[http://www.ted.com/index.php/talks/view/id/113]
他的书本来就不错，但真人演讲更加是那种现在罕见的英国式men of letters的风度，内容虽然偏激（且不说他也落入了elitist的俗套引用IQ教育程度科学院院士位置和宗教的关系，另外我也觉得他在攻击稻草人，我不信现在美国atheist的地位还不如homosexuals），但态度淡然而幽默。对比起英国钱上的达尔文和美国钱上的in god we trust那段真的非常搞笑，我现在还是笑得停不了口。
那些鬼佬们的评论都值得看一下，不少的评论立场虽然不一样都是有内容的。就是偏激的人，我也理解他们草木皆兵的想法。不过还是这位的评价和我想的一样：
引用:
He wants atheists to "come out" and he also wants to attract others to the atheist 'camp.' My problem is that this sounds like proselytizing atheism, and the problem with that is: if one is successful, one will doubtless attract several new 'supporters' who are proud to call themselves "atheists" for the same reason one might be proud to call one's self a "Christian" or "Muslim," - namely, to belong to a group, to blindly adopt a label, an 'ism', b/c it seems the socially correct thing to do. This kind of blind faith in atheism is precisely what Dawkins does not - or should not - want. For, it is not religion or spirituality that's the problem, but blind faith... in anything (including atheism, science, rationality, etc.).
In other words, we want people to THINK, to actually BE rational, to BE scientific - we do NOT want people to merely SAY they are rational and scientific - we don't want people looking down on religion b/c they believe that's the 'right' thing to do, or because other members of their in-group will applaud them for doing so, w/out knowing or even thinking about the issues. By proselytizing atheism, Dawkins seems to be inviting this possibility. In the long run, this could do more harm than good to the cause of promoting what Nietzsche called an "intellectual conscience."
The only alternative to aggressively marketing (if you will) atheism would be to fight for better education generally. But, this has been an option on the table since the beginning of rational thought, and look where we are! So, maybe it is time for something like what Dawkins has in mind - a "militant atheism." I don't know. I guess I only wanted to voice a word of caution. To quote Nietzsche again:
"He that fights with monsters should look to it that he himself does not become a monster."
我始终觉得Richard Dawkins的态度是bad taste，强调win比强调truth多。我自己心中最深处不愿意被视为与之同一阵营的。我原来坚信要是有理由的东西是不用millitant的态度去推广的，所以也坚信教育的重要性。但看看现实又越来越悲观，indeed，好的公共教育的概念被推广被至少partially实行了这么久，效果如此不明显，也许non-believers真的需要一个象Dawkins那么有煽动力的人物去作为同样有煽动力的人物机构如美国现在的mega church机构的antidote。或许，在不同的偏激思想的冲撞下我们才可以大部分人得到moderate的nuanced的想法。也是或许。因为有可能是moderate的nuanced的东西很难吸引人（太杀脑细胞），所以双方有可能越来越偏激以吸引观众，成为race to the bottom。总之我觉得自己越老就越悲观，这世界越看越没有希望。
--------