Richard Dawkins: "why didn't the baby just wear the shoes? ffs"
It’s very thoughtful of Richard Dawkins to step again into the role of Twitter Main Character, just when the moderators had taken Naomi Wolf away from us
So to recap:
Naomi Wolf, with a lit degree, has been spouting bonkers things about science.
Richard Dawkins, with a science degree, has been spouting bonkers things about literature.
And this is why no one trusts those of us who do actual interdisciplinary work.
people talking like this is Kafka thing is Dawkins first foray into literary criticism as if this never happened
Richard Dawkins furiously throwing The Great Gatsby to the floor after it never reveals where the green light was coming from
Richard Dawkins, asking the questions of primary school children everywhere.
Seems glaringly obvious to me that “Metamorphosis” is about the twin experiences of dysphoria and alienation.
Dawkins seems unable to relate to interior mental states he, personally, has never experienced.
Richard Dawkins consistently serves as an excellent reminder of the need for people studying STEM subjects to have done at least one humanities class before they graduate https://t.co/FPd7Y5zbI2
One thing both Dawkins and many of the people defending the book here seem to agree on is that a book has to be "about" one primary thing in a very straightforward way, whether as allegory or otherwise, in order to be valuable. https://t.co/iPKjD2gcyT
Si Richard Dawkins ha logrado ser considerado uno de los grandes intelectuales de nuestro tiempo siendo más tonto que una pedrada en los cojones, vosotros podéis conseguir lo que os propongáis ❤️ https://t.co/AaLj5X6Dpb
Great piece on how New Atheist grifters enable & champion white supremacy
People like Sam Harris & Richard Dawkins are dangerously ignorant about Islam, immigration, & multiculturalism—& too cowardly to debate scholars b/c they know they'll get shut down
Dawkins: “Well, which was it, the best of times or the worst of times? Make up your mind, Chuck.”
Richard Dawkins repeating indignantly, “A big whale? A big whale? What’s the point?”
As much as I want to drag Dawkins for not understanding Kafka, his tweet is a microcosm of the way STEM people often devalue the study of literature. There’s this assumption that it’s supposed to be easy and so if a text is “hard” it must have some deficiency.
When I was in my teen years I was unimpressed by Kafka's Metamorphosis just like Dawkins. But then I realized it's a work that tests one's limit of understanding literature. It's not SF or allegory, it's a self-contained form of literary compression, microcosmic worldmaking.
In their published works, Carl Sagan. Richard Dawkins and Neil deGrasse Tyson all write bad history of science. When I point this out, their fans say it doesn't matter, because they are brilliant science communicators. Somebody, who is a successful author and wilfully writes 1/2
Maybe it’s time UM gets a new AD🤷♂️
T-Rob and DVD are not playing around. #22ToTheU
o dawkins não gostou de metamorfose porque diferente de nós leigos ele sabe que é biologicamente impossível um ser humano virar uma barata. ele é muito inteligente
Man this is hilariously bad. If you’re inspired by Richard Dawkins shouting OH YEAH WELL CAN GOD MAKE A ROCK SO BIG HE CAN’T LIFT IT, I don’t know what to tell you. The New Atheists got mainstream attention during the Bush years because they hated Muslims. https://t.co/t2Ai7olsGi
So look, this is the only time you're going to find me defending Richard Dawkins: If *you*, in 2004, had awoken from uneasy dreams to find yourself transformed in your bed into a gigantic insect, wouldn't you too be a little sensitive afterward about media about that subject?