Yeah I just worry he might do what I did and find Gaia. Us earth worshippers are annoying enough without Dawkins among us. Though I’ll acknowledge I already had a foot in the door to pantheism at the time
Eh, I think he’s too stubborn and too good at defining his terms to go that route. I love the idea of Spinoza’s pantheistic view of the universe, but I would never tell the average person that because I don’t want to end up in the same box as Einstein, where just because I use the word “God,” people assume I’m religious.
Personally, I think Dawkins would wind up going the same route as Sagan, defining mystical experiences related to the universe as “numinous” rather than “religious” for precisely that reason: because it’s really obnoxious when people take your words out of context, so stick to using very specific words that don’t carry the baggage of religion.
Yeah I just worry he might do what I did and find Gaia. Us earth worshippers are annoying enough without Dawkins among us. Though I’ll acknowledge I already had a foot in the door to pantheism at the time
I think Dawkins would simply acknowledge it as a hallucination brought on by cultural concepts.
Eh, I think he’s too stubborn and too good at defining his terms to go that route. I love the idea of Spinoza’s pantheistic view of the universe, but I would never tell the average person that because I don’t want to end up in the same box as Einstein, where just because I use the word “God,” people assume I’m religious.
Personally, I think Dawkins would wind up going the same route as Sagan, defining mystical experiences related to the universe as “numinous” rather than “religious” for precisely that reason: because it’s really obnoxious when people take your words out of context, so stick to using very specific words that don’t carry the baggage of religion.