cross-posted from: https://lemmy.today/post/52276726

Dawkins points out how the goalposts have been moved from the Turing test without justification and claims it can be viewed as a test of consciousness.

    • Tartas1995@discuss.tchncs.de
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      10
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      3 days ago

      In the context of atheism:

      When I look at his work, I am truly not impressed. Surely he knows a few things but it seems to add very little to the actual discussion.

      Like I know a lot about e.g. computers but when talking about geopolitics, my knowledge about computers is not entirely useless but most interested people are already aware of the key points of anything I could say in that regard. So I probably should not waste my and your time by talking about that.

      He did just do that. Again and again. On reddit, people would call it a circlejerk.

      • Addv4@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        7
        ·
        3 days ago

        Yeah, when I was questioning my religion (am currently Atheist), I read a bit of Dawkins, and mostly felt like a lot of his work was a bit condescending, and needlessly so. Hitchens was a much better resource, as well as just Douglas Adams (for a sense of humor in the face of the absurd). Now every time I read something about Dawkins, it’s usually negative (last thing I remember reading was about his stance on the middle east, think it was in support of the Israelis during the early days of the genocide).