UFO UpDates
A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
'Its All Here In Black & White'
Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2011 > Sep > Sep 6

Re: Richard Dawkins 'The Purpose Of Purpose'

From: Ray Dickenson <r.dickenson.nul>
Date: Tue, 6 Sep 2011 01:23:47 +0100
Archived: Tue, 06 Sep 2011 08:49:57 -0400
Subject: Re: Richard Dawkins 'The Purpose Of Purpose'

>From: William Treurniet <wtreurniet.nul>
>To: post.nul
>Date: Mon, 05 Sep 2011 09:05:42 -0400
>Subject: Re: Richard Dawkins 'The Purpose Of Purpose'


>Dawkins is very uncomfortable with the why question when it is
>aimed at the bigger picture that extends beyond the material
>world. By crossing that line, he is no longer talking about
>biology, his professed area of expertise, but about the larger
>non-material world of psychology and spirituality. These areas
>can be addressed scientifically, but he has certainly not done
>that. So when his criticisms go beyond biology, Dawkins is
>merely spouting an opinion that is no better than anyone elses.
>The difference is that he is often given a venue where people

Hello William,

Think I agree with you - imho Dawkins doesn't have the knowledge
- of physics, biology and mathematics - needed to understand the
probabilities involved. Instead he demands that we accept the
various 'standard models' of biology, astro-physics and
cosmology (all severely flawed and probably 'wrong'), to which
he then attaches his self-serving 'political' messages (as he
once did with the 'Selfish Gene' message that "greed is good" -
since disproved many times). In other words, he picks simplistic
'band-wagons' to ride on.

However, here's a real thinking scientist, Roger Penrose:

[Quotation Begins]

"To my way of thinking, there is still something mysterious
about evolution, with its apparent 'groping' towards some future
purpose. Things at least _seem_ to organize themselves somewhat
better than they 'ought' to, just on the basis of blind-chance
evolution and natural selection. It may well be that such
appearances are quite deceptive. There seems to be something
about the way that the laws of physics work which allows natural
selection to be a much more effective process than it would be
with just arbitrary laws. The resulting apparently 'intelligent
groping' is an interesting issue, and I shall be returning to it
briefly later."

[End Of Quotation]

pp 537-538 'The Emperor's New Mind' [he then proceeded to
consider the role of consciousness in the non-algorithmic nature
of mathematical insight - with the example of Godel's

Impressed by such queries - of Penrose and Smolin (+ Stephen Jay
Gould), and earlier by Hoyle et al - I began to collect their
gist in a page of quotes and linked questions, maybe
provocatively titled "Creation?", at:


which has been continually updated to 2011.

Here's part of the intro: (HTML links at page)

"Feb 2011 - That 'Universe bigger than they thought' item had a
follow-up. One can't help being struck by its un-thinking
parroting of 'received opinion': ie - blind assumptions. Here's
an extract - "when our universe was born, there was no space.
There was no time either. There was no vacuum. There was
literally nothing." - which blithely ignores the core problem of
such ideas: i.e that they demand a 'cause'. One sees this more
clearly when referring back to basic principles, in my case the
first principle of Leibniz: "that nothing happens without a
sufficient reason why it should be thus and not otherwise". From
that POV, depending on your inclinations, you're almost bound to
conclude that our Universe is either a 'supernatural creation',
or maybe some sort of experiment by advanced beings."


Ray D

Listen to 'Strange Days... Indeed' - The PodCast



These contents above are copyright of the author and
UFO UpDates - Toronto. They may not be reproduced
without the express permission of both parties and
are intended for educational use only.