beliefs/superstitions etc......

and so if Dawkins has made that comment its pretty correct.....

Let's take the various astika school of thoughts:

Nyaya - Explicitly belief in god. Udayana for example goes to great lengths to prove the existence of god.

Vaishesika - Though this doesn't talk explicitly about god, it closely follows Nyaya and the two later on combined to become the Nyaya-Vaishesika system.

Samkhya - No god. But believes in the dualistism of Prakriti and Purusha. Today we know that this dualism is untenable.

Patanjali's Yoga - Believes in the same dualism of Samkhya.

Purva Mimamsa - No god. But goes to extreme lengths to justify rituals These rituals would be considered superstitious today.

Uttara Mimamsa (Vedanta) - Believes in a non-existent Brahman.

So I'm not sure were you pulled the 9 out of 10 number. 6 schools either believe in a god, or in superstitions or in untenable metaphysics. None of these are true of modern day atheism.
[+] 3 users Like Lije's post
Reply
#11
(23-Jun-2013, 01:44 AM)Lije Wrote:
(23-Jun-2013, 12:20 AM)Shank1112 Wrote: well its very wrong to say that god in the hinduism is not different from abrahamic god....the problem occurs when u dont read the vedas completely......vedas are a collection of belief systems.....atheism has always had a part in hinduism read http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atheism_in_.........9/10 schools of thought in hinduism are atheistic....and they have no value for superstition or faith.....
but the problem lies in the people who practice it.....unfortunately almost all hindus never bother to read their religion....and stick on to irrational beliefs/superstitions etc......

and so if Dawkins has made that comment its pretty correct.....

Let's take the various astika school of thoughts:

Nyaya - Explicitly belief in god. Udayana for example goes to great lengths to prove the existence of god.

Vaishesika - Though this doesn't talk explicitly about god, it closely follows Nyaya and the two later on combined to become the Nyaya-Vaishesika system.

Samkhya - No god. But believes in the dualistism of Prakriti and Purusha. Today we know that this dualism is untenable.

Patanjali's Yoga - Believes in the same dualism of Samkhya.

Purva Mimamsa - No god. But goes to extreme lengths to justify rituals These rituals would be considered superstitious today.

Uttara Mimamsa (Vedanta) - Believes in a non-existent Brahman.

So I'm not sure were you pulled the 9 out of 10 number. 6 schools either believe in a god, or in superstitions or in untenable metaphysics. None of these are true of modern day atheism.

i gave u the reference(the page from wiki) from where i pulled the number sorry its 8/9.......fine the numbers are not my point....what i'm saying is making a statement that hindu god is no better than an abrahamic god is wrong.......there has always been lot of diffent views on 'god' and 'god' has been subjected to a lot of skeptical questioning......
so my bigger point is as sam harris, richard dawkings always say "reigions like islam are inherently worse than other religions"
PS - i'm not defending hinduism.....i'm just puttin forward som arguements.......at the same time i accept that hinduism has a long list of problems...
Reply
#12
(23-Jun-2013, 10:42 AM)Shank1112 Wrote:
(23-Jun-2013, 01:44 AM)Lije Wrote:
(23-Jun-2013, 12:20 AM)Shank1112 Wrote: well its very wrong to say that god in the hinduism is not different from abrahamic god....the problem occurs when u dont read the vedas completely......vedas are a collection of belief systems.....atheism has always had a part in hinduism read http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atheism_in_.........9/10 schools of thought in hinduism are atheistic....and they have no value for superstition or faith.....
but the problem lies in the people who practice it.....unfortunately almost all hindus never bother to read their religion....and stick on to irrational beliefs/superstitions etc......

and so if Dawkins has made that comment its pretty correct.....

Let's take the various astika school of thoughts:

Nyaya - Explicitly belief in god. Udayana for example goes to great lengths to prove the existence of god.

Vaishesika - Though this doesn't talk explicitly about god, it closely follows Nyaya and the two later on combined to become the Nyaya-Vaishesika system.

Samkhya - No god. But believes in the dualistism of Prakriti and Purusha. Today we know that this dualism is untenable.

Patanjali's Yoga - Believes in the same dualism of Samkhya.

Purva Mimamsa - No god. But goes to extreme lengths to justify rituals These rituals would be considered superstitious today.

Uttara Mimamsa (Vedanta) - Believes in a non-existent Brahman.

So I'm not sure were you pulled the 9 out of 10 number. 6 schools either believe in a god, or in superstitions or in untenable metaphysics. None of these are true of modern day atheism.

i gave u the reference(the page from wiki) from where i pulled the number sorry its 8/9.......fine the numbers are not my point....what i'm saying is making a statement that hindu god is no better than an abrahamic god is wrong.......there has always been lot of diffent views on 'god' and 'god' has been subjected to a lot of skeptical questioning......
so my bigger point is as sam harris, richard dawkings always say "reigions like islam are inherently worse than other religions"
PS - i'm not defending hinduism.....i'm just puttin forward som arguements.......at the same time i accept that hinduism has a long list of problems...
and its funny to see that out of the 6 systems you have quoted 5 don't have the theistic view of god.......and coming to way u talk about modern atheism - its like u consider it to be another religion.......its not another religion...
isn't an atheist, some1 who has grown out of religion?? and there are always small disagreements among atheists......
Reply




Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)