, Like Dawkins, Russell T Davies is an Atheist. RTD's beliefs about the nature of life and death are touched on in the opening of Everything Changes.
When the unfortunate John Tucker is brought back to life he reveals to all of us that when you're dead you're done. Nothing, that's it, end of story. Of course we would all like to think that our consciousness will never end, and I would also like to think I will win the lottery this weekend, I imagine the latter has much better odds. So in the Whoniverse there appears to be no traditional afterlife to speak of, but as is evident from the title of the next episode Ghost Machine, our emotions might just have a life of their own after we are dead and buried.
Now while I'm as skeptic as they come about the supernatural out here in the natural non-fiction world, I do enjoy watching fictional stories that aren't restricted by our same natural laws on TV. In online forums there seem to be a minority of folks who felt disrespected by the revived John Tucker's revelations. However, just as I don't get upset about violations of physics in Torchwood, there is no reason to get up in arms because your particular beliefs aren't adhered to in a dramatic TV show.
Well I'm off on my quick heathen holiday, thanks for helping make Torchwood a huge hit, and be sure to attend the Church of Torchwood this and every Sunday night on BBC3.
12 comments:
Richard Dawkins used to be an engaging and creative writer, and a leader in the field of Evolutionary Biology. Now he's a bitter old atheist with a shrivelled wife, who thinks that science is going to help him kill God.
wow didn't take long for a comment on this, I hadn't even finished editing it.
Don't you think you could have squeezed in some more ad hominem attacks in there? Must not have been trying hard enough.
And as for your perception of Dr. Dawkin's goals, there is no need to kill someone who has yet to be established is even alive.
What's his wife got to do with it - shrivelled or otherwise?? Why offend his wife?
Shrivelled....good grief, wash your mouth out, anonymous. Blimey.
"Established is even alive" will probably never happen, nor will people "killing God" so both are unnecessary, really.
Actually, gone on too long! Just wanted to say Who continuity DOES ALSO contain in the end of "The Unquiet Dead" evidence of an "afterlife", well, evidence just as, if not more compelling then, some bloke who's possibly not 100% reliable given the circumstances saying he doesn't remember anything....(grins)
Take it easy, all.
Oh, not "unnecessary", more like "not worth taking the time to say"....but that's it for me, I'm not touching this whole issue!
Just wanted to make the continuity point!
Again, bye, properly this time :)
I unfortunately have to say Kurly, that your attitiude for this entry frustrates me. I am quite aware you are entitled to an opinion, however I am dissapointed at your arrogance.
"there is no need to kill someone who has yet to be established is even alive."
So you are going to tell me that the bible and the whole Christian faith is a fairytale? Also, please define alive. I think you will find that the concept of God being alive in the human sense of the word is ridiculous as God is not a human. (He was a human at one point through Jesus, but that's another story)
I will say one final thing. I am by no means the best person to be able to come up with a convincing arguement, unfotunately I haven't got a good enough grasp of Christianity myself to do so. I encourage you to continue this arguement with a friend or someone you know who has a deep understanding of the Christian faith.
It's interesting that a TV show could spark such talk, and I think that's what people like RTD and Dawkins want -- though maybe for different reasons.
I think Dawkins and his good friend Douglas Adams only got "purple faced" when other people would use faith to silence discussion.
People should be more open to talking with those whose viewpoints, on the surface or in name only, seem to be opposite to their own.
It's too easy to say "I'm right because I believe I am" BUT it's also too easy to say "I'm right because you can't articulate your point."
Joel C Quote:
"So you are going to tell me that the bible and the whole Christian faith is a fairytale?"
Yes.
Sorry but when you ask a yes/no question, you get a yes/no answer.
Jamie Quote:
"Why he (Richard Dawkins) abandoned science for social criticism is beyond me, particularly when religious believers do nothing but ignore him."
Dr. Dawkins knowledge of science and reason fuel his "social criticism" as you call it, its not a matter of doing one or the other. Not that one needs their stamp of approval, but as his latest book is #2 on Amazon.com, I would say there are at least one or two religious believers who aren't ignoring him.
"Yes.
Sorry but when you ask a yes/no question, you get a yes/no answer."
Okay, that's any pretence at this blog being unbiased out the window then :D
Could you pass on what evidence you have recieved to come to this reasonable conclusion?
"Dr. Dawkins knowledge of science and reason fuel his "social criticism" as you call it, its not a matter of doing one or the other."
No, his personal prejudices do that, otherwise there'd be no scientists out there with religious views.
I have never claimed to be unbiased, any writer that claims they are is only fooling themselves. I believe sneaky condescending attempts to pretend you respect somebody's beliefs when you don't is the most disrespectful thing of all.
And any scientists who are religious (of which there are microscopically few) come to those beliefs for their own separate personal/emotional reasons not because of any work they are doing in the lab.
Fair enough!
To just add--
"microscopically few" ????
I only brought up the "social criticism" point because you implied Dawkins came to it naturally from science.
I'm being crap, really, by not leaving the topic when I said I would. So I will.
Btw, found the below link, a piece by a paid-up atheist which is a mixed bag (particularly the 5% rubbish) but which has some VERY interesting points, including an assesment of Dawkins et al.
http://www.wired.com/news/wiredmag/1,71985-0.html
Bye for real now!
Dawkins is to atheism, what a tele-evangelist is to Christianity.
post by implication
Post a Comment