Join my new community for the censored bits!: andrewgold.locals.com Watch my next episode with atheist comedian David Baddiel: ua-cam.com/video/pKqdLQj_eqg/v-deo.html. Are you a fan of Richard Dawkins? Are you religious? Atheist? All are welcome here.
Ouch.. I got pissed at piers over his interview w Trump, he had a teaser of the interview and it made it appear that Trump walked out on him.. I thought that was shitty just for clicks..
Nice job Andrew! I am a fan of Richards but he isn’t the easiest to interview because he is so careful to stick to what he knows (which is a good thing). For an interviewer, it can lead to dead ends which you handled with ease. It is a unique skill and it’s required to be a truly good interviewer. You have it.
Really? You mean the Bible built in a pre-emptive manipulation that even if someone seems good if they don't have faith in God they're a snake in disguise? I can't imagine why Relgious doctrine would ever do such a thing. /s@@thevoiceofamerica2389
I'm a Christian but I enjoy listening to Richard Dawkins and find it hard to refute a lot of what he says. I think the same about Sam Harris. Both of them seem to be genuinely decent people. For a contrary view I like to listen to John Lennox. I also like listening to Christopher Hitchens but he appeared to be angry all the time (or maybe it was just exasperation) but he was also very witty.
Non-condescending??? The man who has called the majority of the planet a bunch of fools and publicly called to mock those with a religious belief, and so disgracefully so that most of his colleagues won't even talk to him anymore, even the atheistic ones because of his lack of class in doing so. There is a reason the man has so few friends because he's a zealous pompous ass. He's a snake just for the fact that he is telling you that there is no God, when no man knows this for sure. Follow him and you'll end up in a ditch.
I didnt estch the entire video but the psrts I watched the interviewer spoke 90% of the time lol. Daekins msinly answer yes or no lol. @@skywalker9770
One of his Russell quotes springs to mind 'The whole problem with the world is that fools and fanatics are always so certain of themselves, and wiser people so full of doubts.' Being able to admit to not knowing something, is far better than blundering on without knowing what are talking about. Sidenote - Dawkins knows more about physics than he often portrays, but he knows he's not an expert in those fields so prefers not to go too far in answering question that maybe someone like Neil DeGrasse Tyson, or Steven Pinker or Lawrence Krauss.. etc... would have better ways / understanding of answering ( all people that have had conversations with Richard over the years)
I owe Dr.Dawkins a great deal. Raised Roman Catholic, I'd ceased to belief in the charade by the time I was twelve, but kept it private so as not to hurt my parents. It wasn't a choice I made. I simply stopped believing because it seemed obvious to me that the priests didn't believe it. Dr.Dawkins helped me to make sense of it all. We can't comprehend the scale of time, we can't comprehend the scale of the Universe, and we can't comprehend the incremental nature of evolution that takes place over an incomprehensible length of time.
When Dawkins speaks you can see him pondering and reaching into his mind and getting out his mouth the exact honest version of how he sees things. If somebody showed him to be wrong in some idea and he suddenly realized he was wrong you can imagine him saying it out loud “you know what? You are right. I hadn’t realized that”. His only ego is in being ruled by what his mind tells him to be truthful. I so admire people like that.
Nope - hes being careful not to say something that illustrates what hes done to everyone. People are beginning to realised hes the founding father of thought crime modelling. Banning free speech didn't stop with religious people.
From my own experience, when you have a stroke mental processing slows and it becomes harder to gather thoughts and craft a rapid response. Prof Dawkins has rebounded remarkably well. Time now for empathy.
Then the founding father of modern thought crime would tell us why he first stoked up a consensus for banning religion people from thinking the way they want to think which turned out to be CHRISTIANS ONLY. - no others religious people just the christians Who now cannot be christians in public for they will be arrested. They cannot even mime a prayer under their breath - wear a cross nor carry a bible in public thanks to Dawkins. All well & good - NO. Thats the first THOUGHT CRIME since the witchcraft trials. And by far his handiwork didn't remain there did it as the models he designed for this are now SHUTTING DOWN EVERYONES FREE SPEECH !!!!! You want to praise and praise and praise this evil person for stopping you and you kin from being able to THINK as is you rights ? And to really take the P a separate abrahamic religion was slotted in to replace christianity. You dawkins sycophants always were off your trollies
I have recently lost both my parents. Neither were believers. So they had no fear of heaven or hell. They knew they would simply cease to exist, as they had done before they were born, without pain, fear, or discomfort of any sort. I personally find that, extremely comforting. It also makes it extremely important, to live a fulfilling life, while we have the opportunity. 😊
Absolutely and embracing death is essential to happiness.. death isn’t miserable because we all die and in 100 years NOBODY will care.. if we are here or not.. and when we embrace death we can appreciate and live our best lives.. choosing happiness, joy love and laughter everyday.. because time is precious and it’s a waste of valuable time being miserable, angry or whatever.. and so damn ridiculous if people actually thought about it.. This idea we have to be fulfilled or make our mark is a tad ambitious.. EVERYTHING we crave from money, relationships and fame etc. is all based around what makes us happy.. and yet we can find happiness if we CHOOSE TO.. and nothing makes us happy except US.. if we choose to be happy.. Even if someone cures cancer and makes their mark on the world, yes, they will be fulfilled for a while until they get used to it and they will feel the need to do something else fulfilling.. and in 100 years people will know their name BUT NOBODY WILL EVER KNOW WHO THEY WERE.. who they truly were as an individual because nobody is around to know who they are., so people just know their name.. Like cleopatra.. we all know the name but wouldn’t have a clue who she really was so who cares.. Live the best possible life you can, be happy and laugh everyday because life is hilarious.. 😂😂 ❤❤ Oh, my father had the best attitude to death.. he was looking forward to the REST.. 😂😂 I drove him to his triple bypass surgery and asked him if he was scared and he LAUGHED.. and said ‘scared of what.. none of us will get off this would alive’.. 😂 I think about my father every single day and miss him so damn much but he would think I was an imbecile if I was sad.. so I remember him with love, laughter and joy.. because I won’t get off this world alive either.. and I talk to my kids about my own death and joke about it a lot.. so they also won’t be sad.. because I definitely don’t want them mourning me.. the inheritance will cheer them up.. 😂😂
I watched this right after the Piers Morgan interview. What a contrast in interviewing styles. From a complete buffoon to a genuinely engaging and intelligent interviewer. Great job. Interesting stuff from Dawkins as usual too.
Richard Dawkins is an intellectual and thinker. Very few people can be so brutally honest and yet so gentle. I have read all his books and as a biochemist find him truly scientific. I am from India
When my father died I was with him. He was a Christian. He believed that God was taking him home. I wish I could believe like he did. Coming home. Isn’t this what we all wish? And he died peacefully.
Seek God. Ask God to reveal Himself to you. (Using the masculine in a generic sense - God transcends male and female.) God desires a relationship with you.
@@LC-df3jl I hit the bottom years ago. Being crawling along the bottom for years. Looking after one sick relative after another. My grandparents, my parents and now my brother. If it was not for bad luck I would have none. Life sucks and god never showed up for me. If god is real he / she / it is one twisted evil fucker.
Who doesnt think Piers Morgan is a fool he is always on an ego trip only listens to his own voice 🙄😂 Andrew Gold is a true gem authentic honest and amazing to listen too covers really interesting subjects that people want to hear about long may he continue with his great work love from Inverness Scotland 🦕❤️
QUESTION: richard claims that trans goes against biology and thus, wrong but why does he support homosexuality? Does that not go against biology? Like, its scientifically proven.that the correct sexes to get together are males and females for our genes to pass on So, why is Richard not against homosexuality? Anyone?
@@timphillips9954 Cheap shot saying that PM is just that.. Your are correct... He should of made it more than a sentence... Continued to explain the reasons as to why.... Then Again, Cheap is what cheap gets. So, Piers Morgan IS a fool.
I'd personally use stronger language. Morgan is frequently intentionally malicious in pursuit of a pay packet. Never forget that he was behind the horrendous phone hacking scandal in the 90s. Was that the act of a devout Christian man? Morgan is scum.
I was already a fan of Dawkins, but, "I can't resist Stephen Fry" upped my admiration of him 10-fold. Stephen Fry is a global treasure, and anyone who realises this is good people! 😏👌🏻
Now, that is how to interview someone properly. Great job, Andrew. Richard Dawkins is articulate and brilliant as usual. What an inspiration. Oh, how I miss Christopher Hitchins.
Both Hitchens and Sam Harris both grew to dislike Dawkins. And Dawkins picking and choosing which monothesims are worse is just childish and derives from his bigotry. They are all horrid. Dawkins manages to be both anti-science and bigoted when it coms to trans as well. Dawkins is on these small venues because he was rightly cancelled. The large atheist forum, and most universities have pretty barred him good reason
He was entertaining, but far less of a good discussion partner. The problem with people like CH is that they're far too radical to achieve their goals. I compare him to people like Jordan Peterson or that annoying guy who thinks he's the smartest being in the universe... what's his name again... shapiro or something like that They stand behind a few points that are hard to reason with so they gather up a following and become an impressive force in the media... but they have their flaws, personal and otherwise. No matter whether you go too far to the left or too far to the right (in political terms), you're crossing lines that shouldn't be. Even Dawkins has had his moments, but still wherever he goes, he has the moral high-ground and whether you agree or disagree with the bloke, he just demands respect. I cannot say the same of CH. But again, he certainly was entertaining and hopefully made a few people think about all the garbage that society has been feeding them.
@@teo2975 the radicals may have cancelled Dawkins... I don't know because I'm not a radical atheist... but Dawkins was never cancelled. The guy got a stroke and took a step back. And radical atheists are in my opinion no better than religious people. Stop trying to convince people that you are right and they are wrong. Eventually the truth will come out and if not, then so be it. I like the freedom to believe (or not) in what I want. I'm not bothering anyone with it (unless I'm asked) and I like the same in return. The world would be a much nicer place if both believers and non-believers would take that stance.
When I was a kid I asked my father where lightning came from, he told me it was the clouds bumping into each other, causing sparks. I think this is how religion begins, son asks father something, father doesn't know, so makes something up.
You are so lucky to have sat in the same room and spoken to the genius: Richard Dawkins. I have been watching your channel for a couple of years. I’ve been reading Dawkins for decades. Well done on snagging this interview. You know you’ve made it when Richard Dawkins gives you the time of day. Well done!
Riiiiiiiiight. I’m sure there’s special people in your life too. And I’m sure you’re not delusional about their humanness either. Put a lid on your superiority and move on.
I don't feel like Dawkins is actually a genius. He's just someone who has learned and studied hard and is great at conveying those thoughts. He just speaks common sense and most of the science that comes up is basic knowledge for anyone who has done university level biology. It probably goes over many people's heads who don't understand it
We are so fortunate to have Richard Dawkins. He (and the other three 'Horsemen') has given us a rational approach to life and, indeed, such an articulate presenter
While Piers Morgan may be a fool, that doesn't necessarily validate Richard's approach. However, it's worth noting that Richard's explanation for the emergence of religion is weak, and exploring alternative perspectives like those presented by Rene Girard, who is not religious himself, might provide a more insightful understanding.
@@destruction1928Why should we accept that the good professor is correct and Dawkins is wrong? There seem to be a vast array of well-qualified people who endorse Dawkins’s views.
@@kyoglesage YYour view of the world is wrong. Einstein's theory of relativity was only observed 100 years after his proposition. Dawkins and his crew put too much emphasis on evidence and observation because of their dislike of religious people. Besides, your argument is totally against the scientific method - the notion that 'if many people agree with me, that means I'm correct.' You need to reevaluate and conduct deeper research. By the way, Sam Harris is wrong too. Read René Girard.
It's a sad truth today that not having a strong opinion on everything is seen as a negative or weakness or a cop out. In actual fact it's demonstrates humility and honesty and should be encouraged to prevent any one of us commenting on topics we aren't expperts on. Science thrives on the "I don't know".
So is mine, his book put in words what I always felt is true, when you listen there are no personal subjectiv statements, always fact followed by examples.. he showed me how to see what ppl say and I never hesitate to say I dont know, I will see data and make my mind then..fact dont care about feelings and I want my son to be like that in his life even if you are not scientist.. In my mind he is above all due his personality.. hope he live long and give us more books!🙋❤️🇨🇿
I love his theory that aliens - a high intelligent, high tech'l race, long, long ago - came to earth and designed, seeded earth with all the different life forms; that is his alternative theory to how life here started/abio genesis. By declaring that, he gave the nod to 'intelligent design' - as promoted by many theists
Good interview. Especially impressive how politely Dawkins fields Andrew's limited knowledge about his own questions (heaven, wormholes, evolution, etc.). Never says "that's ridiculous", although he looked tempted a few times. Kudos.
He wouldn't do it to his face. He probably will ridicule him at another interview with someone else. Just like he was polite to Piers Morgan during the interview with him, but was belittling Piers during this interview. Not very impressive!
@@aajiz1I don't think that likely at all. Andrew was a very different interviewer than Piers - I just watched that interview. Piers took a very cocky and attacking tone, often cutting Richard off mid sentence. Richard fielded the questions very well remaining polite and answering Piers' questions thoughtfully. Piers' conduct was certainly not one entitling him to intellectual respect from Richard beyond the interview room itself. Piers was asking to be called a fool. He came across as a fool to me, too. The interview with Andrew and Richard was much more chatty and fun in tone, seemingly enjoyed by both. I imagine they parted on good terms. They seemed to show a genuine respect for one another, not just politeness. I also don't think Richard thinks everyone who asks questions that Richard knows the answer to is a fool. Richard is an educator and like all educators worthy of the name he meets others at their level of knowledge and lifts them up, not puts them down. I'd be extremely surprised after this interview if Richard badmouthed Andrew. If ever he does please come back here and post a link to it, because it would change my opinion of Richard Dawkins profoundly.
@@Amy-ky5wr I agree. I dislike PM's interview tactics immensely. It's rare for him to truly listen to his interviewees and understand where they're coming from. He interrupted RD at every turn, and I don't think he actually understood nor cared to do so at any point during the interview. I think his audience is in on this bc they like his style more than the substance. Perhaps RD regretted going on his show. I appreciate AG in this video for at least listening to RD to finish his points bf asking. There's no rule that says the interviewer must have equal knowledge or know a lot about the subject for which he is interviewing. She/he needs to let the interviewee, the expert, unfold the content rather than grab the spotlight the way PM did with RD.
@@aajiz1piers Morgan interview and this interview is total opposite. Did you ever saw any interview where piers Morgan let the guest to speak? He always repeat the same line again and again. On that interview Richard get no time to say him fool. He is not a diplomatic man. Very straight forward but not a bully
Richard Dawkins is our national treasure. So courteous & such a high intellect. Stephen Fry is also such a light with tremendous talus. But Christopher Hitchens was the most articulate genius of all. Miss you enormously Hitch. Nobody will or can replace him ever. RIP Hitch learned massively from you.
Is he ? Wasn't the model he put around anti religion one that brought down just the 1 religion & another abrahamic religion replaced it ? Were the artefacts of than successful prohibition simply thought crime elements ? Since the model was proven to be police state compatible isn't the thought crime that says we cannot explain 'A WOMAN' by a biological definition just the same original design that dawkins caused religious free speech be shut down with ? So like so many you still cannot recognise how this post truth thought policing era came about ?
Brilliant! It’s so refreshing to hear an intelligent conversation that doesn’t devolve into a clash of egos! Andrew, you have a real gift for interviewing!
You are a gifted interviewer, Andrew. As self-effacing as you are, your own mind must be pretty astonishing. I too heard that change in J. Peterson’s vocabulary (by the way). Anyway, I deeply enjoyed this conversation, and there were laughs! Thank you.
@@ardentynekent2099 It's not only J. Peterson. As Dawkins rightly said, we all subconsciously change our vocabulary when we talk to children or teenagers - and I can add when we talk to uneducated people, or to people who are not fluent in our language. We want to make sure our audience understands us! A scientist will write differently if it's a report on a peer-reviewed scientific publication and differently if he or she's writing for a popular magazine. When you're interviewing a person of high intellectual calibre, on one side you still don't want to bore or alienate your audience, and make sure you're understood, but at the same time you want to put yourself on the same level and be respected by your interlocutor. It's a subtle balance, and a good interviewer has to achieve it.
I loved this Andrew! I've seen Richard Dawkins on so many podcasts but this was the most human and most warm of all those interviews. This is what you're great at! Well done!
And Aetheism hasn't murdered almost 200 million of people in the last hundred years alone? More than all the religious wars in history put together! Terrible, hideous things have been done to people in the name of "there is no God! " Aetheism is evil!
When I was young I couldn't accept not existing and wanted to live for ever. Now I'm 69 I have no fear and therefore the idea of a sleep without disturbance sounds rather wonderful.
I agree with you! I loathe the short attention span nonsense of everything now. Who wants to hear only the bullet points from the loudest bully-style speakers? Not me. I’m happy to see I’m not the only one 😃 The most interesting stuff is spoken lightly and in full sentences. Not the headline.
May i ask why you needed to get "out of religion" and how this improved your life? I ask because as a theologian, physicist and science teacher i can't imagine how getting "out of religion" could possibly improve my life. I know of many forms of organized religion from which getting out of would be good and healthy. I'm just curious here.
@@Vasilefs_TerranorumA theologian is just someone who seeks to understand the nature of religion, they don't have to have any faith themselves, in fact most don't
Richard Dawkins is a wonderful person. He is criticized for being cold, but he isn't. He is warm-hearted. He just doesn't indulge fantasies that take people away from reality. That's not just an intellectual commitment, it is the only way to be sincerely and fully human.
I’d say rather that he indulges in fantasies with the acknowledgement that they are fantasies. He could read lord of the rings and love it very much but that doesn’t mean he will confuse middle earth with actual earth lol
Richard Dawkins is a very warm man with a highly developed sense of humour. In many ways he reminds me of Stephen Hawking. They both followed the rigours of scientific method to find a tangible truth, but both were happy to parody themselves.
Well done to the interviewer who actually ASKED questions and the let Dawkins actually answer without interruption, and also have humility. Enjoyed this much more than the interview with Piers Morgan that was continuously provoking and had an agenda in mind. 😊
i can see how Piers keeps the speed and topics moving quickly. Im on the fence on if it is wrong or different style (pros and cons).. i do think both interviews explored very interesting points.
Richard Dawkins has a agenda too, it just appears to be less obvious if he is in a setting where most around him may agree with him or at least greatly admire him. I agree that the interviewer here was humble, but I can not at all see how anyone can claim Richard Dawkins to be. I think he is extremely arrogant, but yes so is Piers Morgan.
@@ProgressIsTheOnlyEvolution Just consider it real, that R.Dawkins is not 20 anymore, and REALLY did some good things during those many years - and some people realize that. Maybe these people just want to express their respect for R.Dawkins accomplishments. To say 'extremely arrogant' is as far from the truth, as it could get. I wonder, If you could elaborate, what you would expect. Maybe you would like to pad Albert Einstein on the back, saying: "What's up, old buddy? How's it hanging?"
@@GetZappéd1974 What good has Dawkins done worthy of a lot of respect? Extremely arrogant means arrogant to a very large degree, and it is very arrogant to claim not do have fear of death, know there is no God or anything which last beyond the brain against countless of testimonies, to claim to KNOW something can come out of nothing, He even himself admit he has a ego, and perhaps the only really humble thing I have heard him say is acknowledging this ego and that it wont remain. ua-cam.com/users/shorts-YXia0SsK84 He also wrote the "selfish gene" which again is a title suggesting he is aware of his arrogance. ua-cam.com/video/mB6Rl9lN32k/v-deo.html His evolutionary claims are also arrogant, such as claiming that there is no evidence of anything beyond the physical, when testimony is ALSO a part of what evidence is. His claim that it goes against the spirit of science to believe in anything spiritual is in itself a arrogant claim and a oxymoron, considering that the word spirit occur in the spirit of science, and that science is about finding truths which has not yet been found, with the evolution theory having FAR LESS evidence to back it up than the notion of existence beyond the human brain. He ironically do not believe everything came about by chance like Alex O'Connor, but rather by a natural selection out of nothing, without having a source to do the selecting. Also in his claim to know the Book of Mormon is a obvious fake, which he claims the Bible and Quoran isn't because they are ancient. But he has nothing to back up any of these claims with other than it is his opinion or belief. Its especially his manerism and complete emotional dismissal of other options without evidence one way or the other which is extremely arrogant. Look at him here with Brandon Flowers, none of the people here agree with each other, but the only one being rude, arrogant and disrespectful here is Richard Dawkins. If Richard Dawkins is not arrogant, then who is? He is one of the most arrogant people I have ever listened to. ua-cam.com/video/W-pr2PL-e9Y/v-deo.html
The main difference in psychology of males and females is due to the fact that males take 10 minutes to reproduce and females take 9 months, which leads to very different breeding strategies with huge effects on general human behaviour.
Congratulations, Andrew, for having one of the most interesting conversations with Richard Dawkins I've heard in a good while. It was nice to hear things he may not have come up with with any other journalist. You have fast become one of my most favourite podcasters. Hope you get 1 milliom subs in the next few years. You are earning it by leaps & bounds 💛
Great interview. I am an atheist, and yes, I am a fan of Richard Dawkins. He's brilliant, and he comes across as thoughtful, honest, and unassuming. He is truly a treasure. We are lucky to have him among us.
I have seen him launch into a young American student who dared to contradict him with such viciousness the word "kind" was a long way away from his consciousness.
@@jacquelinedesanctis7082 I quite like some of his books but I don't understand his fixation on belief, or to put it more accurately, other people's beliefs. Though I'm not religious myself, I find it hilarious how atheism has become a belief system in itself- Atheism+ etc. Religion was the driving force behind the abolition of slavery, it helped/helps communities bond, it gave a certain code to societies. As an anthropologist, Dawkins must know that it's a human trait to believe or wish to believe, something greater than oneself. He's not exactly being brave or dying on some hill by being an atheist in the West, he should stick to defending nature over nurture rather than some crusade (irony) against what other people wish to believe.
@@davidcohen26 Says the guy who believes the position of a star ( which is probably already a dead star as light takes time to travel) at his birth it what writes his life.
@@stephenmcdonagh27951. Dawkins's fixation on the people's beliefs is that people's baseless beliefs impact hugely on society, wars, legislation, people's actions. The more thta critical thinking is explained to people, rhe less religious they tend to become. And 2. Atheism is not a belief system, you don't understand what atheism is, it's NON belief. Atheists may well have other beliefs, but that's separate from atheism. You should learn what non belief actually means.
Andrew, this is hands down your best interview that I've seen you do so far. It was fascinating. Light humored and far from a boring interview of what is probably one of the most brilliant minds of our time. You were very prepared and asked the questions were ones I wanted to ask and so much more. I believe Dawkins enjoyed your questions and did not seen the slightest bit perturbed by any of your inquiries. I almost expect this of most intellectuals. This may go down as one of your proudest moments in your career. I don't know.... you may be capable of so much more. Im a newer subscriber. Just plainly put, Freaking Awesome Dude!
I'm afraid I disagree. He is a pleasant man and well spoken, but unfortunately deluded. He does not believe in his creator. I feel sorry for him to be honest. The Bible warns us of people like him and all the naysayers and doubters on UA-cam. Do not be fooled by him Mitch. God bless you. GOD BLESS AMERICA.
@@thevoiceofamerica2389Yeah this guy Dawkins is Deluded....'They thought they were Wise, but they were Fools' . God is the Judge of everyone ...even Egomaniacs like him.
Humility? Arrogant as hell! I don't know where he is taking that he is reasonable and logical? How he could be so sure? That just different level of believing. I love sience and as that one theory what was "true" yesterday might be proven false tomorrow... and relay on Darwin evolution theory is f*&ck up, when it was exposed that he actually falsified some of his "discoveries"! There are some new updates and still too many unknown. What he is saying it's just other believe, many falsehoods, which he is saying as facts, but they are not facts.
Jeez, I loved this interview! Thank you so much Andrew Gold whoever you are - never heard of you before today but I sure am going to watch more of your work. 🤩 Dawkins is very reserved and yet with you he was relaxed and clearly enjoying himself and showed that there is a ton more to bring out of him - probably by someone else - but the depths remain to be mined for the world to hear him...Heartfelt thanks to both of you!
My mother was never a religious person but she got cancer a few years ago. My uncle is a Reverend and my mother got baptised after her chemotherapy and it changed her outlook she found religion and started going to church. Her cancer returned and she deteriorated rapidly with only two months to live. Her new faith gave her tremendous strength and comfort. She accepted her life was coming to an end and her fear went away. It does give comfort and gave me comfort too. My Reverend uncle was at the hospital in the last hours blessed my mother with holy water and prepared her for eternal life with the Lord.
most of the New Atheists back this ''nonsense'' because atheists are by nature Left Wing - as in communism - materialism-atheistic Marxism... as in China
What Richard failed to mention is that many doctors and scientists support the idea of gender fluidity and there being over one hundred genders. Many once reputable medical publications refer to birthing people. So much for finding the truth by following the science
I have no idea why many Christians do not like Dawkins. Sure, he disagrees with their religion, but he's such a kind, respectful, loving person just like their prophet they believe in. Not to throw shade, but it wouldn't be the first time they were hypocritical.
Is he ? Wasn't the model he put around anti religion one that brought down just the 1 religion & another abrahamic religion replaced it ? Were the artefacts of than successful prohibition simply thought crime elements ? Since the model was proven to be police state compatible isn't the thought crime that says we cannot explain 'A WOMAN' by a biological definition just the same original design that dawkins caused religious free speech be shut down with ? So like so many you still cannot recognise how this post truth thought policing era came about ?
I love you Richard Dawkins. You remind me so much of my grandad who I had wonderful, intelligent and fascinating conversations with and I miss him greatly. You are truly an intelligent man. I love your work, have learnt so much from your books. I wish there were more people with your knowledge and wisdom.
Nasty reply when I never even mentioned parents. Actually one parent died of cancer when I was very young. Not that it's any of your business. My grandad was intellectual and I miss him and our philosophical conversations dearly. I'm an intelligent woman, an avid reader. Don't judge me when you don't know me.
Very interesting conversation! I've never heard of him, but he was very interesting and very reflective. I like people who are able to discuss complicated issues without high pitched voices.
@@jackwhitbread4583 A British biologist is not likely to turn up on a whim in my reading and he doesn’t figure all over the media just because you know him 😉
@@purpledragonfly313 He's not just any old British biologist, though. He's a bestselling author and one of the leading writers of popular science books. His 1976 book, _The Selfish Gene,_ topped a public poll of the most inspiring science books of all time. And it introduced the world to the word "meme", which is a word that you _might_ have heard. Anyway, now you have heard of him, you can buy all of his books and read every one of them. They are all well worth reading. :)
@@jackwhitbread4583 . I imagine this is a perfect example of how we are becoming more and more separated from each other due to algorithms. Unless people make a concerted effort to break out of their information silos, they can be fed articles, videos, music, lifestyle choices and political opinions that coincide with their biases. When people follow only the recommended info streams, they can easily become disconnected with reality. Especially in politics, unscrupulous operators will ruthlessly feed confirmation bias, which has led to the mad culture wars we are seeing at the moment. Many of the 'viral' issues that consume so many people and provoke so much outrage and anger, in fact have NO direct personal effect on their lives. Manufactured outrage is VERY lucrative to media companies and content creators. The corporate financial hijacking of our economies effects EVERYONES, yet serious debate and discussion of this issue is rarely spoken of. Gender issues, however which is a highly personal matter between medical professionals and their patients, has become a constant media war, sucking all the oxygen from the room, and taking a disproportionate amount of attention away from really important matters.
My wife in ICU dying of small cell brain cancer spent her last 10 days living on a machine with a breathing tube. The last 4 days of that 10 she couldn't even respond to anyone at all, just laid there getting worse by the hour in a comma state. On the 10th day, the day she died, I stood by her bed held her hand and told her we'd see each other again. No joke, after I said that she opened her eyes wide looked me right in the face with a smile and nodded her head yes. Last time she seen me, last time I seen her alive and I'll never forget her response. Later that afternoon she passed on, I went away in peace and she died in peace. This is not a made up story, this in fact happened just as I said it did. You all can believe what you want, I'm convinced life goes on after this worldly existence.
Convinced by what evidence? (The story you told I believe. Yet it isn't evidence life goes on. It's just evidence someone _believed_ it does. Nobody disputes that some people _believe_ it. It's just we don't have good reason to think life actually goes o.n)
@@garyr7027 You have evidence she did believe it though. Maybe her entire life she didn't, but people about to die are at their most desperate and irrational, right? So perhaps she genuinely began to believe it. Or perhaps she knew it would comfort you, and her last act was out of love towards you. Either way, I'm not wrong because what you're describing still only indicates her belief; it doesn't indicate it's true.
@@majmage she was my wife so yeah I know what she believed and didn't believe. However, point taken, at deaths door you'd be amazed how all a sudden change of mind happens, which should be a huge wake up call that something is obviously there many ignore until that time comes. You can justify it all you want though and require physical proof which there is none and never was meant to be and it can't be stuck under a microscope for proof. I'm fully persuaded there's another dimension past our existence here, and we'll all know it in the end. We are more than just a physical existence, we are also spiritual beings, that's where our emotions comes from. The fact my wife responded on her last day was something that shouldn't have ever happened considering her state, and I take it as a sign cause it was biologically impossible... she was braindead from cancer. To be honest I was freaked out over it, yet glad at the same time... very mixed emotions going on at that moment.
@@garyr7027 Why are you saying "something is obviously there"? I feel like you probably understand (and presumably don't disagree) that minds on the verge of dying are at one of their _least rational_ states. So them changing their minds isn't an indication something is obviously there. Knowing truth requires evidence, so if you're saying this idea is beyond our ability to have evidence of, you're saying it cannot be known. At least I assume that's what you meant by "stick it under a microscope", because I'm not literally asking you for that, I'm asking you _what evidence?_ It doesn't seem like you have a basis for this belief. We don't get to just invent the truth when things are unexplained. So if what you're describing was an event that seemed impossible, but you don't have evidence of the proper explanation, I think you should just be honest and admit you don't know.
I love how Dawkins is like "you know that?" About humans not coming from baboons. Richard is fun and very straightforward and I respect him so much for that. He simply speaks very directly and I enjoy his answers to dumb questions as well as smart questions.
As an atheist, I'm not scared of not existing after death, but I'm depressed that I won't live long enough to see what we have in store for the future long after I'm dead.
@@PointNemo9 It's an assumption based on the progress of science and technology over the past few thousand years, so I'm certain it's a pretty sound assumption. And yes, good or bad, I want to see it.
I actually think this was quite beautiful to watch. This may appear as an odd comment but I think the unassuming naivety and self effacing but inquisitive nature of Andrew combined with the wisdom and at times clinical nature of Dawkins works to make fascinating viewing and gives for a much more user friendly, intellectual discussion. Great work, subscribed.
I find myself so envious of you, Andrew. Thank you so much for having him on. He is a treasure. This is an excellent interview and you actually just let him speak. I would have hardly been able to form questions I am such a fan.
Envy is unnecessary even if used as a figure of speech. I would never nor have I ever typed the words envy/envious/jealous to describe a feeling towards another.
I once had a lung infection which resulted in me blacking out. There I was, one moment felling light headed, the next moment a friend was bent over me asking if I was OK. In the couple of minutes the black out lasted there was nothing and what I took from this was that death was not a thing to fear, just the journey to that point.
.. I fell off a tree when I was ten. I didn't even feel my body hitting the ground. I passed out for a few hours .. the next thing I knew was in bed and I remember a searing excruciating pain through my back as I tried to get up. So I did missed schooling for a couple of weeks. So that's my take, too .. I mean, if I go I want to go while in my sleep. I worry not of being dead .. but of suffering/ in great pains before dying.
Until being fitted with a pacemaker, I suffered from blackouts which occurred without warning and I realised how it was possible to just drop dead as people sometimes do.I was fortunate; my heart restarted. Had it not, I’d never have known. My GP told me recently that I was lucky to be alive (heart again) from which I took it that I was living on borrowed time. The idea of death’s proximity doesn’t bother me. I”ll just no longer be there as I haven’t been every night of my life. I’ve never believed in God, heaven or hell and won’t start now.
1. One of my favourite reflections on life and death was from an anonymous woman on a scary long-distance flight who said: 'If I am to die, what a fool I was to refuse the dessert.' 2. Richard Dawkins' patience and forbearance in accommodating this Andrew Gold 'interview' is truly admirable.
I also think Dawkins is demonstrating self control and great patience. Dawkins has such a lofty intellect and some of Gold's questions are worded clumsily; he seems not to have prepared very well. The interviewer is lovely and at times very good but he is all over the place asking juvenile questions.
Shame you couldn't have the courtesy and politeness to not post this comment. Andrew did his best with a very high profile guest. If you didn't enjoy it, no problem - just leave quietly.
Brilliant Brilliant 😊😊😊 I felt RD was a little spikey at times, but Andrew just floated over it (a la Theroux) Such an interesting interview, jam-packed with highlights 👏👏👏
From the beginning of your conversation .. my favourite English word. Ellipsism: that vague feeling of sadness that you won’t be around to see how history turns out.
This is extremely unusual! An interviewer who is actually more intelligent than he pretends to be. Dawkins, as always, is highly impressive and has thought a lot of things through.
I didn't think I could admire Richard Dawkins any more than I already did, until he described Piers Morgan as a fool. I wish there were a few more like Richard. God bless him!! 😂
QUESTION: richard claims that trans goes against biology and thus, wrong but why does he support homosexuality? Does that not go against biology? Like, its scientifically proven.that the correct sexes to get together are males and females for our genes to pass on So, why is Richard not against homosexuality? Anyone?
Was looking forward to this one, & it didn't disappoint! Unlike Jordan Peterson, you allowed Richard to talk & shine his knowledge upon us. Well handled Andrew. 🤠👍
@@tru2harris998 he's talking about the interview Peterson did with Dawkins, Peterson was incredibly rude, would not let Richard talk and was a downright bully.
@@jackwhitbread4583 That's not how I remember it. I do remember that Dr. Peterson talked a lot - too much - when it would have been more sensible to allow Dr. Dawkins to speak more, but my recollection is that he seemed to have a great deal of respect for Dr. Dawkins, and I don't recall him being a "bully" towards him. Would you be able to refresh my memory on that?
Incredible that you got Sir Richard and it was really brave of you to interview him, I would have been so intimidated by his great intellect. Really great interview, asking the things we want to know. 🎉
Sir? That simply means he has done his job for his handlers. Amazing that the proles think so highly of these people and then you wonder why they have always referred to you all as"it." Russell was a pervert by the way, who got the go ahead from as high as the royals to study the effects of pre-puberal sex in children. Read a bit and stop worshipping these sick people and their fake titles...perverts are all the way at the top..they like little children. Let us not even discuss the Huxleys or the the Darwins who bred with the same family(Wedgewoods) for five generations thinking they can have the perfect being, ended up with a bunch of crazy children.
@@helencheung2537 I wonder, this isn't intended in a confrontational way, I'm truly curious, who would you considera great intellect? Are there any persons alive today you would consider fitting into that category? Also, are you religious, and if so do you think that greatly impacts your regard for his intellect?
This was absolutely fascinating. It's rare to see an interviewer actually hold their own with somebody like Dawkins (just in terms of keeping him interested) but this was engaging from start to finish. Subscribed!
I love the idea of Piers Morgan seeing the description in this video and getting all fired up, only to watch it and hear Richard Dawkins simply calling him a fool, and not wasting anymore time discussing the nob head, I think that will annoy Piers Morgan more than anything.
One thing I will always remember Mr Dawkins for, When the late Christopher Hitchens, seriously ill, took to the stage and spoke. His voice crackling at some parts. When He finished Mr Dawkins embraced him, like the great friend that he was. Very sad.
At 4:00, Andrew asks, "If you could inject a serum into your mind or something that would make you believe the lie, just for comfort's sake, would you do that?" Richard answered no. For me, such a serum does exist, and it's the drug LSD. I knew I was an atheist at the time of my earliest memories, and I've been so ever since except for one night. On that night, after taking LSD, I did think, "There must be something up there." I decided the next day that I would NEVER take LSD again. I'd learnt it could turn me into something I fundamentally wasn't, I wouldn't allow that to happen again, even though I continued using other recreational drugs for a few more years, and that night was one of the most blissful in my life. Now it pisses me off to know that death is the end of me, but I live with it.
My mother was an atheist until the day she died. Even during horrific pancreatic cancer, surgery, and resulting spinal injury which made her last 6 months a nightmare. Still an atheist. Even when numerous unasked for religious people arrived in hospice to provide a last minute conversion. She spent her time with her family. No sky daddy required.
I was quite taken by this podcast. Thank you for giving ME the confirmation of the comfort that I find in science. Many of the views expressed by both of you gentlemen resonate with my own. I would suggest that all humans just spend a lot more time thinking. This is after all, how we progress as a society. I have tremendous respect for thinkers such as yourselves.
Regarding the trans ‘issue’, after listening to this interview, I am now more convinced than ever that the confusion surrounding this topic is because of a failure of language. I think there is great confusion because our language hasn’t caught up to our thinking. Gender is most definitely a separate thing to biological sex. - Male and female refers to our biology/physiology. - Masculine and feminine describes traits associated with sex. - The identity of these traits is what we call gender. So man and woman are terms referring to the traits associated with gender. Whereas male and female are terms referring to the characteristics associated with sex. The reason humans have separate sex and gender is because masculine and feminine traits are not exclusive to males and females, respectively. Some males have feminine traits and some females have masculine traits. The issue becomes confusing when someone like Dawkins says “it’s not right that a man can say he’s a woman and therefore becomes a woman” (I’m paraphrasing)because that is not what is happening. What is happening is a biological MALE feels like a WOMAN because of the FEMININE traits they possess, therefore they are calling themselves a woman - NOTE woman, not female.
Thank you for this thoughtful comment, I was scrolling through to see if somebody had thought to make this point. I wonder how someone as wise and intelligent as Richard Dawkins cannot make this distinction. Of course no one simply gets up in the morning, and suddenly proclaim: I am now a biological (fe)male because I will it to be so. We as humans are all on a spectrum, be it sexually, be it how feminine or masculine we are. Are we really not beyond telling people they should be - or behave - a certain way based on the composition of their bodies by now? I'm so tired of people gatekeeping a way of life they view to be theirs by birthright, simply by being born a certain way. We have no influence on what we are born as, but we can choose how we want to live our lives, thankfully. So many of Dawkins' interviews revolve around us having one life to live and then ceasing to exist, so we need to make the best of it. Yet people choosing their gender, choosing how they wish to be seen and how they want to see themselves, seems to be a step too far. Even if this choice is hurting no one and greatly beneficial to the person making it. People do love to bring up safety concerns, thinking that if we 'allow' people to 'choose' to be either feminine or masculine, then suddenly people will be accosted in bathrooms. Well, people are already assaulted every couple minutes of every single day, and this has been so for many centuries. Bathrooms, locker rooms, dressing rooms. If you think that a pictogram on a door will keep assailants out, then you are mistaken. I'm very sorry that J.K. Rowling suffered domestic abuse, but this is not a relevant argument in the gender issue. It was not a trans perpetrator that did that. Anyone on a journey to live outside of the societal norm, in whatever shape or form, is on a very hard road indeed. Instead of beating them down at every turn, let's aid them. We don't need religion to be kind, indeed - we need to find that kindness in ourselves. Calling the struggle of so many "insanity" is not a kindness.
except everyone would rather just call females women and males men, regardless of their masculine or feminine traits because its the easiest and most informative way of doing it. And no matter how feminine a man is (or vice versa) we would never have previously said it affected their gender, you could say they are acting like a woman but not that they are one, only now are people deciding to change that element of language, and yes you can change it but most dont think it should be because it doesn't actually help anyone. And I think feeling like you have the opposite to your sex gender traits to the point of wanting to have gender affirming surgery does just feel like something has gone horribly wrong with someone's feelings about their own gender/sex identity. As in they should be able to be as masculine or feminine as they like without resorting to changing their sex characteristics if they are separate from gender right?. I mean they have freedom to do what they want but i dont know if accepting it to the point of ignoring it leads to an actual cause of the problem not being solved. Because no matter what way you look at it, not having to have drug therapy or surgery to feel good about yourself is preferable.
The dictionary literally states that the definition of gender is: …used to refer to the condition of being physically male, female, or intersex (= having a body that has both male and female characteristics) However, we will soon see all this change due to the pressures of transgender people believing that gender and sex are different. Less than 50 years ago sex and gender were interchangeable, as was the definition of someone who identified themselves as being transgender which was coined gender identity disorder but again has changed due to the political push towards accepting whatever people want to believe in.
Thank you for interviewing this giant of science. I have read all of his books. If the U.K were a real democracy we could elect intelligent people like Richard Dawkins to be our Head of State. Imagine President Dawkins.
Join my new community for the censored bits!: andrewgold.locals.com
Watch my next episode with atheist comedian David Baddiel: ua-cam.com/video/pKqdLQj_eqg/v-deo.html.
Are you a fan of Richard Dawkins? Are you religious? Atheist? All are welcome here.
Wonderful discussion. Thank you.
Am a fan of a friend of his, Christopher Hitchens
This is EPIC
My Holy Trinity of Hitchens, Dawkins and Fry! What an amazing guest to get on. Would be fab if you could get Stephen Fry to 👀
Ouch.. I got pissed at piers over his interview w Trump, he had a teaser of the interview and it made it appear that Trump walked out on him.. I thought that was shitty just for clicks..
Wow, an interviewer who allows their guest to actually finish their thought! Well done!
Piers Morgan could learn much from how Gold conducted this interview.
@@ianclark2665 he does go on about himself a bit though
@@ianclark2665 piers morgan isn't interested in learning anything. From anyone. He already knows it all.
Agreed. 💯 So sad that skill and protocol is dying
@@ianclark2665piers is a first-class moron and idiot 💯
Nice job Andrew! I am a fan of Richards but he isn’t the easiest to interview because he is so careful to stick to what he knows (which is a good thing). For an interviewer, it can lead to dead ends which you handled with ease. It is a unique skill and it’s required to be a truly good interviewer. You have it.
yeah I think Dawkins has been burned a few times by entertaining hypotheticals for the sake of conversations and thr "flow" of an interview
Richard is so relaxed and non-condescending and genuinely tries to understand and show interest. He is a lovely human being.
Yes he is, but don't be fooled by people like him. The Bible warns us of this!
Really? You mean the Bible built in a pre-emptive manipulation that even if someone seems good if they don't have faith in God they're a snake in disguise? I can't imagine why Relgious doctrine would ever do such a thing. /s@@thevoiceofamerica2389
I'm a Christian but I enjoy listening to Richard Dawkins and find it hard to refute a lot of what he says. I think the same about Sam Harris. Both of them seem to be genuinely decent people. For a contrary view I like to listen to John Lennox. I also like listening to Christopher Hitchens but he appeared to be angry all the time (or maybe it was just exasperation) but he was also very witty.
@@thevoiceofamerica2389 Where in the bible?
Non-condescending??? The man who has called the majority of the planet a bunch of fools and publicly called to mock those with a religious belief, and so disgracefully so that most of his colleagues won't even talk to him anymore, even the atheistic ones because of his lack of class in doing so. There is a reason the man has so few friends because he's a zealous pompous ass. He's a snake just for the fact that he is telling you that there is no God, when no man knows this for sure. Follow him and you'll end up in a ditch.
Thank you inviting Mr Dawkins. I am a big fan professor Dawkins and have read most of his books so far. Brilliant interview
This interview has just reinforced my like for him, I'll mirror your words, Brilliant interview.
If hes so clever where dem middle monkeys at yo?
Your interviewer talent is that you are warm and quiet with your guest. Do not change. This interview is a treasure.
in other words keeping his mouth closed most of the time is his best quality?
I didnt estch the entire video but the psrts I watched the interviewer spoke 90% of the time lol. Daekins msinly answer yes or no lol. @@skywalker9770
I find it refreshing to listen to an interviewee who's so comfortable responding to a question with, "I don't know."
It exhibits integrity and credibility and creates a basis of trust.
You will rarely see a creationist admit they don't know something!
One of his Russell quotes springs to mind 'The whole problem with the world is that fools and fanatics are always so certain of themselves, and wiser people so full of doubts.'
Being able to admit to not knowing something, is far better than blundering on without knowing what are talking about. Sidenote - Dawkins knows more about physics than he often portrays, but he knows he's not an expert in those fields so prefers not to go too far in answering question that maybe someone like Neil DeGrasse Tyson, or Steven Pinker or Lawrence Krauss.. etc... would have better ways / understanding of answering ( all people that have had conversations with Richard over the years)
Yes, yes, yes!
I owe Dr.Dawkins a great deal. Raised Roman Catholic, I'd ceased to belief in the charade by the time I was twelve, but kept it private so as not to hurt my parents. It wasn't a choice I made. I simply stopped believing because it seemed obvious to me that the priests didn't believe it. Dr.Dawkins helped me to make sense of it all. We can't comprehend the scale of time, we can't comprehend the scale of the Universe, and we can't comprehend the incremental nature of evolution that takes place over an incomprehensible length of time.
When Dawkins speaks you can see him pondering and reaching into his mind and getting out his mouth the exact honest version of how he sees things. If somebody showed him to be wrong in some idea and he suddenly realized he was wrong you can imagine him saying it out loud “you know what? You are right. I hadn’t realized that”. His only ego is in being ruled by what his mind tells him to be truthful. I so admire people like that.
and like all good scientists will say straight up "I don't know" when he doesn't know the answer.
Nope - hes being careful not to say something that illustrates what hes done to everyone. People are beginning to realised hes the founding father of thought crime modelling. Banning free speech didn't stop with religious people.
@@cameroncameron2826 he’s never tried to ban religious speech, what the hell are you on about you raving lunatic?
From my own experience, when you have a stroke mental processing slows and it becomes harder to gather thoughts and craft a rapid response. Prof Dawkins has rebounded remarkably well. Time now for empathy.
Then the founding father of modern thought crime would tell us why he first stoked up a consensus for banning religion people from thinking the way they want to think which turned out to be CHRISTIANS ONLY. - no others religious people just the christians Who now cannot be christians in public for they will be arrested. They cannot even mime a prayer under their breath - wear a cross nor carry a bible in public thanks to Dawkins. All well & good - NO. Thats the first THOUGHT CRIME since the witchcraft trials.
And by far his handiwork didn't remain there did it as the models he designed for this are now SHUTTING DOWN EVERYONES FREE SPEECH !!!!!
You want to praise and praise and praise this evil person for stopping you and you kin from being able to THINK as is you rights ?
And to really take the P a separate abrahamic religion was slotted in to replace christianity.
You dawkins sycophants always were off your trollies
I have recently lost both my parents. Neither were believers. So they had no fear of heaven or hell. They knew they would simply cease to exist, as they had done before they were born, without pain, fear, or discomfort of any sort. I personally find that, extremely comforting. It also makes it extremely important, to live a fulfilling life, while we have the opportunity. 😊
Sorry for your loss. I am glad that you take comfort in your beliefs.
@@nicoledonovan2057 I take comfort, in what is evidently true. Thank you for your kind thoughts.
Absolutely and embracing death is essential to happiness.. death isn’t miserable because we all die and in 100 years NOBODY will care.. if we are here or not.. and when we embrace death we can appreciate and live our best lives.. choosing happiness, joy love and laughter everyday.. because time is precious and it’s a waste of valuable time being miserable, angry or whatever.. and so damn ridiculous if people actually thought about it.. This idea we have to be fulfilled or make our mark is a tad ambitious.. EVERYTHING we crave from money, relationships and fame etc. is all based around what makes us happy.. and yet we can find happiness if we CHOOSE TO.. and nothing makes us happy except US.. if we choose to be happy.. Even if someone cures cancer and makes their mark on the world, yes, they will be fulfilled for a while until they get used to it and they will feel the need to do something else fulfilling.. and in 100 years people will know their name BUT NOBODY WILL EVER KNOW WHO THEY WERE.. who they truly were as an individual because nobody is around to know who they are., so people just know their name.. Like cleopatra.. we all know the name but wouldn’t have a clue who she really was so who cares.. Live the best possible life you can, be happy and laugh everyday because life is hilarious.. 😂😂 ❤❤ Oh, my father had the best attitude to death.. he was looking forward to the REST.. 😂😂 I drove him to his triple bypass surgery and asked him if he was scared and he LAUGHED.. and said ‘scared of what.. none of us will get off this would alive’.. 😂 I think about my father every single day and miss him so damn much but he would think I was an imbecile if I was sad.. so I remember him with love, laughter and joy.. because I won’t get off this world alive either.. and I talk to my kids about my own death and joke about it a lot.. so they also won’t be sad.. because I definitely don’t want them mourning me.. the inheritance will cheer them up.. 😂😂
@@Steve-Crossthere is no evidence, either way.
@@Madonnalitta1 Fair point. You can’t disprove a negative. 🙂
I watched this right after the Piers Morgan interview. What a contrast in interviewing styles. From a complete buffoon to a genuinely engaging and intelligent interviewer. Great job. Interesting stuff from Dawkins as usual too.
Here here or is it hear hear? Either way, I completely agree with what you say.
Haha me too. Well said!
Piers Morgan is a moron!
Totally agree
@@arthurmeehear hear!
Richard Dawkins is an intellectual and thinker. Very few people can be so brutally honest and yet so gentle. I have read all his books and as a biochemist find him truly scientific. I am from India
Richard Dawkins is such an intelligent and logical thinker...he is also honest and kind hearted. I could listen to him all day.
Night
100% agreed.
If only a third rate paparazzi journalist could have some degree of integrity!
DAWKINS IS CLOSER TO THE GRAVE !!
Kind hearted?? That's the man who believes a down syndrome baby must be aborted.
@@afsar_gunner5271we all are. What's your point?
So refreshing to see two people talking without interrupting each other every second. Unlike some other interviewer...
When my father died I was with him. He was a Christian. He believed that God was taking him home. I wish I could believe like he did. Coming home. Isn’t this what we all wish? And he died peacefully.
I'm with you! I'd get the needle in my brain! How do people become "born again "? They don't believe and voila, they do.
Seek God. Ask God to reveal Himself to you. (Using the masculine in a generic sense - God transcends male and female.) God desires a relationship with you.
It's when you hit rock bottom the. You will know God is real.
@@barbarahansen5353 Sought god for years, has not shown up , must not be real.
@@LC-df3jl I hit the bottom years ago. Being crawling along the bottom for years. Looking after one sick relative after another.
My grandparents, my parents and now my brother. If it was not for bad luck I would have none. Life sucks and god never showed up for me. If god is real he / she / it is one twisted evil fucker.
Who doesnt think Piers Morgan is a fool he is always on an ego trip only listens to his own voice 🙄😂 Andrew Gold is a true gem authentic honest and amazing to listen too covers really interesting subjects that people want to hear about long may he continue with his great work love from Inverness Scotland 🦕❤️
I normally agree with Mr. Dawson, But… when he calls Piers Morgan a fool, I Totally, Absolutely AGREE with him.
Ah yes, Richard Dawson.
Amazing Andrew , what a scoop, and great to see that Richard is still firing on all cyllinders, great respecful conversation with a true legend x
Chris Shelton was wearing a T-shirt with the print: "God made me an atheist. Don't question his wisdom." 😃💗
🤣
No his mother made him a twat because she is also a twat.
... Whimsical Indeed 😂
QUESTION: richard claims that trans goes against biology and thus, wrong but why does he support homosexuality? Does that not go against biology?
Like, its scientifically proven.that the correct sexes to get together are males and females for our genes to pass on
So, why is Richard not against homosexuality?
Anyone?
Love it !.
"Piers Morgan is a fool" - never a truer word spoken; Dawkins nails it again.
A cheap shot from Dawkins
@@timphillips9954 Cheap shot saying that PM is just that.. Your are correct... He should of made it more than a sentence... Continued to explain the reasons as to why....
Then Again, Cheap is what cheap gets.
So, Piers Morgan IS a fool.
I'd personally use stronger language. Morgan is frequently intentionally malicious in pursuit of a pay packet. Never forget that he was behind the horrendous phone hacking scandal in the 90s. Was that the act of a devout Christian man? Morgan is scum.
@@Rhythmattica Piers Morgan is not the fool. The fools are those who follow him and watch his drivelling rubbish!
And yet, he lets himself be interviewed by Piers. I think that's a bit hypocritical.
Really enjoyable conversation from this listener's perspective. Polite, casual, genuine--like meeting Dawkins over a beer. Great stuff!
Dawkins is the master of - Less Is More - He never over stretches. If he doesnt understand he says, I don't understand. He also uses very few words
Master of freemasonry!
I was already a fan of Dawkins, but, "I can't resist Stephen Fry" upped my admiration of him 10-fold. Stephen Fry is a global treasure, and anyone who realises this is good people! 😏👌🏻
Now, that is how to interview someone properly. Great job, Andrew. Richard Dawkins is articulate and brilliant as usual. What an inspiration.
Oh, how I miss Christopher Hitchins.
I really miss Christopher Hitchins
Both Hitchens and Sam Harris both grew to dislike Dawkins. And Dawkins picking and choosing which monothesims are worse is just childish and derives from his bigotry. They are all horrid. Dawkins manages to be both anti-science and bigoted when it coms to trans as well. Dawkins is on these small venues because he was rightly cancelled. The large atheist forum, and most universities have pretty barred him good reason
@@teo2975 If you think so, but just a suggestion, try researching a bit better whilst reading Dawkins Obituary to Hitchens.
He was entertaining, but far less of a good discussion partner. The problem with people like CH is that they're far too radical to achieve their goals. I compare him to people like Jordan Peterson or that annoying guy who thinks he's the smartest being in the universe... what's his name again... shapiro or something like that They stand behind a few points that are hard to reason with so they gather up a following and become an impressive force in the media... but they have their flaws, personal and otherwise. No matter whether you go too far to the left or too far to the right (in political terms), you're crossing lines that shouldn't be.
Even Dawkins has had his moments, but still wherever he goes, he has the moral high-ground and whether you agree or disagree with the bloke, he just demands respect. I cannot say the same of CH. But again, he certainly was entertaining and hopefully made a few people think about all the garbage that society has been feeding them.
@@teo2975 the radicals may have cancelled Dawkins... I don't know because I'm not a radical atheist... but Dawkins was never cancelled. The guy got a stroke and took a step back.
And radical atheists are in my opinion no better than religious people. Stop trying to convince people that you are right and they are wrong. Eventually the truth will come out and if not, then so be it.
I like the freedom to believe (or not) in what I want. I'm not bothering anyone with it (unless I'm asked) and I like the same in return. The world would be a much nicer place if both believers and non-believers would take that stance.
When I was a kid I asked my father where lightning came from, he told me it was the clouds bumping into each other, causing sparks. I think this is how religion begins, son asks father something, father doesn't know, so makes something up.
I suppose in an over-simplified way it is, certainly more accurate than " God's wrath" which was the religious explanation for thousands of years.
My mother used to tell us when we were scared of thunder that it was god moving his furniture around
Yes, religion like catholic Islam Muslims have started when to control humans lives for a leader to live off the people's fear
You are so lucky to have sat in the same room and spoken to the genius: Richard Dawkins. I have been watching your channel for a couple of years. I’ve been reading Dawkins for decades. Well done on snagging this interview. You know you’ve made it when Richard Dawkins gives you the time of day. Well done!
He's just a man . Nothing special
Riiiiiiiiight. I’m sure there’s special people in your life too. And I’m sure you’re not delusional about their humanness either. Put a lid on your superiority and move on.
He is not a genius. He is a fool and a charlatan. Believe in GOD
That must mean Piers Morgan has made it and is held in high esteem by Mr Dawkins.
I don't feel like Dawkins is actually a genius. He's just someone who has learned and studied hard and is great at conveying those thoughts. He just speaks common sense and most of the science that comes up is basic knowledge for anyone who has done university level biology. It probably goes over many people's heads who don't understand it
We are so fortunate to have Richard Dawkins. He (and the other three 'Horsemen') has given us a rational approach to life
and, indeed, such an articulate presenter
Denis Noble, a distinguished biologist and former professor of his, effectively refuted many aspects of his beliefs.
While Piers Morgan may be a fool, that doesn't necessarily validate Richard's approach. However, it's worth noting that Richard's explanation for the emergence of religion is weak, and exploring alternative perspectives like those presented by Rene Girard, who is not religious himself, might provide a more insightful understanding.
@@destruction1928Why should we accept that the good professor is correct and Dawkins is wrong? There seem to be a vast array of well-qualified people who endorse Dawkins’s views.
@@destruction1928Why is that worth noting? It sounds like merely your opinion. On what basis should I consider your view to have any validity?
@@kyoglesage YYour view of the world is wrong. Einstein's theory of relativity was only observed 100 years after his proposition. Dawkins and his crew put too much emphasis on evidence and observation because of their dislike of religious people. Besides, your argument is totally against the scientific method - the notion that 'if many people agree with me, that means I'm correct.' You need to reevaluate and conduct deeper research. By the way, Sam Harris is wrong too. Read René Girard.
I love the fact that Dawkins says "I don't know": both as an honest reaction and a way of not being chivvied down the rabbit hole.
It's a sad truth today that not having a strong opinion on everything is seen as a negative or weakness or a cop out. In actual fact it's demonstrates humility and honesty and should be encouraged to prevent any one of us commenting on topics we aren't expperts on. Science thrives on the "I don't know".
If I was Dawkins, I would be thinking « how did I get myself into this »
We lost our father in June 🥲❤️
He’s with us all the time but only in memories
Richard Dawkins one of my only living heroes. Guy is a prime example of class, morals and reason.
So is mine, his book put in words what I always felt is true, when you listen there are no personal subjectiv statements, always fact followed by examples.. he showed me how to see what ppl say and I never hesitate to say I dont know, I will see data and make my mind then..fact dont care about feelings and I want my son to be like that in his life even if you are not scientist.. In my mind he is above all due his personality.. hope he live long and give us more books!🙋❤️🇨🇿
You should probably say "scientific morals". It's so easy to confuse things otherwise.
I love his theory that aliens - a high intelligent, high tech'l race, long, long ago - came to earth and designed, seeded earth with all the different life forms;
that is his alternative theory to how life here started/abio genesis.
By declaring that, he gave the nod to 'intelligent design' - as promoted by many theists
I lost all respect for Richard Dawkins with his stance for getting mandatory covid jabs.
@@johnlennox-pe2nq Nope. You'd still have to explain who "created" the aliens...
Good interview. Especially impressive how politely Dawkins fields Andrew's limited knowledge about his own questions (heaven, wormholes, evolution, etc.). Never says "that's ridiculous", although he looked tempted a few times. Kudos.
He wouldn't do it to his face. He probably will ridicule him at another interview with someone else. Just like he was polite to Piers Morgan during the interview with him, but was belittling Piers during this interview. Not very impressive!
Now, there's a diplomatic response if I ever did see one, and yes, you are right. 😁
@@aajiz1I don't think that likely at all. Andrew was a very different interviewer than Piers - I just watched that interview.
Piers took a very cocky and attacking tone, often cutting Richard off mid sentence. Richard fielded the questions very well remaining polite and answering Piers' questions thoughtfully. Piers' conduct was certainly not one entitling him to intellectual respect from Richard beyond the interview room itself. Piers was asking to be called a fool. He came across as a fool to me, too.
The interview with Andrew and Richard was much more chatty and fun in tone, seemingly enjoyed by both. I imagine they parted on good terms. They seemed to show a genuine respect for one another, not just politeness.
I also don't think Richard thinks everyone who asks questions that Richard knows the answer to is a fool. Richard is an educator and like all educators worthy of the name he meets others at their level of knowledge and lifts them up, not puts them down.
I'd be extremely surprised after this interview if Richard badmouthed Andrew. If ever he does please come back here and post a link to it, because it would change my opinion of Richard Dawkins profoundly.
@@Amy-ky5wr I agree. I dislike PM's interview tactics immensely. It's rare for him to truly listen to his interviewees and understand where they're coming from. He interrupted RD at every turn, and I don't think he actually understood nor cared to do so at any point during the interview.
I think his audience is in on this bc they like his style more than the substance. Perhaps RD regretted going on his show. I appreciate AG in this video for at least listening to RD to finish his points bf asking. There's no rule that says the interviewer must have equal knowledge or know a lot about the subject for which he is interviewing. She/he needs to let the interviewee, the expert, unfold the content rather than grab the spotlight the way PM did with RD.
@@aajiz1piers Morgan interview and this interview is total opposite. Did you ever saw any interview where piers Morgan let the guest to speak? He always repeat the same line again and again. On that interview Richard get no time to say him fool. He is not a diplomatic man. Very straight forward but not a bully
Richard Dawkins is our national treasure. So courteous & such a high intellect. Stephen Fry is also such a light with tremendous talus. But Christopher Hitchens was the most articulate genius of all. Miss you enormously Hitch. Nobody will or can replace him ever. RIP Hitch learned massively from you.
I love and miss Hitch, imagine him articulating on religion, culture etc. today 🥰🥰
I concur
Is he ? Wasn't the model he put around anti religion one that brought down just the 1 religion & another abrahamic religion replaced it ? Were the artefacts of than successful prohibition simply thought crime elements ? Since the model was proven to be police state compatible isn't the thought crime that says we cannot explain 'A WOMAN' by a biological definition just the same original design that dawkins caused religious free speech be shut down with ?
So like so many you still cannot recognise how this post truth thought policing era came about ?
@@cameroncameron2826 WHAT The CRAP iS yOUr BS abOUt? Leave thinking to the experts, dunderklumpin!!
@@cameroncameron2826that is a stunning load of abject dribble. Well done for spinning such an incoherent load of crap. You are ill lettered.
Rob Thomas said it best "I'm not afraid of getting older, I'm one less day from dying young."
Brilliant! It’s so refreshing to hear an intelligent conversation that doesn’t devolve into a clash of egos! Andrew, you have a real gift for interviewing!
aw thanks! i guess the trick is to just really enjoy the moment.
You are a gifted interviewer, Andrew. As self-effacing as you are, your own mind must be pretty astonishing. I too heard that change in J. Peterson’s vocabulary (by the way). Anyway, I deeply enjoyed this conversation, and there were laughs! Thank you.
@@ardentynekent2099 It's not only J. Peterson. As Dawkins rightly said, we all subconsciously change our vocabulary when we talk to children or teenagers - and I can add when we talk to uneducated people, or to people who are not fluent in our language. We want to make sure our audience understands us! A scientist will write differently if it's a report on a peer-reviewed scientific publication and differently if he or she's writing for a popular magazine. When you're interviewing a person of high intellectual calibre, on one side you still don't want to bore or alienate your audience, and make sure you're understood, but at the same time you want to put yourself on the same level and be respected by your interlocutor. It's a subtle balance, and a good interviewer has to achieve it.
Just discovered this channel. Andrew has an intellectual innocence and curiosity about him which makes it a joy to watch this interview
Lol, nice way of saying he's thick.
I loved this Andrew! I've seen Richard Dawkins on so many podcasts but this was the most human and most warm of all those interviews. This is what you're great at! Well done!
Here here Great interview
He's not generally a warm person. Unfriendly, distant and angry. Perhaps age has mellowed him slightly.
And Aetheism hasn't murdered almost 200 million of people in the last hundred years alone? More than all the religious wars in history put together! Terrible, hideous things have been done to people in the name of "there is no God! " Aetheism is evil!
Well done?! Be careful Tom Cruise doesn’t hear this. You’ll be cleaning lavatories with a toothbrush for the next billion years. 😆😂🤣🪥🚽
Its his quality as an interviewer, I guess.
When I was young I couldn't accept not existing and wanted to live for ever. Now I'm 69 I have no fear and therefore the idea of a sleep without disturbance sounds rather wonderful.
This is the BIG ONE! Dawkins! Bravo Andrew!
I'm making a pot of chai to enjoy while listening. Eeee -
I am ridiculously excited about this.
Yes, this is a huuuuuge score for Andrew.
I love long-form podcasts like this where everyone gets to finish their sentences. Top notch conversation :)
I agree with you! I loathe the short attention span nonsense of everything now. Who wants to hear only the bullet points from the loudest bully-style speakers? Not me. I’m happy to see I’m not the only one 😃
The most interesting stuff is spoken lightly and in full sentences. Not the headline.
It is always a pleasure listening to Dawkins. He was one of the main voices of reason that helped me out of religion. I owe him a lot.
You owe him nothing. He is a charlatan and a phony. Do not be deluded by this sophisticated snake oil salesman!
May i ask why you needed to get "out of religion" and how this improved your life? I ask because as a theologian, physicist and science teacher i can't imagine how getting "out of religion" could possibly improve my life.
I know of many forms of organized religion from which getting out of would be good and healthy.
I'm just curious here.
@@starkfels-diespielefestung2680someone being a theologian and a physician is a contradiction in terms.
@@Vasilefs_Terranorum
Nonsense. Why would this be a contradiction? Is this really what you believe?
@@Vasilefs_TerranorumA theologian is just someone who seeks to understand the nature of religion, they don't have to have any faith themselves, in fact most don't
I love how concise Dawkins is. You can see Andrew asking a question and going "oh he responded to that with a single word."
Richard Dawkins is a wonderful person. He is criticized for being cold, but he isn't. He is warm-hearted. He just doesn't indulge fantasies that take people away from reality. That's not just an intellectual commitment, it is the only way to be sincerely and fully human.
I’d say rather that he indulges in fantasies with the acknowledgement that they are fantasies. He could read lord of the rings and love it very much but that doesn’t mean he will confuse middle earth with actual earth lol
Richard Dawkins is a very warm man with a highly developed sense of humour. In many ways he reminds me of Stephen Hawking. They both followed the rigours of scientific method to find a tangible truth, but both were happy to parody themselves.
Dawkins is a liar, a coward and very good at running away from William Lane Craig.
❤
love is blind - he is your guru and idol !
Wonderful show. I love Richard Dawkins. Amazing mind and has given so much to humanity. Great interview.
He is a nice man but has offered nothing to humanity but doom and gloom. Do not be fooled by this snake-oil salesman!!!
Well done to the interviewer who actually ASKED questions and the let Dawkins actually answer without interruption, and also have humility. Enjoyed this much more than the interview with Piers Morgan that was continuously provoking and had an agenda in mind. 😊
i can see how Piers keeps the speed and topics moving quickly. Im on the fence on if it is wrong or different style (pros and cons).. i do think both interviews explored very interesting points.
I don't see how it can be hard with Dawkins. He is pretty succinct. No word salad or runons
Richard Dawkins has a agenda too, it just appears to be less obvious if he is in a setting where most around him may agree with him or at least greatly admire him.
I agree that the interviewer here was humble, but I can not at all see how anyone can claim Richard Dawkins to be. I think he is extremely arrogant, but yes so is Piers Morgan.
@@ProgressIsTheOnlyEvolution Just consider it real, that R.Dawkins is not 20 anymore, and REALLY did some good things during those many years - and some people realize that. Maybe these people just want to express their respect for R.Dawkins accomplishments. To say 'extremely arrogant' is as far from the truth, as it could get. I wonder, If you could elaborate, what you would expect. Maybe you would like to pad Albert Einstein on the back, saying: "What's up, old buddy? How's it hanging?"
@@GetZappéd1974 What good has Dawkins done worthy of a lot of respect?
Extremely arrogant means arrogant to a very large degree, and it is very arrogant to claim not do have fear of death, know there is no God or anything which last beyond the brain against countless of testimonies, to claim to KNOW something can come out of nothing,
He even himself admit he has a ego, and perhaps the only really humble thing I have heard him say is acknowledging this ego and that it wont remain.
ua-cam.com/users/shorts-YXia0SsK84
He also wrote the "selfish gene" which again is a title suggesting he is aware of his arrogance.
ua-cam.com/video/mB6Rl9lN32k/v-deo.html
His evolutionary claims are also arrogant, such as claiming that there is no evidence of anything beyond the physical, when testimony is ALSO a part of what evidence is.
His claim that it goes against the spirit of science to believe in anything spiritual is in itself a arrogant claim and a oxymoron, considering that the word spirit occur in the spirit of science,
and that science is about finding truths which has not yet been found, with the evolution theory having FAR LESS evidence to back it up than the notion of existence beyond the human brain.
He ironically do not believe everything came about by chance like Alex O'Connor, but rather by a natural selection out of nothing, without having a source to do the selecting.
Also in his claim to know the Book of Mormon is a obvious fake, which he claims the Bible and Quoran isn't because they are ancient.
But he has nothing to back up any of these claims with other than it is his opinion or belief.
Its especially his manerism and complete emotional dismissal of other options without evidence one way or the other which is extremely arrogant.
Look at him here with Brandon Flowers, none of the people here agree with each other, but the only one being rude, arrogant and disrespectful here is Richard Dawkins. If Richard Dawkins is not arrogant, then who is? He is one of the most arrogant people I have ever listened to.
ua-cam.com/video/W-pr2PL-e9Y/v-deo.html
The main difference in psychology of males and females is due to the fact that males take 10 minutes to reproduce and females take 9 months, which leads to very different breeding strategies with huge effects on general human behaviour.
Congratulations, Andrew, for having one of the most interesting conversations with Richard Dawkins I've heard in a good while. It was nice to hear things he may not have come up with with any other journalist. You have fast become one of my most favourite podcasters. Hope you get 1 milliom subs in the next few years. You are earning it by leaps & bounds 💛
Great interview. I am an atheist, and yes, I am a fan of Richard Dawkins. He's brilliant, and he comes across as thoughtful, honest, and unassuming. He is truly a treasure. We are lucky to have him among us.
Nah he comes across as a simple bible basher, he doesn't believe deep down what he is saying I believe?
@@Neil-Aspinall Its not your fault
@@Interdiction Ahhhhh what that I can think for myself?
I feel sorry for you being an atheist. God bless you. GOD BLESS AMERICA!!!!!!
@@americanpatriots4868 I don't feel sorry for you being such a bigot and hypocrite. You are hell on Earth.
I respect and admire Richard Dawkins. Intelligent and a man of reason, but also a kind and honest human being⭐️
I have seen him launch into a young American student who dared to contradict him with such viciousness the word "kind" was a long way away from his consciousness.
@@jacquelinedesanctis7082 I quite like some of his books but I don't understand his fixation on belief, or to put it more accurately, other people's beliefs. Though I'm not religious myself, I find it hilarious how atheism has become a belief system in itself- Atheism+ etc. Religion was the driving force behind the abolition of slavery, it helped/helps communities bond, it gave a certain code to societies. As an anthropologist, Dawkins must know that it's a human trait to believe or wish to believe, something greater than oneself. He's not exactly being brave or dying on some hill by being an atheist in the West, he should stick to defending nature over nurture rather than some crusade (irony) against what other people wish to believe.
@@stephenmcdonagh2795 he is a fool like Piers.
Both are Aries - "it's just me, myself and I."
@@davidcohen26 Says the guy who believes the position of a star ( which is probably already a dead star as light takes time to travel) at his birth it what writes his life.
@@stephenmcdonagh27951. Dawkins's fixation on the people's beliefs is that people's baseless beliefs impact hugely on society, wars, legislation, people's actions. The more thta critical thinking is explained to people, rhe less religious they tend to become.
And 2. Atheism is not a belief system, you don't understand what atheism is, it's NON belief.
Atheists may well have other beliefs, but that's separate from atheism. You should learn what non belief actually means.
Andrew, this is hands down your best interview that I've seen you do so far. It was fascinating. Light humored and far from a boring interview of what is probably one of the most brilliant minds of our time. You were very prepared and asked the questions were ones I wanted to ask and so much more. I believe Dawkins enjoyed your questions and did not seen the slightest bit perturbed by any of your inquiries. I almost expect this of most intellectuals. This may go down as one of your proudest moments in your career. I don't know.... you may be capable of so much more. Im a newer subscriber. Just plainly put, Freaking Awesome Dude!
One of the most brilliant minds of our time? You're very fucking easily impressed.
@@elliotmoriarty7536so who do you consider the greatest minds of our time?
Dawkins is a true world treasure for humanity. Long live, Richard Dawkins!
No, thank you.
I'm afraid I disagree. He is a pleasant man and well spoken, but unfortunately deluded. He does not believe in his creator. I feel sorry for him to be honest. The Bible warns us of people like him and all the naysayers and doubters on UA-cam. Do not be fooled by him Mitch. God bless you. GOD BLESS AMERICA.
He's only partly right
@@thevoiceofamerica2389 If you are using the bible to critique anyone, then you are the one who is deluded.
@@thevoiceofamerica2389Yeah this guy Dawkins is Deluded....'They thought they were Wise, but they were Fools' . God is the Judge of everyone ...even Egomaniacs like him.
Always love Dawkins' humility and his calm, measured reasoning
Humility? No. Arrogance and pomposity, yes.
Absolutely right on reply!
What.....he's one of the most arrogant men I've ever come across - and a bully (just look at his tweets during Covid)
Humility? Arrogant as hell! I don't know where he is taking that he is reasonable and logical? How he could be so sure? That just different level of believing. I love sience and as that one theory what was "true" yesterday might be proven false tomorrow... and relay on Darwin evolution theory is f*&ck up, when it was exposed that he actually falsified some of his "discoveries"! There are some new updates and still too many unknown. What he is saying it's just other believe, many falsehoods, which he is saying as facts, but they are not facts.
@@helencheung2537 Which of his books made you form this opinion of him?
What a wonderful interview! I'm so thrilled to have come across this one, thank you..
Glad you enjoyed it!
"I'm seeing a snail having sex with a starfish"
"Well you're wrong." 😂😂
Jeez, I loved this interview! Thank you so much Andrew Gold whoever you are - never heard of you before today but I sure am going to watch more of your work. 🤩 Dawkins is very reserved and yet with you he was relaxed and clearly enjoying himself and showed that there is a ton more to bring out of him - probably by someone else - but the depths remain to be mined for the world to hear him...Heartfelt thanks to both of you!
My mother was never a religious person but she got cancer a few years ago. My uncle is a Reverend and my mother got baptised after her chemotherapy and it changed her outlook she found religion and started going to church. Her cancer returned and she deteriorated rapidly with only two months to live. Her new faith gave her tremendous strength and comfort. She accepted her life was coming to an end and her fear went away. It does give comfort and gave me comfort too. My Reverend uncle was at the hospital in the last hours blessed my mother with holy water and prepared her for eternal life with the Lord.
Sorry to hear about your mother, but so happy for the holy water and eternal life..... yeah, holy water and eternal life.... makes sense no?
If you were logical you would be an atheist. I hate Piers Morgan too.
Nice to hear Richard talk about modern issues, and happy to note that he shares my views on a lot of nonsense that we have to endure these days
Amen
most of the New Atheists back this ''nonsense'' because atheists are by nature Left Wing - as in communism - materialism-atheistic Marxism... as in China
ua-cam.com/video/X-cxUYmxiTs/v-deo.html
What Richard failed to mention is that many doctors and scientists support the idea of gender fluidity and there being over one hundred genders.
Many once reputable medical publications refer to birthing people. So much for finding the truth by following the science
I have no idea why many Christians do not like Dawkins. Sure, he disagrees with their religion, but he's such a kind, respectful, loving person just like their prophet they believe in. Not to throw shade, but it wouldn't be the first time they were hypocritical.
Andrew that was an exceptional interview. Well done 👍🏻
Dawkins is one of the most intelligent people I've ever listened to
Is he ? Wasn't the model he put around anti religion one that brought down just the 1 religion & another abrahamic religion replaced it ? Were the artefacts of than successful prohibition simply thought crime elements ? Since the model was proven to be police state compatible isn't the thought crime that says we cannot explain 'A WOMAN' by a biological definition just the same original design that dawkins caused religious free speech be shut down with ?
So like so many you still cannot recognise how this post truth thought policing era came about ?
I love you Richard Dawkins. You remind me so much of my grandad who I had wonderful, intelligent and fascinating conversations with and I miss him greatly. You are truly an intelligent man. I love your work, have learnt so much from your books. I wish there were more people with your knowledge and wisdom.
Love God, not Richard.
Sorry you have such a bad relationship with your parents
Scrooge -Dawkins has written books based on lies lies lies- just to make money What a coward for attacking innocent religious people !!
DAWKINS IS A LIAR AND A CLOWN
Nasty reply when I never even mentioned parents. Actually one parent died of cancer when I was very young. Not that it's any of your business. My grandad was intellectual and I miss him and our philosophical conversations dearly. I'm an intelligent woman, an avid reader. Don't judge me when you don't know me.
I was 4 years old when my brothers told me there was no Santa Cause. After that no way to believe in any supernatural thing.
This guy Andrew Gold is phenomenal. Such a calm and intelligent interviewer. How is he not on prime tv
Never let him slip away.
He should stay his own man, Piers Morgan's more their cockwomble.
He was and realised telalivision was just that.
Dawkins is fantastic. Very nice to hear him interviewed.
Very interesting conversation! I've never heard of him, but he was very interesting and very reflective. I like people who are able to discuss complicated issues without high pitched voices.
He’s a scholar…..he also used to DEBATE a lot as regards belief in a god etc, things like that……
Never heard of him? How the hell do you go through life and never hear of one of the most prominent scientists in the world?
@@jackwhitbread4583 A British biologist is not likely to turn up on a whim in my reading and he doesn’t figure all over the media just because you know him 😉
@@purpledragonfly313 He's not just any old British biologist, though. He's a bestselling author and one of the leading writers of popular science books. His 1976 book, _The Selfish Gene,_ topped a public poll of the most inspiring science books of all time. And it introduced the world to the word "meme", which is a word that you _might_ have heard.
Anyway, now you have heard of him, you can buy all of his books and read every one of them. They are all well worth reading. :)
@@jackwhitbread4583 . I imagine this is a perfect example of how we are becoming more and more separated from each other due to algorithms. Unless people make a concerted effort to break out of their information silos, they can be fed articles, videos, music, lifestyle choices and political opinions that coincide with their biases.
When people follow only the recommended info streams, they can easily become disconnected with reality. Especially in politics, unscrupulous operators will ruthlessly feed confirmation bias, which has led to the mad culture wars we are seeing at the moment. Many of the 'viral' issues that consume so many people and provoke so much outrage and anger, in fact have NO direct personal effect on their lives. Manufactured outrage is VERY lucrative to media companies and content creators.
The corporate financial hijacking of our economies effects EVERYONES, yet serious debate and discussion of this issue is rarely spoken of. Gender issues, however which is a highly personal matter between medical professionals and their patients, has become a constant media war, sucking all the oxygen from the room, and taking a disproportionate amount of attention away from really important matters.
My wife in ICU dying of small cell brain cancer spent her last 10 days living on a machine with a breathing tube. The last 4 days of that 10 she couldn't even respond to anyone at all, just laid there getting worse by the hour in a comma state. On the 10th day, the day she died, I stood by her bed held her hand and told her we'd see each other again. No joke, after I said that she opened her eyes wide looked me right in the face with a smile and nodded her head yes. Last time she seen me, last time I seen her alive and I'll never forget her response. Later that afternoon she passed on, I went away in peace and she died in peace. This is not a made up story, this in fact happened just as I said it did. You all can believe what you want, I'm convinced life goes on after this worldly existence.
Convinced by what evidence? (The story you told I believe. Yet it isn't evidence life goes on. It's just evidence someone _believed_ it does. Nobody disputes that some people _believe_ it. It's just we don't have good reason to think life actually goes o.n)
@@majmage see that's where you're wrong, she didn't even believe in a afterlife. She thought like you, when you die you're just dead and that's it.
@@garyr7027 You have evidence she did believe it though. Maybe her entire life she didn't, but people about to die are at their most desperate and irrational, right? So perhaps she genuinely began to believe it. Or perhaps she knew it would comfort you, and her last act was out of love towards you. Either way, I'm not wrong because what you're describing still only indicates her belief; it doesn't indicate it's true.
@@majmage she was my wife so yeah I know what she believed and didn't believe. However, point taken, at deaths door you'd be amazed how all a sudden change of mind happens, which should be a huge wake up call that something is obviously there many ignore until that time comes. You can justify it all you want though and require physical proof which there is none and never was meant to be and it can't be stuck under a microscope for proof. I'm fully persuaded there's another dimension past our existence here, and we'll all know it in the end. We are more than just a physical existence, we are also spiritual beings, that's where our emotions comes from. The fact my wife responded on her last day was something that shouldn't have ever happened considering her state, and I take it as a sign cause it was biologically impossible... she was braindead from cancer. To be honest I was freaked out over it, yet glad at the same time... very mixed emotions going on at that moment.
@@garyr7027 Why are you saying "something is obviously there"? I feel like you probably understand (and presumably don't disagree) that minds on the verge of dying are at one of their _least rational_ states. So them changing their minds isn't an indication something is obviously there.
Knowing truth requires evidence, so if you're saying this idea is beyond our ability to have evidence of, you're saying it cannot be known. At least I assume that's what you meant by "stick it under a microscope", because I'm not literally asking you for that, I'm asking you _what evidence?_ It doesn't seem like you have a basis for this belief.
We don't get to just invent the truth when things are unexplained. So if what you're describing was an event that seemed impossible, but you don't have evidence of the proper explanation, I think you should just be honest and admit you don't know.
Came here for "Piers Morgan is a fool." Thank you, first smile of the day!
I love how Dawkins is like "you know that?" About humans not coming from baboons. Richard is fun and very straightforward and I respect him so much for that. He simply speaks very directly and I enjoy his answers to dumb questions as well as smart questions.
As an atheist, I'm not scared of not existing after death, but I'm depressed that I won't live long enough to see what we have in store for the future long after I'm dead.
be glad you weren't born in the 1800s
You are assuming that the future will be good and that you would want to see it.
@@PointNemo9 I'd rather assume it's going to be good.
@@elirien4264 Why?
@@PointNemo9 It's an assumption based on the progress of science and technology over the past few thousand years, so I'm certain it's a pretty sound assumption. And yes, good or bad, I want to see it.
I actually think this was quite beautiful to watch. This may appear as an odd comment but I think the unassuming naivety and self effacing but inquisitive nature of Andrew combined with the wisdom and at times clinical nature of Dawkins works to make fascinating viewing and gives for a much more user friendly, intellectual discussion. Great work, subscribed.
I find myself so envious of you, Andrew. Thank you so much for having him on. He is a treasure. This is an excellent interview and you actually just let him speak. I would have hardly been able to form questions I am such a fan.
Envy is unnecessary even if used as a figure of speech. I would never nor have I ever typed the words envy/envious/jealous to describe a feeling towards another.
I'm envious of Andrew, in the same room as Dawkins and a full head of black hair. That's the dream.
Totally share your feelings mate;)
@@sjohnson65456 Envy is a natural human emotion, most social animals have envy and show jealousy
Screw those people and screw IGN for thinking that we care
I once had a lung infection which resulted in me blacking out. There I was, one moment felling light headed, the next moment a friend was bent over me asking if I was OK. In the couple of minutes the black out lasted there was nothing and what I took from this was that death was not a thing to fear, just the journey to that point.
.. I fell off a tree when I was ten. I didn't even feel my body hitting the ground. I passed out for a few hours .. the next thing I knew was in bed and I remember a searing excruciating pain through my back as I tried to get up. So I did missed schooling for a couple of weeks.
So that's my take, too .. I mean, if I go I want to go while in my sleep. I worry not of being dead .. but of suffering/ in great pains before dying.
Until being fitted with a pacemaker, I suffered from blackouts which occurred without warning and I realised how it was possible to just drop dead as people sometimes do.I was fortunate; my heart restarted. Had it not, I’d never have known. My GP told me recently that I was lucky to be alive (heart again) from which I took it that I was living on borrowed time. The idea of death’s proximity doesn’t bother me. I”ll just no longer be there as I haven’t been every night of my life. I’ve never believed in God, heaven or hell and won’t start now.
1. One of my favourite reflections on life and death was from an anonymous woman on a scary long-distance flight who said: 'If I am to die, what a fool I was to refuse the dessert.'
2. Richard Dawkins' patience and forbearance in accommodating this Andrew Gold 'interview' is truly admirable.
I also think Dawkins is demonstrating self control and great patience. Dawkins has such a lofty intellect and some of Gold's questions are worded clumsily; he seems not to have prepared very well. The interviewer is lovely and at times very good but he is all over the place asking juvenile questions.
Shame you couldn't have the courtesy and politeness to not post this comment.
Andrew did his best with a very high profile guest. If you didn't enjoy it, no problem - just leave quietly.
@@dmorgsev - quite the opposite. Praise was merely afforded to Richard Dawkins
@@justindaley2460Nah, the dig was evident. I'm not taking a side, just saying...
His questions were a bit too elementary. I found many quite boring.
Thank you Andrew Gold for providing elevated debates on philosophical questions, and especially this one with Richard Dawkins.
Brilliant Brilliant 😊😊😊 I felt RD was a little spikey at times, but Andrew just floated over it (a la Theroux) Such an interesting interview, jam-packed with highlights 👏👏👏
Glad you enjoyed it!!
Dawkins is hilarious without trying to be. I also loved Andrew's charming plea for solace in eternity, and Dawkins having none of it.
From the beginning of your conversation .. my favourite English word.
Ellipsism: that vague feeling of sadness that you won’t be around to see how history turns out.
I love Professor Richard Dawkins.❤
This is extremely unusual! An interviewer who is actually more intelligent than he pretends to be. Dawkins, as always, is highly impressive and has thought a lot of things through.
I didn't think I could admire Richard Dawkins any more than I already did, until he described Piers Morgan as a fool. I wish there were a few more like Richard. God bless him!! 😂
Dawkins caved to the muslim mob and is now scared for saying anything against Allah....if Piers is a fool, Dawkins is a f#ag
Yeah untill you realise he's an Epstein acolyte. When all we are, are gene replicating systems, it can really lead to some fcked up ends
I thought he must have called him a fagg.
'he described Piers Morgan as a fool.' ... sadly Piers was probably flattered
QUESTION: richard claims that trans goes against biology and thus, wrong but why does he support homosexuality? Does that not go against biology?
Like, its scientifically proven.that the correct sexes to get together are males and females for our genes to pass on
So, why is Richard not against homosexuality?
Anyone?
Was looking forward to this one, & it didn't disappoint! Unlike Jordan Peterson, you allowed Richard to talk & shine his knowledge upon us. Well handled Andrew. 🤠👍
PARDON? DIDNT HE LET JORDAN PETERSON?
@@tru2harris998 I'm sure you have a point to make, just wish I knew what it was!
@@tru2harris998 he's talking about the interview Peterson did with Dawkins, Peterson was incredibly rude, would not let Richard talk and was a downright bully.
@@jackwhitbread4583Who is surprised?
@@jackwhitbread4583 That's not how I remember it. I do remember that Dr. Peterson talked a lot - too much - when it would have been more sensible to allow Dr. Dawkins to speak more, but my recollection is that he seemed to have a great deal of respect for Dr. Dawkins, and I don't recall him being a "bully" towards him. Would you be able to refresh my memory on that?
Genius, always loved the frank, open honesty of Dr Dawkins, but I do miss Hitch as I am sure does Richard.
Richard just comforts me by his sheer lack of bullshit and his joy of curiosity of the natural world. Enjoyed this interview immensely. Great!
Incredible that you got Sir Richard and it was really brave of you to interview him, I would have been so intimidated by his great intellect. Really great interview, asking the things we want to know. 🎉
Great intellect? Well . . . everything is relative.
Sir? That simply means he has done his job for his handlers. Amazing that the proles think so highly of these people and then you wonder why they have always referred to you all as"it." Russell was a pervert by the way, who got the go ahead from as high as the royals to study the effects of pre-puberal sex in children. Read a bit and stop worshipping these sick people and their fake titles...perverts are all the way at the top..they like little children. Let us not even discuss the Huxleys or the the Darwins who bred with the same family(Wedgewoods) for five generations thinking they can have the perfect being, ended up with a bunch of crazy children.
@@helencheung2537 I wonder, this isn't intended in a confrontational way, I'm truly curious, who would you considera great intellect? Are there any persons alive today you would consider fitting into that category?
Also, are you religious, and if so do you think that greatly impacts your regard for his intellect?
@@helencheung2537 he does have great intellect, it's a shame that you are such a bitter old hag.
Unless I've missed something (always possible) I don't think Richard is a knight yet.
This was absolutely fascinating. It's rare to see an interviewer actually hold their own with somebody like Dawkins (just in terms of keeping him interested) but this was engaging from start to finish. Subscribed!
Looked like a struggle to me. For myself, and both involved.
I can’t imagine how intense it would be to interview this man. Thank you.
I love the idea of Piers Morgan seeing the description in this video and getting all fired up, only to watch it and hear Richard Dawkins simply calling him a fool, and not wasting anymore time discussing the nob head, I think that will annoy Piers Morgan more than anything.
One thing I will always remember Mr Dawkins for, When the late Christopher Hitchens, seriously ill, took to the stage and spoke. His voice crackling at some parts.
When He finished Mr Dawkins embraced him, like the great friend that he was. Very sad.
At 4:00, Andrew asks, "If you could inject a serum into your mind or something that would make you believe the lie, just for comfort's sake, would you do that?" Richard answered no.
For me, such a serum does exist, and it's the drug LSD. I knew I was an atheist at the time of my earliest memories, and I've been so ever since except for one night. On that night, after taking LSD, I did think, "There must be something up there." I decided the next day that I would NEVER take LSD again. I'd learnt it could turn me into something I fundamentally wasn't, I wouldn't allow that to happen again, even though I continued using other recreational drugs for a few more years, and that night was one of the most blissful in my life.
Now it pisses me off to know that death is the end of me, but I live with it.
My mother was an atheist until the day she died. Even during horrific pancreatic cancer, surgery, and resulting spinal injury which made her last 6 months a nightmare. Still an atheist. Even when numerous unasked for religious people arrived in hospice to provide a last minute conversion. She spent her time with her family. No sky daddy required.
You were honoured Andrew! And you absolutely rose to the challenge. Great stuff!
Andrew seems a bit nervous and excitable. Would have liked more pauses for Richard to think and elaborate on intial statements.
"Have you got anything to comfort me?" "Yes....yes....not really. No." 💀
This is such a lovely conversation. The childlike wonder of Andrew is perfect.
Richard Dawkins made me an atheist thank God.
😂
Thank Richard 😂
@@user-hp7yz1zw8j I do, it was sarcasm
I think you mean "Thank Piers Morgan."
Hahahaha 😂 Hahahaha 😂 Hahahaha 😂 Hahahaha 😂 Hahahaha 😂 (douchebag)
I was quite taken by this podcast. Thank you for giving ME the confirmation of the comfort that I find in science. Many of the views expressed by both of you gentlemen resonate with my own. I would suggest that all humans just spend a lot more time thinking. This is after all, how we progress as a society. I have tremendous respect for thinkers such as yourselves.
Our pleasure!
Your status has definitely risen by interviewing a legend. Good work 👏
🎉!
The older I get, and the more I experience and the longer i live I , the more I relate to Dawkins. On quite a few issues. Admiration and respect.
Regarding the trans ‘issue’, after listening to this interview, I am now more convinced than ever that the confusion surrounding this topic is because of a failure of language. I think there is great confusion because our language hasn’t caught up to our thinking.
Gender is most definitely a separate thing to biological sex.
- Male and female refers to our biology/physiology.
- Masculine and feminine describes traits associated with sex.
- The identity of these traits is what we call gender.
So man and woman are terms referring to the traits associated with gender.
Whereas male and female are terms referring to the characteristics associated with sex.
The reason humans have separate sex and gender is because masculine and feminine traits are not exclusive to males and females, respectively. Some males have feminine traits and some females have masculine traits.
The issue becomes confusing when someone like Dawkins says “it’s not right that a man can say he’s a woman and therefore becomes a woman” (I’m paraphrasing)because that is not what is happening. What is happening is a biological MALE feels like a WOMAN because of the FEMININE traits they possess, therefore they are calling themselves a woman - NOTE woman, not female.
Thank you for this thoughtful comment, I was scrolling through to see if somebody had thought to make this point. I wonder how someone as wise and intelligent as Richard Dawkins cannot make this distinction. Of course no one simply gets up in the morning, and suddenly proclaim: I am now a biological (fe)male because I will it to be so.
We as humans are all on a spectrum, be it sexually, be it how feminine or masculine we are. Are we really not beyond telling people they should be - or behave - a certain way based on the composition of their bodies by now? I'm so tired of people gatekeeping a way of life they view to be theirs by birthright, simply by being born a certain way. We have no influence on what we are born as, but we can choose how we want to live our lives, thankfully.
So many of Dawkins' interviews revolve around us having one life to live and then ceasing to exist, so we need to make the best of it. Yet people choosing their gender, choosing how they wish to be seen and how they want to see themselves, seems to be a step too far. Even if this choice is hurting no one and greatly beneficial to the person making it. People do love to bring up safety concerns, thinking that if we 'allow' people to 'choose' to be either feminine or masculine, then suddenly people will be accosted in bathrooms. Well, people are already assaulted every couple minutes of every single day, and this has been so for many centuries. Bathrooms, locker rooms, dressing rooms. If you think that a pictogram on a door will keep assailants out, then you are mistaken. I'm very sorry that J.K. Rowling suffered domestic abuse, but this is not a relevant argument in the gender issue. It was not a trans perpetrator that did that.
Anyone on a journey to live outside of the societal norm, in whatever shape or form, is on a very hard road indeed. Instead of beating them down at every turn, let's aid them. We don't need religion to be kind, indeed - we need to find that kindness in ourselves. Calling the struggle of so many "insanity" is not a kindness.
What are feminine traits? And how would a man feels these traits?
except everyone would rather just call females women and males men, regardless of their masculine or feminine traits because its the easiest and most informative way of doing it. And no matter how feminine a man is (or vice versa) we would never have previously said it affected their gender, you could say they are acting like a woman but not that they are one, only now are people deciding to change that element of language, and yes you can change it but most dont think it should be because it doesn't actually help anyone. And I think feeling like you have the opposite to your sex gender traits to the point of wanting to have gender affirming surgery does just feel like something has gone horribly wrong with someone's feelings about their own gender/sex identity. As in they should be able to be as masculine or feminine as they like without resorting to changing their sex characteristics if they are separate from gender right?. I mean they have freedom to do what they want but i dont know if accepting it to the point of ignoring it leads to an actual cause of the problem not being solved. Because no matter what way you look at it, not having to have drug therapy or surgery to feel good about yourself is preferable.
No. It is a bunch of garbage.
The dictionary literally states that the definition of gender is: …used to refer to the condition of being physically male, female, or intersex (= having a body that has both male and female characteristics)
However, we will soon see all this change due to the pressures of transgender people believing that gender and sex are different. Less than 50 years ago sex and gender were interchangeable, as was the definition of someone who identified themselves as being transgender which was coined gender identity disorder but again has changed due to the political push towards accepting whatever people want to believe in.
Thank you for interviewing this giant of science. I have read all of his books. If the U.K were a real democracy we could elect intelligent people like Richard Dawkins to be our Head of State. Imagine President Dawkins.
Instead you got Boris and we got drumpf.
Thanks to idiots.
It would be awful
only corrupt people are elected tbh
@@darrenwithers3628compared to what?
Omg Andrew! Richard Dawkins - I clicked straight away, you guys talking is my dream interview!