Reading Jane Roberts, Robert A. Monroe and Stuart Wilde at a young age gave me a different perspective on life than someone who reads Richard Dawkins and Stephen Hawking.
I did read Hawking's "A Brief History of Time" but thought it was far inferior to Paul Davies' "God and the New Physics" and only so popular because disability sells. Which it shouldn't. Not when it comes to ideas.
As for Richard Dawkins, he seems to mean well but I don't see him as a font of wisdom, and a glance through "The God Delusion" certainly added nothing of interest to my knowledge.
Dawkins may know a thing or two about genetics but his perspective on religion is infantile and obvious. Everyone knows religions are not statements of physical fact, more morality tales, at their best at least.
And it should be clear to any developed mind that you must separate the wheat from the chaff when it comes to any organised religion or philosophy. To accept it all or reject it all, without discrimination, is equally ignorant in my view.
No comments:
Post a Comment