Viruses of the Mind paper

Viruses of the Mind paper - all 2006 PHL 202 Keith...

Info iconThis preview shows pages 1–2. Sign up to view the full content.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
all 2006 PHL 202 Keith “Viruses of the Mind” Response My interpretation of Dawkins’ message was that he asserts that the human mind is vulnerable and uses an analogy about the correlation between human minds and computers, and how easily they can be corrupted. To make his point, he suggests that both are easily susceptible to “virii” or “mind viruses,” respectively, and seems to ignore mans most basic gift; choice. However, there are two points that Dawkins made that I do not agree with; one being that “faith” is silly and insane and the other, indirectly, about his analogy and the correlation made. On the main point, I believe his evidence is too weak to back up his claim that faith is “ridiculous” and that he does not give a strong enough fact-based argument on why not to have it. In order to believe his premise I would have to do something quite ironic in this case, which would in fact require faith. From what we have gone over in class, something that is “factual” is determined by empirical evidence. This is where I believe Dawkins has no claim. While he makes one point about faith being that some of those who have it feel “the less evidence there is, the more virtuous the belief,” I see no good evidence put forth by him to give merit in
Background image of page 1

Info iconThis preview has intentionally blurred sections. Sign up to view the full version.

View Full DocumentRight Arrow Icon
Image of page 2
This is the end of the preview. Sign up to access the rest of the document.

Page1 / 3

Viruses of the Mind paper - all 2006 PHL 202 Keith...

This preview shows document pages 1 - 2. Sign up to view the full document.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
Ask a homework question - tutors are online