Im sorry but I just cant get this Richard Dawkins thing out of my head. Fairytales and by extension SOME religious stories ARE true, in a certain way. They may not be materially, literally true, with archeological evidence of spontaneous frog to human transformation. BUT that doesnt make them emotionally, psychologically or spiritually untrue. We have a word for that - it is METAPHOR. Dawkins argues that he thinks fairytales might be useful for creating skepticism in children who gradually realise their beloved stories arent actually true. But our way of understanding and knowing things gradually develops over time. I am insulted on behalf of our great rich literary traditions at his idea that the usefulness in fairytales lies in children one day realising they were just lies. To me that feels like breeding a generation of highly cynical, materialistic people - oh hang on ..... Yes religious fundamentalism isnt good - all vaguely intelligent people agree with that but please Mr Dawkins stop trying to reduce us all to walking brains. Rant over
Posted on: Fri, 06 Jun 2014 16:50:26 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015