THE FATHER OF MEMES: A GUIDE TO RICHARD DAWKINS

Get Surfshark VPN at surfshark.deals/sisyphus Enter promo code SISYPHUS for 83% off and 3 extra months for FREE!
PATREON: [
[www.patreon.com/user?u=3261155](kzbin.info?even...)
](
[www.patreon.com/user?u=3261155](kzbin.info?even...)
)
MUSIC: [
[kzbin.info/door/KPZ...](kzbin.info/door/KPZ...)
](
[kzbin.info/door/KPZ...](kzbin.info/door/KPZ...)
)
TWITTER: [
[ / 5isyphus55 ](kzbin.info?even...)
](
[ / 5isyphus55 ](kzbin.info?even...)
)
Sources:
[Richard Dawkins loses ‘humanist of the year’ title over trans comments | Books | The Guardian](www.theguardian.com/books/202...)
[Richard Dawkins event cancelled over his ‘abusive speech against Islam’ | Science and nature books | The Guardian](www.theguardian.com/books/201...)
[Spectrum of theistic probability - Wikiwand](www.wikiwand.com/en/Spectrum_...)
www.theguardian.com/science/2...
The Selfish Gene. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 1976. ISBN 978-0-19-286092-7.
The Extended Phenotype. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 1982. ISBN 978-0-19-288051-2.
The Blind Watchmaker. New York: W. W. Norton & Company. 1986. ISBN 978-0-393-31570-7.
The God Delusion. Bantam Press (United Kingdom), Houghton Mifflin (United States). 2006. ISBN 978-0-618-68000-9.

[@rhaven090]

Memes, the DNA of the soul.

[@pedroaf7223]

''They are the culture, they are everything we pass on...''

[@yrrej9696]

Archetypes

[@shamaniccolonic777]

Nah thats dmt

[@masstv9052]

Memes, the powerhouse of the soul.

[@666GodofDark]

Well if it isn't saucy Jack

[@featherycoffee1401]

Big chungus in a Sisyphus thumbnail. The internet lately has gone insane and im for it

[@metrobrayd2035]

Always has been

[@Chris-wl2tw]

How can a censored platform go insane? Only if its just a madness.

[@2bitmarketanarchist337]

Are you new to the internet?

[@ethancortez6434]

Dawkins was the og reddit atheist

[@irish_deconstruction]

He created the reddit atheists.

[@metallistener340]

literally almost all of the internet atheist movement wouldn’t have existed without this man

[@irish_deconstruction]

@Quantum Passport You're wrong on a couple things. 1. Whenever someone says that one has faith in science or technology, that's a red flag. The Scientific Method uses deductive reasoning, rendering it the polar opposite of faith, and technology, I have no idea what you mean when you say one has faith in it. 2. Religion is not why people make amazing discoveries, or why people form societies together, in fact, religion is known more for dividing people and causing wars, genocides, witch hunts, and so on. I suppose you could use Yuval Noah Harari's way of thinking and say that humans invent myths in order to bond together, but Harari uses the word 'myth' to refer to pretty much any social construct, meaning a society can indeed be formed with myths, but not necessarily religious myths. 3. Mythicism is a minority position amongst scholars, but I don't see that as a reason to discard it, as that would be an appeal to popularity fallacy. The evidence for Jesus existing as a person is pretty scarce, and the people who are cited as being evidence for Jesus don't say anything about Jesus himself, rather, they only parrot what Early Christians would have believed about Jesus. 4. You make Dawkins out to be some sort of imbecile. I do agree, he has said some stupid things, especially in recent times, but to act as if he hasn't done groundbreaking work in terms of biology and hasn't made decent arguments against religion is honestly mind-boggling. Also, Dennet actually knows Dawkins as a person, you don't, so how do you know Dennet doesn't have good reasons for being friends with him?

[@lillysgrandmaable]

@Irish deconstruction, you are incorrect about the case for Christ. Please look again and you will find evidence for Jesus.

[@Sadnessiuseless]

@@lillysgrandmaable Where is the evidence? You have to backup what you say in an argument, y'know.

[@NIL0S]

"It is the mark of an educated mind to be able to entertain a thought without accepting it." -Aristotle

[@nukiradio]

There's truth in that

[@swank8508]

"the mark of an educated mind is posting often attributed quotes in the comment section of youtube videos" -joseph stalin

[@just83542]

@@swank8508 it was not a random and meaningless quote, but rather a context relevant comment about the absurd notion that this revolutionary evolutionary biologist fails to grasp the world better than the delusional masses simply because he's older than them.

[@swank8508]

@@just83542 i didnt say it was meaningless, just that it was misattributed

[@winzyl9546]

"Wow that qoute really fit well with the video" -your mom

[@YTwoKay]

I think the word Dawkins was looking for is 'dank'.

[@magolda6770]

Dawkin memes

[@cygneturesounds]

Dankins

[@yrrej9696]

The REAL father of memes is Carl Jung

[@AB6ambino]

and Nietzsche

[@YEET-fe3fw]

@alvi memes matter

[@adudeontheinterweb6571]

father of memes, daddy of milfs

[@Montanero]

The collective unconscious and its archetypes, yessir

[@pIacebo]

The real father of memes is Sisyphus 55

[@connortremblay1259]

I don't understand the issue with the trans tweet. To me it seems pretty clear in what he says. Trans people may not have the chromosomes that they want, but he still refers to them how they want to be addressed out of courtesy and because it's how they identify. If somebody who does see the problem could explain it to me that would be great, thanks.

[@Catalyst2812]

I would take this as a lapse in the open minded tendencies of Sisyphus, no one is perfect, I’d say he didn’t quite analyse the comment and fell into his own biases on the topic.

[@leopard2a743]

@@Catalyst2812 thought so aswell

[@bugseater1]

I am transgender and I see it as a bit iffy but not full blown evil worth total 100% shaming of. You can't change your chromosomal sex, but you can change several other characteristics of it (hormones, secondary sexual characteristics, etc.) And with gender being a separate thing from sex, with both a non-deniable biological part to identity (Trans people's brains match closer to their desired sex and lie somewhere between their birth and desired sex), and a socially constructed view of gender (roles, looking deeper into identity, etc).

[@cariboux2]

I concur entirely. If you define by chromosomes, no. Logically and factually 100% correct. If you define by self-identification, yes. Once again, correct. There can be no argument against either one of these claims that isn't fallacious. What people are criticizing him for is what he didn't say, which is entirely unfair. I met him a decade ago and he is indeed a prickly character, and The God Delusion IMH(atheist)O is pretty much a rant, but logically and ethically, despite some disagreements, I have very little criticism of him, and feel that those who do are speaking from emotion and not reason.

[@Joey-rj8hz]

Although I agree that the quote shown is not objectively transphobic. I think a different quote better demonstrates his “upsetting” opinions: In a 2021 tweet, he stated "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.” I think that this quote would have been a better quote selection as it deals with his beliefs on identity, not chromosomes. I am quite mixed about this because I don’t agree with his views on trans people, I do understand that it’s philosophers job to question things.

[@johncieslak2111]

Sisyphus is the only KZbinr who I sit through the ad for just cuz he seems like a nice genuine guy

[@robertortiz-wilson1588]

Delusional.

[@hv7920]

While the video was great as always, I feel like there was a slight misrepresentation of the Sokal affair. This controversy was by no means the dunk on postmodernists that it's made out to be. Sokal himself has stated: "From the mere fact of publication of my parody I think that not much can be deduced. It doesn't prove that the whole field of cultural studies, or cultural studies of science -- much less sociology of science -- is nonsense. Nor does it prove that the intellectual standards in these fields are generally lax. (...) It proves only that the editors of one rather marginal journal were derelict in their intellectual duty, " Jonas Čeika has a great video on this, which I recommend to anyone interested in the issue.

[@propkid]

True, the Grievance Studies affair came to a much more damning conclusion with respect to a more specific sub-field of cultural studies.

[@serdirtbagoftheleft4045]

“Wut, you telling me it wasnt meant to shit on gender studies….. libtards duum”

[@treyandrews5716]

Out of all the living thinkers that you haven’t done a video for yet, I think Kendrick Lamar might make the most interesting one. I feel like his takes on self-actualization and morality in To Pimp a Butterfly are not talked about enough.

[@KendrickMegaFan]

Single greatest album ever made

[@dhruvmakwana8560]

He listened to you and made a video

[@griz6361]

He did it

[@my_negative_world3741]

I'd love to see old trusty Hitch.

[@BC-hu6yq]

5:40 Is it transphobic to agree with (at least partially) the sentiment of that tweet? What defines a woman kinda IS semantic. If we define woman as "person with XX chromosomes", then a trans woman isn't a woman. And if it'd by self-identification, of course a trans woman is a woman. As someone who I think most accurately described as non-binary, I dont see how this is offensive at all.

[@video_enjoyer]

I mean he isn't wrong per se, but in what context does anyone define a woman by chromosomes? we can't see chromosomes, unless you happen to be a genetic lab. "woman" is, in most contexts, defined by a whole lot of personal characteristics both mutable and unmutable like hair length, use of makeup, bone structure, choice of clothes, general vibe, etc etc, and someone who, say, identifies with a different gender, will (when given the opportunity) change what characteristics they can to match the gender they identify as. so it's a lot easier to just say okay fine, if someone identifies as a woman they're a woman, rather than trying to list out every single possible characteristic you can think of and trying to pin down the metaphysics of being a woman.

[@BC-hu6yq]

@@video_enjoyer that's how just about every conservative defines a woman, by their biological sex. They see sex and gender as synonymous.

[@video_enjoyer]

@@BC-hu6yq they might say that if you ask them, but if they look at a random person at the street they can probably tell that person's gender (or their gender expression anyhow) without needing to know that person's sex. Even people who claim to define gender that way aren't going around looking in everyone's pants before deciding which set of pronouns to use

[@brokenglassshimmerlikestar3407]

The last few decades has seen a lot of changes in gender studies in anglophone academia. But older generations and non anglophone cultures aren't catching up yet. I live in France. Recently some of my friends talked about how in French, the word genre (equivalent of gender) wasn't really used for gender identity in human beings traditionally. They use the word sexe, which is biological sex and not gender. So the whole idea of gender identity is still foreign to a lot of people who weren't concerned and it's just a whole new field of social discussion. And older cisgender people can be easily confused by or be dismissive of the gender identity debate. Last time I looked at the chart of the different groups forming my local pride parade I was confused by a lot of the acronyms and labels too... So maybe Dawkins shouldn't have weighed in on something he didn't understand very well, but I certainly see where he's coming from. Why some on the left gotta be so harsh and boycott anything that doesn't agree with them... it's tiring

[@prettyunusual]

If he used the terms male and female in order to talk about biology rather than men and women, it'd have made more sense since one defines a biological given and the other a social construct

[@ipadair7345]

0:50 Kazakstan

[@dbmassiv]

world's number one exporter of potassium, if I'm not mistaken

[@ipadair7345]

@@dbmassiv awesome

[@co2_os]

Greatest country in the world.

[@flipper6582]

this guy scratches such a specific and amazing itch no one else has or can and i love it

[@Hafaechaes]

All I'm getting when looking for answers is that "the problem lies in the subtext". The problem with that statement is that it has a subtext itself, namely "I'm the deciding authority on what Dawkins REALLY meant". See how annoying that is? EDIT: In the time since I wrote this comment 4 months ago, Richard Dawkins has openly endorsed trans-exclusive feminism by tweeting "Please sign the Declaration on Women’s Sex-based Rights. I have just done so." - that document he wants you to sign? It's fucking wild yo, read it if you have the time. So with all this context and hindsight it's safe to say that his past tweets were dog-whistles. Kudos to everyone who saw what Dawkins was doing all along, I will openly admit that I did not.

[@oxy-moron_]

Looks to me like a pretty good document, all we need now is a Declaration on Trans-Rights to go with it and add an "along with" between sex and gender identity throughout the bill it would be a pretty good sexual rights achievement. But I do see how it can be off putting to have them disregard gender identity, but like many people say Sex and Gender are different, why shouldn't we have laws for both?

[@fee8422]

Respect for correcting your comment later, it's sometimes harder to recognise rethoric when it isn't harmful directly to yourself or those like you.

[@yrrej9696]

This video presumes that proceeding generations develop “nuanced” views of the world and that Dawkins interpretation of said nuance is shallow. Maybe his interpretation is nuanced and the generations worldview is shallow. Why must I believe a-priori that a generation and it’s changing worldview is of value worthy of a nuanced interpretation

[@prod.hxrford3896]

I 100% agree, most of the tweets shown are not blatantly wrong or offensive enough to justify the presumption that there’s something wrong about his views on modern thought. Quite disappointed about that...

[@hotrightnow8932]

You really saw those tweets and figured they're a-ok?...

[@hotrightnow8932]

@@prod.hxrford3896 Oh please. His views on trans people is ridiculously unscientific.

[@Z0mb13ta11ahase]

@@hotrightnow8932 What was unscientific about them? Idk much about gender identity or the trans community.

[@immanuelt613]

@@hotrightnow8932 Explain what was unscientific about the chromosome and gender identity tweet

[@chainsawninjalcemist]

"Free will is a myth! Religion is a joke We are all pawns controlled by something greater: Memes, the DNA of the soul" -Richard Dawkins

[@seansmith3058]

This doesn't seem like a good choice for a profile since Dawkins isn't really a philosopher and his more systematic thinking is scientific. He has opinions but so do most people.

[@PabloSensei]

Doesn't he hate philosophy and theology?

[@cesareangeli6653]

@@PabloSensei he thought that studying theology is completely useless. But here you see a good thing about Dawkins: in a conversation with KosmicSkeptic (don't remember where the k are in that name), the latter explained why he thought Dawkins was wrong and Dawkins conceded and changed his mind

[@volodyadykun6490]

What is your definition of philosopher then

[@volodyadykun6490]

Philosophers haven't systematic thinking? I thought this channel is all about that

[@Hexa1rtn1]

There's nothing wrong with saying you should be able to say anything at university. That's what they're there for.

[@insidethebox2470]

The problem is people dont rlly mean that, taking a look at most universities there is hostility towards socialist groups or stright up a ban on such groups. That statement is often used to exuse harmful ideologys being protected such as natzis

[@jcavs9847]

True, university SHOULD be the place we discuss uncomfortable and controversial things, with help of professors, specialists, etc. rather than on social media

[@Eerielai]

@@insidethebox2470 I don't know where in the world you're talking about, but in the US universities have a leftwing slant. 25% of social sciences professors self-identify as Marxist. So lots of people have the opposite experience of universities to what you write - center-rightwing ideas are treated with hostility and injustly labeled nazi while radical left are accepted. You also could argue many ideologies are harmful, it's very easy to argue socialism, communism and Islam are harmful ideologies, so if you think "harmful" ideologies should be banned those could be banned also.

[@insidethebox2470]

@@Eerielai center right is empathetic to natzis and socialism is isnt even remotely dangerous. Should we nuke Denmark for being a democratic socialism or take away your holidays and worker protections because that's socialist in reality.

[@Invizive]

@@insidethebox2470 people should allow all ideologies freedom to compete for hearts and minds of new generations in universities. All minds are flawed and biased, it only becomes worse with age, so any ban or regulation of exchange of ideas among students is fundamentally against progress of culture and civilization. I hope we can agree on this.

[@catherinebennett3948]

I never buy merchandise for youtubers, but I like your channel so much that I couldn't help but buy yours

[@stephano4468]

I just purchased Susan Blackmores "The Meme Machine" today on a whim and seeing as you've mentioned them in this video a dedicated look into the topic could be highly informative for what I feel is a painfully under highlighted subject and idea

[@Haganenno121]

"a movement that has lost its edge" This had to be an intentional pun

[@burritoeltaco]

goddamnit, I laughed way too hard at chung us

[@aishwariyasweety2433]

I don't think it always stands that the older you get, the more outdated your views become or you get conservative about certain issues. Noam Chomsky comes to mind as a counterexample.

[@owenbillo5513]

People can certainly adapt their views over time. However, I think it's less that the person changes and more that the person doesn't change while society does. A person can have the same set of values their whole life, but those values might be considered liberal in the 50s and conservative now. And they certainly have no opportunity to change their mind once they die

[@aishwariyasweety2433]

@@owenbillo5513 I agree but I am contending that there are people like Bernie Sanders or Noam Chomsky who've been consistently liberal throughout their life. Rather refreshing to be honest

[@aishwariyasweety2433]

@@scottlancaster2865 what Anderson? What's your point

[@Yellow.1844]

@@aishwariyasweety2433 pretty sure Chomsky is an anarcho-syndicalist and Bernie a socialist(I think its his position, he just deals with the dems cuz he has no choices)

[@just83542]

Inn this case, it was just as "outdated" for him to challenge the ancient delusional views of the masses as the contemporary views of the masses. His correctness is not dependent on his relative age. Just like Sanders or Chomsky, he doesn't need to change to be correct when the accepted mainstream is wrong.

[@shadowling77777]

“Memework makes the dreamwork” -Ancient Kekistani Shitposting Sages

[@riper7514]

that last sentence really did strung a chord in me, thanks

[@PappyBiceps]

Wait, by intentionally having the advertisement portion's audio low does that crackpottedly boost algorithm interaction with people more likely to interact to turn it down? Just curious if anybody would be able to add insight on that. Much love man, your content is desperately needed by the generations looking for a way up on better critical thinking and reflection.

[@Burns11112]

I don’t think volume adjustment counts as engagement.

[@precisodeumvulgo]

who does that though

[@squidwarden226]

Huge fan of Richard Dawkins! I love his idea of "altruism" in evolution.

[@shdhfbf412]

@@Dimitris_Balf based and breadpilled

[@angelohieronymous2692]

Go back before it's too late

[@richie7935]

if you are still doing your podcast i think it would be super cool to have an episode with Syrmor!! his content is very different from yours but he's talked to a ton of people and shared incredible stories, i think discussions of self made happiness and life would be cool to listen to

[@kosmo5330]

he just caught up with our fave boy dawa

[@bugseater1]

I am transgender and I see his comment about it as a bit iffy but not full blown evil worth total 100% shaming of. You can't change your chromosomal sex, but you can change several other characteristics of it (hormones, a lot of secondary sexual characteristics, etc.), sex in its totality is not a binary, and a fully transitioned person would fall non-binary in some spots, male in some spots, and female on others. And also gender is a separate thing from sex (he kind of mentions this), with both a non-deniable biological part to identity (Trans people's brains match closer to their desired sex and lie somewhere between their birth and desired sex), and a socially constructed view of gender (roles, looking deeper into identity, etc. This stuff is literally so weird when you begin to look at it and runs super deep, and as Lily Alexandre put it, "I see this sh-t in six dimensions, you cannot begin to comprehend just how fake it is!"). It's good that as a formality he refers to someone as their gender, rather than biological sex, as anyone should out of respect.

[@vallisdaemonumofficial]

8:13 let's talk about that iFunny watermark 🍀

[@garlicninja1257]

Do the rest of the new atheists, especially Dan Dennett!

[@hanseinarfuglum8858]

He already did Sam Harris, but id love to see Dennett and Hitchens too.

[@diegoisaias5795]

Hitchens is finally coming 🥃

[@loganlabbe9767]

If hitch was alive today he would be SOOOOOOOO canceled. Absolutly no doubt. I would love to have his perspective in these times tho, never ever dull.

[@diegoisaias5795]

@@loganlabbe9767 I doubt his nonchalance would let that last; if Hitchs' reinforced anything for me is that cancel culture -as any other sort of fanaticism-, when met with the proper questions, finds no room for self-importance, thus extinguishing the relevance of an "offence"

[@loganlabbe9767]

@@diegoisaias5795 i think thats why the atheism movement kindof petered out and sidestepped into gender related topics which at first glance makes no sense. Second glance though, its still rebelling against brand new tabboos.

[@oxy-moron_]

Hitch wouldn't let them cancel him; they'd all fall over swooning

[@mohamedrawadali7938]

His tweet raised a genuine interrogation in me since I'm not much of an expert in gender dysphoria but what does it exactly mean to feel like a woman while you're biologically male ? Because the tweet about comparing identifying as black and identifying as a woman may sound silly but the first objection that came to my mind was "you can't identify as black cause it is just a skin color, it doesn't associate with any personality, behaviour, or anything fundamentally different from being white. Saying you identify as black implies some kind of stereotype that is ultimately unfounded in reality". But then is this reasoning not applyable to gender too ? One of the things I came to understand is that gender roles are just a social construct and there's no really any specific personality traits associated with your biological sex. So much so that it's said that it's nonsensical to write a "female character" because a female character is just a character but with a vagina that doesn't change anything in how she should behave. So when you identify as a man or a girl, does it mean that you just subjectively feel, baselessly, so or is there some personality you have that make you think that way? Either way I find the two really challenging because it either goes against the inexistence of gender specificities or it legitimates that you could genuinely identify as anything. Please if there are people that could help in figuring this out I would be very thankful.

[@phonix6352]

Well, its actually not linked to any real character traits in gender dysphoria. Its just that they *feel* different. Actually, very strongly. Gender Dysphoria means that you feel very uncomfortable with living in the body you were born with, more precisely, with living with those genitalia of your body. Yes, gender roles are a societal construct, but...trans people don't really think about those gender roles, nor about the cliché male or female attributes. Its more about the body itself. E.g. Trans People might feel highly uncomfortable with their existing genitalia. There was actually a case where a doctor changed a very young boy's genitalia and such, gave him hormones etc so that the boy would look like a girl, and the parents were also told to treat the boy like a girl, without losing a single word about the boy being, well, originally a boy But the boy felt very weird, he didn' feel right in that female body. Otherwise, there's also information on gender dysphoria from the NHS, as far as I know, which also proved helpful for understanding

[@mohamedrawadali7938]

@@phonix6352 okay thank you I'll have to read about some studies about the phenomenon but it's really interesting and confusing. Do you have the name for that case about the little boy ?

[@phonix6352]

@@mohamedrawadali7938 unfortunately, I don't 😬 Its been some time since I read about it, but as far as I know, it was a big scandal But I think normal studies from the medical community should suffice

[@phonix6352]

@@mohamedrawadali7938 its however understandable that its confusing. Its not smth we encounter on a daily basis, and we all are only exposed to it after our formative years, so we obviously need some time to comprehend it, nothing wrong with that

[@mohamedrawadali7938]

@@phonix6352 well I can see why it would not be very...ethically...acceptable

[@bluemethbunny]

Great video, Sisyphus! Keep it up! You're really ahead of the curb.

[@W.13th]

Context is clear & intended meaning was clarified. That said, If some complain yet can't find an adequate word to use in place of a word then should some complain @ all?

[@coatlessali]

Now there's a pretty meme, exquisite!

[@jwilson544]

I never really liked his stance on belief, even after I left the church. Sure, the chaotic and oppressive forms of Christianity are extremely toxic and he was right to point it out, but he seems to have thrown the baby out with the bathwater in most cases. He says that beliefs that aren't rooted in some form of science are idiotic, but our modern science was formed by all sorts of people with different beliefs. And science is far from a complete picture and changes all the time. He also says it's wrong to follow ideology, but it's clear to anyone who isn't a die hard for his work that he follows a few ideologies himself that he seems unaware of.

[@Reedamaster]

His arguments against on religion are surrounded by the questions of whether humans are made worse by religion or better, or are we just the same, but that's difficult to answer. Neitzsche also despised Christianity and religion but he still admitted that it was responsible for disciplining the west during the middle ages.

[@jwilson544]

@@Reedamaster well in that stance, I'm still against him. That's not a question in black and white. Religion has been fuel for wars in the past, but its also give rise to peace in ways that don't usually happen. And Religions are completely different around the world. Some are used for inflicting control, others show paths to enlightenment. To label it all under Religion, ideology, etc is folly. No two definitions of God are the same

[@Ragnarok540]

I think not using Twitter is a very good idea.

[@itech439]

Thank you moonson

[@petrkupec8347]

Hey sir, have you considered making one about Hitchens? Cheers

[@Dipper-gx9lv]

All I took from this is gods a meme

[@BlueThing64]

Unironically “based” might be the best English word to replace “selfish” in regards to genes

[@meldealba-ruiz9900]

fuck your right

[@chh066]

No

[@doc_vader2776]

The man used Logic in 2020. What did he expect?

[@tanishqvedak1862]

Bruh the man doesn’t understand how novels work.

[@shadowling77777]

True

[@suckassmork2972]

Big Chungus lives on as the dominant meme

[@Fnidner]

Ugh, this hits close to home. I used to be such a stan for Dawkins and the new atheists since back in the aughts. Then they all started to be anti-muslim and anti-feminist and I gradually came out of the rabbit hole. An interesting journey, that I'm sure I share with many.

[@zachariahpoltergeist4516]

Why would an atheist being anti-Muslim surprise you? It's a religion.

[@Fnidner]

@@zachariahpoltergeist4516 Being against organized religion is not a reason to be a bigot :)

[@zachariahpoltergeist4516]

@@Fnidner but the only thing that makes a person Muslim is just that- adherence to an organized religion. It's not a race, it's a choice.

[@Fnidner]

@@zachariahpoltergeist4516 Really? There’s no personal religion or spirituality? Either way, no reason to discriminate or hate the individual

[@zachariahpoltergeist4516]

@@Fnidner there... is. And that's Dawkins' whole point- it's rediculous. Your own personal spiritual belief is just as baseless and arbitrary as any established religion.

[@slazerlombardi]

Oh boy! can you do Hitchens next?

[@joshualwychgel4593]

Seems to be a euro-centric view of religion. With blankets statements absolut religion only really consistently applying to Christianity. Great work bro!

[@tribudeuno]

“What is the source of all this trouble? I'm saying that the source is basically in thought. Many people would think that such a statement is crazy, because thought is the one thing we have with which to solve our problems. That's part of our tradition. Yet it looks as if the thing we use to solve our problems with is the source of our problems. It's like going to the doctor and having him make you ill. In fact, in 20% of medical cases we do apparently have that going on. But in the case of thought, it's far over 20%. ...the general tacit assumption in thought is that it's just telling you the way things are and that it's not doing anything - that 'you' are inside there, deciding what to do with the information. But you don't decide what to do with the information. Thought runs you. Thought, however, gives false information that you are running it, that you are the one who controls thought. Whereas actually thought is the one which controls each one of us. Thought is creating divisions out of itself and then saying that they are there naturally. This is another major feature of thought: Thought doesn't know it is doing something and then it struggles against what it is doing. It doesn't want to know that it is doing it. And thought struggles against the results, trying to avoid those unpleasant results while keeping on with that way of thinking. That is what I call "sustained incoherence”… David Bohm, quantum physicist, unknowingly wrote the final necessary calculations that made the Atomic Bomb possible in his doctoral dissertation that was seized by the US Government

[@Action_Ichi]

that tweet doesn't seem that wild honestly

[@chinobambino5252]

Yes but it angered the hivemind. Critical thinking is not allowed if it implies any criticism of the corporate HR department brand of virtue signaling.

[@onshii9141]

Yah it’s not even that bad 😂

[@karltanner3953]

The muslim one seemed super unnecessary

[@anguishingquark]

@@chinobambino5252 Going with his gut instinct without thinking it through or understanding the theory and referencing chromosomes in a conversation about gender is what passes for critical thinking these days?

[@Action_Ichi]

@@karltanner3953 I was talking about the initial tweet shown but yeah that one was a little distasteful

[@chrisrenfro2058]

Nothing wrong with that tweet tho.

[@jcavs9847]

No, he falls for the very common misconception of equating sex with gender

[@chrisrenfro2058]

@@jcavs9847 he literally stated the difference between gender identity and sex IN THE TWEET lmfao 😂

[@jcavs9847]

@@chrisrenfro2058 where

[@chrisrenfro2058]

@@jcavs9847 "if you define by chromosomes, no. If by self-identification, yes"

[@jcavs9847]

@@chrisrenfro2058 I take the L. I was rgbking about the other tweet

[@XxPiercedDragonxX]

I don't see why people have to overreact to some tweets just because they don't agree with them. Seriously. They're just tweets. People need to find something better to do with their time

[@Cujo2447]

People have been conditioned to think sharing & disliking statements by public figures in the name of "anti-whateverism" is somehow intellectually important & a statement of "protest" against a position. Discussion of topics, especially on twitter, is a non-starter & giving credence to people shitting on a tweet is a disservice to open forum discussion to begin with.

[@johntheodore8047]

A VPN that uses the same encryption by the government usually means that the government is using the same thing but has to pay for the subscription at a higher price lol

[@sanuku535]

2:00-2:02 Holy S, His head Turned.

[@sibanbgd100]

Animation getting real yo

[@lukeknight2892]

im so early I love u Sisyphus 55

[@miteshyadav4883]

8:39 I am disappointed that I didn't get rickrolled

[@Nathanatos22]

5:40 Dawkins was actually stripped of his Humanist of the Year award in April 2021 for a different tweet that month (not 2015), an honor he said wasn’t important enough to put on his CV.

[@samjebaraj24]

When stripped of it just say , it was not good for me anyways 😂, this is exactly what I do most of the time

[@PUNEETAM20]

@@samjebaraj24 If you care too much about awards and honors are you really working for the work's sake or are you working for the recognition and awards?

[@markmerzweiler832]

Dawkins's "Selfish Gene" = Schoepenhaur's "The Will." Arthur just wrote it over 150 years earlier.

[@kylemoore7746]

Schoepenhaur explained how natural selection works at the level of individual genes instead of individuals within a population even though he died within a year of On the Origin of Species being published?

[@onlinereal]

so smoothie if you think its accordingly this way

[@kingofthend]

4:32 yeah there is some truth in that

[@klevisnrecaj8786]

This will blow up

[@alextrusk1713]

Do a video on Ken Wilber and integral theory

[@hosh7150]

I am wondering what is the difference between "memes", according to the definition of Dawkins, and "archetypes" from Carl Gustav Jung ?

[@skshore338]

Alan Sokal shoutout! 💯

[@Samson-yl1jx]

Dang guess I was wrong. Though Terrance McKenna coined the term Meme

[@vanillaali8772]

The "Arete" ("excellent") Gene

[@rat_king-]

Does line of meme magic. YEA das the gud *SSSHHIIIIIIIIIIIIIEEEEETTT*

[@ProGremlinPlayer]

Richard Dawkins indirectly invented Big Chungus

[@diamondeyesfox]

do ram dass next!

[@alexluna3207]

I digress his viewpoints on the topics are not "shallow" nor "archaic" but well thought out and backed by actual EVIDENCE, which is of utmost importance when proving something is right or wrong regardless of whether its emotionally uncomfortable for some or that the idea is put out recently and believed by a more contemporary audience does nothing to back it up as a true statement what matters and what he does do is look to the EVIDENCE and cites it in backing his claims constantly , other than that entertaining video.

[@BayAreaMike99]

In the whole 11:31 I clearly don’t know what you were talking about😂

[@_chi11_76]

Can you give a better take on how his beliefs now are bad? Because of the tweets? And what do you have to say about them?

[@vickysmashesyouwithahammer]

being a woman doesn't just mean having two x chromosomes, like dawkins implies. gender is much more complex than that, and dawkins doesn't seem to understand that.

[@_chi11_76]

HE CLEARLY SAYS "ON A CHROMOSOME LEVEL".

[@_chi11_76]

He's not talking about the whole picture. But you can't simply deny the part he speaks about

[@envadeh]

@@_chi11_76 Do you not understand euphemisms and dog whistles? And tainting a political discussion by outrage bullshit

[@PedroHCF37]

@@vickysmashesyouwithahammer Exactly. Gender is a if not the most important part of what one's identity is, specially when it's one of the first to be truly exposed to a social level; the "first mask" of your person other people perceive. Given its importance, the idea of indiscriminate approval of everything even barely related to gender identity is causing unnecessary clash between those who advocate for said approval and the biased "senile"... at first. For quite some time in the present, the clash's now with the HBTQA+ community itself with more and more different views popping up, just like what happened to early Christianity and Jesus' message being shared around people who had each of their interpretations acknowledged as an entire separate one. But differently from religion, is the fact we are working with people's perception of self and how delicate and personal that has to be built into. And to that, everyone screams "just be you!", caring little about all the other specifics that can drive one's gender dysphoria even further downward. And I won't even mention the gender groomer problem. tl;dr "mur transphobic arse gtfo"

[@Dan-ud8hz]

"For a finite-size flow system to persist in time (to live) it must evolve such that it provides greater and greater access to the currents that flow through it." (The constructal law of design and evolution in nature) doi: 10.1098/rstb.2009.0302

[@imantssafronovs9245]

What is the problem with 5:40, can someone explain?

[@edwardleas592]

Stick figure adult Dawkins was less than 0ne third from a hate crime on the dl

[@hexa1905]

He is still the humanist of the year. He is and will always be until his death one the biggest lgbt defender.

[@kylemoore7746]

The Humanist Award lost value when it was stripped from him. If it can be taken away so casually for something unrelated to what qualified him for it in the first place, then what's the point of awarding it prior to an individuals death?

[@Victor_Andrei]

"Biologist under fire for views on gender identity" ain't that a headline?

[@pezzy5014]

I love that your videos are almost objective and that u provide information instead of only shove an opinion in ppls mouths! Thanks for that :)

[@prod.hxrford3896]

It’s true he is pretty good at that, although I would beg to differ regarding Dawkin’s tweets. There was no explanation of why they might genuinely be wrong, least of all speak to his greater ability to understand progressive thought. I actually this was super presumptuous on the part of Sysiphus

[@just83542]

@@prod.hxrford3896 Very important point that deserves more attention. The modern delusions are no less dangerous than the ancient ones... somehow, the truth of an offensive statement is no defense for publicly saying it, even tho that's what he's notable for to begin with.

[@sibanbgd100]

@@just83542 From a point of view of your personal morality. Dawkins disagrees, the conversation can go further between people that disagree.

[@Splozy]

@@prod.hxrford3896 lol

[@aryannaik963]

Need a dostoevsky video

[@timothywalsh866]

I think your conclusion is too kind

[@WorthlessWinner]

Dawkins was mostly a communicator of other people's ideas in biology (e.g. Trivers, Hamilton, Maynard-Smith). It's valuable to turn these math heavy ideas into things less math inclined biologists can understand though. The extended phenotype was a more original idea though

[@deeznuts6907]

Dude got cancelled for using logic in a time where feelings are more important lol

[@ajmaloleary3553]

Exactly Burn his books, put him on the blacklist and send him off to the gulag/concentration camp...... Ah, what enlightened times we live in!

[@nukiradio]

@@ajmaloleary3553 you can still read his work...

[@whobobwhatpants7789]

His tweet wasn’t even bad too😂😂

[@pallaciccione7885]

But he wasn't right

[@ajmaloleary3553]

@@pallaciccione7885 why tell us? Why not explain to him? After all, that WAS the point of his tweet, to create a discussion. But instead it just produced the familiar hyper-reaction, name calling, cancelling and revoking of redundant awards. Too often the SJWs are going for easy targets, attacking their allies who don't fully subscribe to the exact letter of the current doctrine. He asked for a discussion, but no one was prepared to discuss, so why bother now? This puritanical hysteria will pass.....

[@trumanblack1]

Have you done a video about Christopher hitchens?

[@nikibronson133]

Now this guy still says race is real (when genetics has shown it isnt) and isn't against many progressive movements of today

[@ruudderks4284]

if you accept memes, in the way Dawkins meant it, then race is real but not in a biological sense. it's real 'cause we deal with it.

[@nikibronson133]

@@ruudderks4284 he literally tweeted out that he believes race is a biological reality when Modern Biology and DNA says no

[@ruudderks4284]

@@nikibronson133 I don 't follow anything on Twitter and haven't read his writings on race zo I can't give any intelligent reply to this claim. Only that I don't know Dawkins as someone who would mean anything unscientific with it. He is usually misunderstood because he says everything in a strictly scientific sense, without thinking of social presures or sensitivities (like the tweet that was mentioned in this clip). An admirable though not always practical way of expressing ones views.

[@nikibronson133]

@@ruudderks4284 Richard Dawkins does not say everything strictly in a scientific sense. I feel like you have a very naive and idolize Viewpoint of this man. He said some really dumb stuff that's why he's kind of fallen from Grace. There are articles from Psychology today, even though I'm not very fond of that publication because it's more like a Blog, and different sources that make a similar statement to which you thought Richard Dawkins said. Race is real but not in the way that you may think. Meaning that race is real in a social matter meaning that we still deal with the social ramifications and categorization but it's not real in a biological matter as it's a social construct. This is a fact. Richard Dawkins does not believe that race is a social construct. He believes race is biological even though all DNA evidence and historic evidence shows that this is not true. twitter.com/RichardDawkins/status/678519868166152192?s=19 www.discovermagazine.com/the-sciences/richard-dawkins-accepts-the-usefulness-of-race

[@ruudderks4284]

@@nikibronson133 as have I and since your comment that I reacted to gave the impression that you think that race isn't real (and not just unbiological) as have you. I don't idolize Dawkins I just don't judge him as harshly as you apparently do, which to my knowledge is my prerogative.

[@andrewgodly5739]

The funny thing about Dawkins is that in his pursuit to destroy religion and its dogmatism he only recreated it as an anti-religous dogmatism. You become what you hate

[@ultraclunt9667]

I can't say exactly why but this reminds something I've read by H.L. Mencken. I think it's "The American Credo".

[@FareedPasha93]

what a dumb comment! I have read all of his books.. no where did he promote any "Dogma" ... its all about throwing all the ideas & memes at the wall and see what sticks...

[@moczs]

​@@FareedPasha93It doesn't necessarily mean that he encourage it but that some people used his beliefs and teachings to propagate "dogma". Bad interpretation exists in every type of beliefs.

[@AM-sw9di]

Ah, fear of the unknown in all its glory

[@Firmus777]

Dawkins should have stuck to natural science. He seems talented at understanding material causes of things and for educating people about scientific concepts, but not much else.

[@skylagonzalez2473]

semantics meaning words. a male is only a woman through words and sexist stereotypes. that completely true and his tweet is based

[@Joepage69]

It’s the desire to be on the right side of history that will end with you in wrong

[@bluemethbunny]

hahaha tell me you're stupid without telling me you're stupid

[@theodorekaczynski8147]

Man implies nothing matters, surprised when people say nothing matters, do whatever they feel like and turn on him

[@sibanbgd100]

Atheism doesn't argue for nihilism

[@ActuallyHoudini]

@@sibanbgd100 If you argue against belief of fake complicated constructs such as God and then defend fake complicated constructs such as bioessentialism then you're just as lost as those you criticize.

[@freeman7079]

11:07 Only one of those seems problematic…..I’m not sure what’s wrong with the other ones.

[@polarbianarchy3333]

The god facade is a shared meme that has a continuum of expression across dominance hierarchal cultures or those conquered by cultures of economic dominant drives/memes., the western European patriarchal colonialism.

[@schadowizationproductions6205]

lol the guy was born in the same year and place as Robert Baden-Powell, founder of the Scout Movement, died.

[@MegaOptimizer]

Memes the smallest basic building block of a religion 😏 each meme or a set of it I think is a possible and different religion

[@skshore338]

Big Chungus religion

[@rentristandelacruz]

He might be the father of memes but he is no meme lord.

[@Montanero]

Jung is the father of memes, through his theory of the collective unconscious and its archetypes which can be observed as recurring over all cultures.

[@jay-ki6ie]

11:13 all these tweets are based

[@dinonuggets7148]

Ah, the DNA of the soul

[@70thalternativeaccount63]

*"Wipe this meme from the face of the earth"*

[@blokmotion]

Am I the only one who doesn't think his tweets are that crazy? I don't think he said anything wrong.

[@Uppernorwood976]

Absolutely not, the overwhelming (silent) majority of people would see them as perfectly reasonable.

[@user-bk9fk2tq2z]

Richard Dawkins is right when it comes to the trans issue. He knows the science.