Re: OT: "Science is interesting; if you don't agree, you can fuck off."
|From:||Sai Emrys <sai@...>|
|Date:||Wednesday, November 14, 2007, 0:35|
On Nov 12, 2007 3:41 PM, Jeff Rollin <jeff.rollin@...> wrote:
> Whether it is or it isn't a Dawkins quote,
Dawkins is on youtube video ("beyond belief" conference, in a
conversation with an astronomer critiquing his biting attitude)
quoting this, and attributes it to an ex-New Scientist editor:
> this kind of attitude - "if you
> don't agree with me on X, Y and/or Z, you can f*ck off" - is responsible for
> most of the world's problems (and not, continuing the Dawkins theme,
> religion) today and throughout history. If it IS by Dawkins, that just goes
> to prove the point even more.
I don't read it as that at all.
As I see it, it's more a statement of territoriality. That is,
something more longwinded would be: "We here at New Scientist believe
that science is interesting. If you don't agree, then we don't give a
damn and you are welcome not to read what we publish, but kindly do
not interfere with our work, which is intended only for people who do
Rather than "if you don't agree, then you are a heathen / Bad Person
and we will attack you", which seems to be your interpretation (and
one that I, like you, would find distasteful).
In other words, I agree with your sentiment but not with your
interpretation of the quote.