Dawkins is debating every day and attends hundreds of occasions where he speaks every year. But only if his opponent is not a philosophy professor…
In October 2011 William L. Craig announced his intention to debate the archbishop of atheism Dawkins publicly. However Dawkins repeatedly denied the challenge. His main excuse was that “he was busy” and that he could not talk with everyone asking him to talk with them. Dawkins also stated that he often talks with archbishops and other proponents of theism. But this of course cannot possibly explain why he does not talk with one of the most known philosophers who are in favor of theism. Another “argument” Dawkins offered to explain his denial, was that Craig was in favor of the genocide of the Canaanites and that is one of the reasons he does not want to talk with this man. However I can hardly realize the point of that argument: Craig simply stated that according to the holy book of the Old Testament, what happened to the Canaanites was justified. If Dawkins believes (which he does) that the Old Testament is rubbish, then it would be more than a good opportunity to go to the debate and smash that argument on the face of Craig. But he did not. Weird for a militant atheist like Dawkins if you ask me. He seems to be keen on debating everyone he thinks is a weak opponents, but when a worthy opponents appears, off he goes into the “I am busy” line of defense…
[sources: http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2011/oct/20/richard-dawkins-william-lane-craig, http://www.onlineopinion.com.au/view.asp?article=12760
Is was then that I attempted to register in the Dawkins Foundation web page and try to post my opinion on the matter. I started writing in the respective forum thread and was immediately confronted with hostility of the worst kind. “Arguments” like “GTF outta here troll” were the main answers to what I posted. I have the whole line of discussion below to prove my case (see http://richarddawkins.net/articles/643584-why-i-refuse-to-debate-with-william-lane-craig#page24 and http://richarddawkins.net/articles/643584-why-i-refuse-to-debate-with-william-lane-craig#page25 for the whole line of comments that led to my banning).
After some arguments, I wrote to them a comment like
Sorry, I am too busy to answer your post.
PS. How does that even sound like?
This is what started another series of furious answers from other forum writers. When I again answered (in a clear attempt to show how non-valid the argument “I am busy” is when you refuse to discuss with someone) “Sorry I am just too busy”, my account was immediately blocked by the Forum.
One might say that I was provocative. However the only thing I did was to use the same argument Dawkins used against Craig. If the “GTF outta here” is not a reason for the moderators of the forum to do something, then certainly one post “I am too busy” is not a reason either. And I believe few people would not recognize a hostile environment in the “Free Thinking Oasis” of Dawkins Foundation when they see those lines of discussion. Claiming that you are “not dogmatic” is something you must prove. And de-activating user accounts over such comments is certainly not the way to prove that…
Figure 1: 2011-10-30 No ability to comment… Too much for them to have another opinion on the forum…
Figure 2: Cannot even edit my Profile
However this is not all. I also tried to post two discussion topics on the Forum, which were of course never published. The Terms and Conditions of the Forum state that the Moderators can decide whether to publish or not your suggested topics for discussion, without telling you why (!!!) That is “free thinking” in its best form! Great terms I would say. Very “anti-dogmatic” indeed…
For historical purposes, the suggested topics were the following:
Figure 3: Suggested topics for discussion that were banned for no reason
Once more, nothing provocative or slightly offensive. Unless you consider Wittgenstein and Art offensive… As I have stated in many articles before, “scientism” is something very different from true science. And true science understands its limits. Dawkins does not. He and his followers are constantly in a state of “war” against everything different. And they may “win” that war in their own Forum where only “similar thinkers” are allowed, but it is very hard to win that war in the general public’s view.
Dawkin’s “Free Thinking Oasis” should try to become more “free” if it really wants to make a stand against dogmatism.
PS. If you have a different opinion about what I post here, I will have no problem whatsoever to discuss them. Because debating is the foundation of civilization. Unlike others, I like discussing. Especially with people having opposite opinion that me…
