Richard Dawkins says, Do not fear the big bad wolf

[Bronzeage]

Richard Dawkins on fairy tales: 'I think it's rather pernicious to inculcate into a child a view of the world which includes supernaturalism'

“Even fairy tales, the ones we all love, with wizards or princesses turning into frogs or whatever it was. There’s a very interesting reason why a prince could not turn into a frog – it's statistically too improbable.”

Dawkins has recently scheduled a tour of pre-schools, where he will give a series of lectures titled, "He's just a puppet, Elmo can't really talk."

Dr. Dawkins is Oxford Professor of No Fun at All was once quoted as saying he lost all faith in religion when he discovered his uncle had not in fact, "gotten his nose."

For myself, I think Dawkins does a disservice to the youth of the world. It was after reading the story of Little Red Ridinghood and how the woodsman chopped open the wolf to rescue her grandmother, I decided to attend medical school to become a surgeon, with a minor in forest management.

 

[Underseer]

I think he's barking up the wrong tree.

Feeding children obvious lies helps them in the long run. Many eventually figure out that if Santa Claus isn't real, then there's a chance Jesus isn't either.

 

[Joni-san]

Terry Pratchett has a really good argument on this matter.

 

[Bronzeage]

I wonder how Dawkins feels about Star Wars, where people can apparently sit comfortably in space ships without having to worry about floating around the cabin, not to mention this undefined "force" which allows certain people to manipulate objects and minds.

 

[braces_for_impact]

Well, to be fair - from the same article:

After facing somewhat of a backlash over claims that Professor Dawkins had implyed the stories themselves were harmful, he clarified his remarks on Twitter, saying that his initial raising of the question had been taken out of contest.

"It IS pernicious to inculcate supernaturalism into a child," he posted on the social networking site. "But DO fairytales do that? It's an interesting Q. The answer is probably no."

 

[James Brown]

In my view, fairy tales don't make children frightened of dragons so much as they teach children that dragons can be defeated with skill and bravery.

 

[GenesisNemesis]

It's obviously true that fairy tales can scare children, but I'm not sure how harmful that is either.

 

[Bronzeage]

In my view, fairy tales don't make children frightened of dragons so much as they teach children that dragons can be defeated with skill and bravery.

It's obviously true that fairy tails can scare children, but I'm not sure how harmful that is either.

"Our fears are like dragons guarding our most precious treasures." Rainer Maria Rilke

Without dragons, we could not guard our treasures.

 

[jab]

Richard Dawkins on fairy tales: 'I think it's rather pernicious to inculcate into a child a view of the world which includes supernaturalism'

“Even fairy tales, the ones we all love, with wizards or princesses turning into frogs or whatever it was. There’s a very interesting reason why a prince could not turn into a frog – it's statistically too improbable.”

Dawkins has recently scheduled a tour of pre-schools, where he will give a series of lectures titled, "He's just a puppet, Elmo can't really talk."

Dr. Dawkins is Oxford Professor of No Fun at All was once quoted as saying he lost all faith in religion when he discovered his uncle had not in fact, "gotten his nose."

For myself, I think Dawkins does a disservice to the youth of the world. It was after reading the story of Little Red Ridinghood and how the woodsman chopped open the wolf to rescue her grandmother, I decided to attend medical school to become a surgeon, with a minor in forest management.

He's a Philistine. . .

 

[Angry Floof]

Stories and fairy tales are useful. Metaphors are mental models to be applied to experience. In my view, metaphorical thinking is a type of intelligence and part of what makes us such brilliant creatures.

I think the objection is teaching metaphors as literal truths. That is superstition. The OP is funny, but not as funny as it would be if this point were not missed. It's more of a straw man than useful satire.

 

[abaddon]

Without dragons, we could not guard our treasures.

Well, you also cannot access your treasures without either befriending or outwitting the dragon that guards it.

And frogs DO turn into princes after the princess's judgment of "eww, yuck" drops away.

Folk tales are not just children's stories. There are wonderful lessons in them. And the ability to walk in other worlds is a wondrous human capacity.

Why doesn't Dawkins teach science instead of evangelizing his metaphysics? Tell people how marvelous nature is, not how dreadfully dangerous the human imagination can be.

 

[Bronzeage]

Without dragons, we could not guard our treasures.

Well, you also cannot access your treasures without either befriending or outwitting the dragon that guards it.

And frogs DO turn into princes after the princess's judgment of "eww, yuck" drops away.

Folk tales are not just children's stories. There are wonderful lessons in them. And the ability to walk in other worlds is a wondrous human capacity.

Why doesn't Dawkins teach science instead of evangelizing his metaphysics? Tell people how marvelous nature is, not how dreadfully dangerous the human imagination can be.

Dawkins is afraid that if children discover there is no such thing as wicked witches and poison apples, they won't believe him when the explains his evolution thing.

 

[braces_for_impact]

Unfortunately, for many children there really are monsters under the bed. Demons and their ilk lie in wait to possess the living, waiting for the faithful Christian to slip. Witches and warlocks cast evil spells and try to make the Christians stumble. Evil forces await you at every turn, and only by the power of Jesus and the holy spirit are they thwarted. This type of superstitious thinking really does make children less able to reason coherently when they are adults.

 

[Turambar]

Remember when Dawkins was just some cool evolutionary scientist teaching about, well, evolution? I don't know when or why did he suddenly became the "atheist Oprah".

 

[Potoooooooo]

I would not mind getting rid of the big bad wolf. Children's stories often influence children's ideas about the Natural World.
When I read the Narnia series as a child I never understood why wolves and apes were evil and lions (who have a pretty impressive track record as man eaters) were good

 

[Perspicuo]

In our society, kids are going to be washed in the fine drizzles and heavy showers of religious bunk anyway. So there is no need to give them a full indoctrination in religious ideas if you believe spiritualist ideas are fun and/or funny, like making your kids believe a fat man brings them presents and fairies buy your expendable oral body parts for money. And in the case you don't think religion is great, if they are raised to be caring, compassionate and critical individuals, they should figure things on their own and if they do get duped, they will be at least basically compationate and critical. No sweat either way.

Anyhoooo...

... because, folks, what are the actual messages religions have for the young? There is a good, I'd say great, point in what Dawkins is trying to say.

 

[Unbeatable]

Terry Pratchett has a really good argument on this matter.

That strikes me as an argument against human existence, rather than an argument in favor of fairy tales. That's the thing about an appeal to consequences, I guess-- it rests on the assumption that the audience uncritically accepts the speaker's value judgment about the consequences that are being invoked.

 

[Perspicuo]

By the way, this in, today:

Richard Dawkins's lack of sympathy for those who cling to religion is a shame
http://www.theguardian.com/commenti...d-dawkins-lack-of-sympathy-for-religion-shame

 

[TV and credit cards]

I always figured they exercised the imagination and fed creativity. Anecdotally, I never, nor do I know anyone who would conflate children's stories with reality. I knew it was make-believe, didn't you? They got me reading on my own, Dr. Seuss to The Hardy Boys to junior's fist novel, Nevil Shute's On The Beach.
My twisted sister's children were weened on jesus stories, sang the songs, went down to the river, the full monty. They're adults now and seem well enough, jobs, families, carry on normal conversation.
Ya burn all the children's stories, what are you going to read them, Fahrenheit 451 for Babies?

 

[Unbeatable]

Richard Dawkins's lack of sympathy for those who cling to religion is a shame
http://www.theguardian.com/commenti...d-dawkins-lack-of-sympathy-for-religion-shame

Campaigning rationalists would do well to think a little about the size of the psychological prop they are trying to wrest off people, when they try to wrest away their God.

I agree with Dawkins that its time of dominance now has to pass. But I don't think it's quite time yet to berate believers as nothing but tiresome fools. Apart from anything else, there are still too many of them, and some of them are still too powerful.

I seem to keep trying to make these sort of points, to people whose words and actions seem to indicate a desire to change minds but an unwillingness to approach the goal with an eye to effective persuasion strategies.