My Youtube exchange with Richard Dawkins on Al-Jazeera is finally up on the web. You can watch my segment here and the subsequent Dawkins segment here. This is the famous "debate that never was." And that's the real pity. Dawkins insisted on appearing separately from me and being interviewed after me. This way he ensured that I could not rebut anything he said on the show. Fortunately I have an AOL blog where I can carry on the conversation.
Dawkins made some good points, noting for instance that evolution does not rely on mere "chance," but he also made some obvious blunders. When a caller pointed out that World War II was motivated in substantial part by a "survival of the fittest" ideology, Dawkins pretended to be completely baffled. He proclaimed the caller's reference "absolute nonsense." Yet Richard Weikart's book From Darwin to Hitler provides extensive documentation that the Nazis repeatedly invoked Darwinian evolution and that Nazi doctrine used "survival of the fittest" as a virtual recruiting phrase. So Dawkins is either historically ignorant or wilfully obtuse.
Here I want to address Dawkins's response to my argument that the effect that is the universe requires a causal explanation. It seems unreasonable in the extreme to say that even though nature had a beginning, somehow nature is the cause of itself. So God is the name we give to the supernatural being that is the cause of nature as a whole. Dawkins argued: "This leaves open the question of where did the creator come from?" Since the creator is this "great big complicated thing," what good does it do to invoke one complex thing to explain another? "If you postulate a designer you haven't explained anything." Basically what Dawkins is saying is that there is no point in using complex explanation A to account for complex phenomenon B if you cannot account for A.
This is a fallacy. We can see this by applying the logic to evolution itself. The logic of evolution is a "great big complicated thing" with all its elements of replication, natural selection, mutations, genetic drift, and so on. Yet it is invoked to explain another complicated thing: the exquisite fit between living creatures and their surroundings. How reasonable would it be to argue: "We are invoking one complicated thing, namely evolution, to explain another, namely living things. Yet this leaves open the question of where evolution came from. We have no idea how and why evolution originally started. Since we cannot account for evolution, our explanation is useless. Simply to postulate evolution is to explain nothing." This is precisely Dawkins's argument regarding God, and here we can see how it boomerangs on evolution!
But consider the argument itself more closely. Is it really true that Complex Explanation A for Complex Phenomenon B only works if we can give a full account of A? Actually it is not true. Gravity may account for why objects fall at a certain pace, but this does not require that we give an account for where gravity comes from or why it exists in the first place. If we find various signs of intelligent life on another planet we can conclude that there are aliens on that planet without having any idea of who created them or where they came from. In summary, the best explanation for something does not require that we also provide an explanation for the explanation.
The problem I think for Dawkins is that his trademark snorts and sneers only work against televangelists who do not do much more than hurl Bible verses at their opponents. When he is confronted with history, philosophy, and logic, Dawkins seems to have very little to say. And perhaps this explains his peculiar insistence that I be given no chance whatever to respond to his statements on the Riz Khan show.
Reader Comments ( Page 5 of 83)
61. In order for you to use the word “fascism” in sentence, it might help you if you understood the meaning of the word.
xxx
You'd best study the doctrine of fascism a little more carefully, publius.
Meanwhile I'll run the details down for you, and in a later post compare it to the project for the new american century, but let's back up first and get the general definition you don't seem to recall so well.
'merger of corporation and government under which the citizen exists to serve the state'.
Mussolini also said that the state should not be static but expansionist, although his ventures into abyssinia weren't so productive, so you can add jingoism to that as well.
That leaves you with three principles:
1. merger of government and private corporation
2. aggressively expansionist foreign policy
3. subjugation of the individual to the corporate state.
This began with the election of Ronald Reagan and corporate deregulation through non enforcement of the Sherman Anti Trust law of 1890 and a modifier, the Clayton Act of 1914, which focused more on collusion and price fixing in restraint of trade.
Obviously, once restraint of trade reached the levels it had prior to passage a huge gravity well for wealth was created.
Empowering corporations in this manner enables them to run their own candidates for office, like the bushes or reagan or gramm or the endless list and to influence government in many other ways through lobbying.
And like any fiduciary operation lacking oversight, corruption also becomes a driving force.
Eventually you get what mussolini dreamed of - a merger of corporation and state so thoroughly entangled on so many levels that the corporate and governmental sector become virtually indistinguishable.
The individual exists to serve the state, so there is no need for habeas corpus, or the bill of rights. Also Eminent domain is ceded to private corporations.
Mussolini as you should know distinguished fascism from socialism by saying that refraining from tampering with individual wealth would obviate the endless class struggle that socialism engendered.
Under mussolini as you would have remembered if you'd actually read it, he was stuck with the church and had to endorse it.
Under reagan-bush fascism, the church was only needed to assist in 'voting' the players into office.
After that, there is the first degree of separation from Mussolini since the fundamentalists aren't all powerful like Rome was in M & G's Italy and are't necessary to the project for a new american century or Penis ( I call it that because its' a century not a kentury) doctrine once the players are in power.
So in review, you have reagan disabling oversight of government by non enforcement of antitrust law, attempting to disband the Small Business Administration and an attempt to bring fundamentalism into goverment.
Additionally, this practice of deregulation almost immediately began redistributing wealth to the wealthiest as has gone on to this day.
Under bush II and clinton nothing was done to re establish corporate regulation, so the problem worsened at the expense of the middle class, and during that time a headlong slide into third world status on health, longevity, education, leisure time and wealth, the things that made America what it isn't now.
Just follow the money and power: disable sherman and clayton, and indiscriminate merger, collusion and price fixing, now all legal creates a gigantically powerful industrial complex that owns congressmen and judges, has trillions in lobbying power and tailors government function to suit their best interests.
This is what you have now.
Also, with deregulation, inevitably greed will crash the system. It did it in '88 with poppy and its here and now with bankruptcies and foreclosures resulting from counting uncollectible subprime money as assets until the system fails again.
There are other emerging degrees of separation but this is the most important one.
Under my old pre reagan america, we believed that the economy existed to serve the best interests of our nation and its citizens. Virtually everything liberal flows from that.
Mussolini believed the citizens and the economy existed to serve the corporate state, but here in bush's america it's even worse:
Now America and her citizens exist to serve global corporations and the global economy.
The very integrity of our nation is threatened by the above. I can easily see our nation broken in some near future into some collection of hybrid zaibatsu-feudal state entities with names like Americo, a Dubai corporation, or New Maoland.
this is the essence of 21st century republicanism.
this is another degree of separation from the gentile-mussolini doctrine and maybe the worst, but maybe not. Consider this next degree of separation from the mussolini doctrine:
Now there is sufficient corporate control of government that they can provide themselves with welfare, as did Bear Stearns and is happening to Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, which rightly ought to be returned to a position in government as they were chartered to do.
This is out and out marxism, communism, call it either - distribution of wealth according to need' and a fascist goverment can obviously engage in this since it's doing it right now with Bear Stearns et al.
So you have a thirty year history of destruction of the most important accomplishments of constitutional government - a stable educated middle class, an employed healthy citizenry, a strong domestic manufacturing and research base, a FUNDED military, and the ability to secure these blessings for ourselves and posterity - all gone >poof<
That's hard to ensure these days with the ten trillion dollar debt fascism cost us to experiment with. Those are the blessings we leave posterity - trillions in debt and a world that thinks we're all dick cheneys.
Also under fascism, mussolini says, true freedom may be experienced, but never by liberals or the liberal philosophy, (which he rejects)
Freedom says benito can only come from surrendering all to the state.
And that surrender, my good publius is the water that Rush Limbaugh says he's carrying.
So I say we are indeed a fascist state and will only slip more deeply into it if you want four to eight more years of the same thing.
And of course, I'm just the messenger. I'm nowhere near alone in saying this.
As of today, 13% of us think this county is going in the right direction.
I'd say Americans don't like fascism all that much.
OK, now you can come back with your name calling and non specifics and dog ate my homework like your boy Lorenzo did.
I certainly hope you're better informed than he is, meaning I hope at least now you understand the difference between socialism, fascism and Penis' fascism plus communism plus sedition.
Clif Kuplen at 12:50AM on Jul 25th 2008
62. Toad - Thanks! Comment 42 best of the night.
Natural Puppy at 12:51AM on Jul 25th 2008
63. Clif….What has Obama accomplished? Name one significant thing.
xxx
I keep saying this. Did you know who he was in 2002? Do you know who he is now?
Where was he today? Talking to an adoring throng of 200,000 of America's best allies.
He didn't have a billionaire daddy or come from a line of admirals or have huge political machine fuhding him, yet here he is.
He has a better record in the senate than you think but it is not important at all at this time.
You are looking at a statesman. I grant you he's as savvy as politicians get, and he has some of the best help available now with his campaign, but Obama is indeed a statesman.
They're just a cut above - the Hawkings, the Mozarts, the Alexanders, the Newtons.
I have no idea what appeal this constitutional abortion of a government could have for you, but whatever it is will cause you to dissociate from his accomplishments. It is emotional and not rational, this much I can tell you.
Also if he didn't stand for and advocate what I also think needs to be done I wouldn't vote for him, but he does in great detail, and I see that as a position of ethics and integrity. I know why I'm voting for him, but I have no idea why you're voting against him. Do you think this is America? How long you been around?
Clif Kuplen at 1:07AM on Jul 25th 2008
64. For those who need concepts explained to them: for every phenomenon, there are an infinite number of explanations. Only that explanation which satisfies the hypothesis (biological evolution) using the least number of entities (God, Spaghetti Monster, natural selection) is valid. Does the theory (accepted as fact, but never accepted as absolute) of evolution require the Spaghetti Monster to initiate or guide its process? No.
Natural Puppy at 1:13AM on Jul 25th 2008
65. tmo - Must agree with you. I gave up the fascist thing a few years ago. Decided that resistance will prevail. Fools? Yes. Fascists? Not yet.
Natural Puppy at 1:52AM on Jul 25th 2008
66. According to The Book of Revelation:
The Anti-Christ will be a man, in his 40s, of MUSLIM descent, who will deceive the nations
with persuasive language, and have a MASSIVE Christ-like appeal....the prophecy
says that people will flock to him and he will promise false hope and world
peace, and when he is in power,
He will destroy everything.
And Now: For the award winning Act of Stupidity
A group of People of America want to elect, to the most Powerful position on the face of the Planet -- The Presidency of the United states of America
A Muslim Male in his 40s!
MIW
I thought you guys couldn't wait for the rapture since being the chosen ones you would be beamed up to outer space or ascend to heaven. I take it you and all other re born bible thumpers will be voting Democrat this year. The pro armaggedon crowd (yeah death for all! except for us because we believe in love!) just may put Barak over the top(I know it was from yesterday but I couldn't resist).
tmo at 1:40AM on Jul 25th 2008
67. Toad - Thanks! Comment 42 best of the night.
Natural Puppy at 12:51AM on Jul 25th 2008
=============
*blush*
Toad at 1:47AM on Jul 25th 2008
68. Clif - If you were just the messenger, your eyes would't be so bloody. Your grand passion is a wonder, but it serves you less well than your excellent intellect. It may prevent you from adequately considering the flip sides of your most compelling arguments. We ain't there yet, and we have allies to help prevent the consequenses you fear. This planet has shrunk too much. It won't allow us embrace that political position. We have much greater fears.
Natural Puppy at 2:10AM on Jul 25th 2008
69. According to The Book of Revelation:
The Anti-Christ will be a man, in his 40s, of MUSLIM descent, who will deceive the nations
And Now: For the award winning Act of Stupidity
...your post?
Clif Kuplen at 2:37AM on Jul 25th 2008
70. We ain't there yet, and we have allies to help prevent the consequenses you fear.
xxx
allies aren't going to help with the economy.
again. I believe that the economy exists to serve the best (and constitutional) interests of the US and her citizens. Everything else flows from that concept.
What's wrong with that?
Clif Kuplen at 2:41AM on Jul 25th 2008
71. It won't allow us embrace that political position. We have much greater fears.
Natural Puppy at 2:10AM on Jul 25th 2008
xxx
like what?
Clif Kuplen at 2:48AM on Jul 25th 2008
72. Who gives a rat’s ass what the French and the Germans think. The last thing Americans should care about is what the dopey French think.
xxx
If I'd read that, I wouln't have even bothered with posting a reply. I wouldn't bother reading it if I were you, since you posted that.
According to you the chinese communists should be appeased in any way they demand, but the French who have been our allies since LaFayette are 'dopey'?
I don't need to tell you who's dopey, but the dope's oxycontin.
You're a dittohead anyway in rereading and I wasted time trying to educate you. go ahead and give 'em your vote. You aren't going to learn anything more in life anyway.
Clif Kuplen at 2:54AM on Jul 25th 2008
73. You know, the D'Sousa family was prominent in South African politics during the nastiness that culminated in the Boer War. Unfortunately for them, they were on the losing side (this from my increasingly suspect memory). What has this to do with anything?
Natural Puppy at 3:03AM on Jul 25th 2008
74. "According to The Book of Revelation:
The Anti-Christ will be a man, in his 40s, of MUSLIM descent, who will deceive the nations
with persuasive language, and have a MASSIVE Christ-like appeal....the prophecy"
----------------------------------
Odd...I didn't think Muslims were around when Revelations was written?....Did god 'write' the Bible in the 7th century?
Maybe I'm wrong?
mac at 3:26AM on Jul 25th 2008
75. 71. It won't allow us embrace that political position. We have much greater fears.
Natural Puppy at 2:10AM on Jul 25th 2008
xxx
like what?
Clif Kuplen at 2:48AM on Jul 25th 2008
****************************************************
Six point six billion Earthlings on this small planet? Come on, Clif. Shall we talk about the hohum stuff, or should we discuss the seventy percent of our hostel that is saturated with co2? So the Earth has a fever! Big Deal? If you should consider that the oceans, the preeminant storage area for carbon, are saturated, and have become so acidic that organisms with an exoskeleton of calcium cannot survive into the future, well, I might consider that to be a fearsome prospect. You say we can do without crabs and oysters? We can't do without the plankton that is the basis of all oceanic life. Marine life is doomed. What does that portend for our future.
Natural Puppy at 3:26AM on Jul 25th 2008