Richard Dawkins under pressure over support for private university

[rug]

Richard Dawkins is under pressure over his involvement in a new private university that has been branded as elitist by campaigners for equal access to higher education.

The New College of Arts and Humanities, which plans to charge £18,000 fees, has been sharply criticised by the National Union of Students (NUS) and the University and College Union (UCU).

Richard Dawkins, a leading biology professor and the most prominent proponent of ‘New Atheism’, is one of fourteen academics who have declared that they will teach at the institution. Others include the right-wing historian Niall Ferguson and the philosopher A.C. Grayling.

Dawkins is already the target of an email campaign urging him to withdraw his support for the institution.

http://www.ekklesia.co.uk/node/14898

[Warren Stupidity]

1. What does this have to do with (a)theism?

[AldebTX]

2. Well By the Money Standard

There are a lot of U.S. universities that should be boycotted for being "elite" as well.

[trotsky]

3. Virtually every private one.

Many of which are directly affiliated with a particular religion, like Catholicism.

[rug]

4. There are few universities that were not started by a religious group.

[trotsky]

5. So they were elitists before elitism was cool and the New Atheists started doing it.

Dangit!

[rug]

12. There was also literacy and scientific inquiry before the New Atheists.

Although modern demographics place self identified New Atheists squarely within the elite.

[trotsky]

13. Yeah, both predate your religion...

So it would not exactly be surprising for an arbitrarily-labeled group of people in the 21st century to also come after them.

But your church did show the world a heck of a lot about how elitism is done.

[rug]

16. And all of it predates your current intellectual costume.

[trotsky]

25. I didn't think it was possible...

but your one-liners are getting even lamer.

[skepticscott]

14. And how many people actually

"self identify" as "New Atheists"? That label was not invented by atheists, and there's nothing much "new" about their atheism, other than the fact that they refuse to stay meekly quiet about their lack of belief and the reasons for it.

[rug]

15. This should help you count.

[skepticscott]

20. Apparently you don't even recognize

a parody when you see it.

Atheists understand that the term is just a dopey label applied by non-atheists.

[rug]

22. That depends on the direction the gnu is facing.

[LeftishBrit]

8. Not really true in the UK except for the oldest ones

The first university to be partly founded on a secular basis was Edinburgh in the 16th century. Some of its original funding did indeed come from a clergyman, but quite a lot came from the City of Edinburgh itself, making it in some sense the first 'state' university.

In London, *explicitly* secular higher education began nearly 200 years ago.

Oxford and Cambridge were established when the clergy essentially were the only providers of education. But University College London, later joined by the other colleges now associated with London University, was established in 1826 on an entirely secular basis, explicitly as an alternative to the religious-dominated Oxbridge, to admit students regardless of their religion and to admit women on equal terms with men.

The contemporary poet Winthrop Mackworth Praed satirized the shocked reactions of the traditionalists of the time:

'Ye dons and ye doctors, ye provosts and proctors,
Who are paid to monopolize knowledge,
Come raise opposition by vote and petition
To the radical infidel College!'


In Wales, Cardiff University, as it's now known, was founded as a co-educational secular institution in the 1880s.

Manchester University was formed in 1905 from the merger of two institutions founded in the early 19th century, one by the textile merchant Owens and one by the scientist John Dalton, for explicitly non-sectarian education that would be made available to all, including working-class people (but not, for some time, women).

And of course the universities founded in the 20th century - i.e. most British universities - were almost all secular from the beginning.

[Goblinmonger]

9. You're talking about England, right? n/t

[rug]

11. Not alone. Look at the origins of the oldest universities in the US, not to mention Europe.

[LeftishBrit]

6. Very true. However, it's a path that most of us in the UK prefer *not* to go down

We are trying to resist the current government's attempts to privatize everything that moves. Both with regard to education and health.

In addition, given the nature and location of the new university, there is the danger of it taking resources from existing, and very good, institutions within the (non-privatized) London University.

There is little direct connection with religion/atheism, however

[edhopper]

7. Well it's great that

Notre Dame, BYU, Yeshiva and Southern Methodist are all free.

[Leontius]

10. Not only was SMU free they used to pay "student athletes"

pretty well.

[bemildred]

17. I would think that going after the politicians would be more useful. nt

[LeftishBrit]

23. We are! - we are!

[LeftishBrit]

26. E.g. see...

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/education/education-news/oxford-passes-vote-of-no-confidence-in-willetts-2294341.html

[SidDithers]

18. "Welcome to Ekklesia, the beliefs and values thinktank."...

Can't imagine why they'd want to drum up a controversy about Richard Dawkins.

Sid

[bemildred]

19. Sometimes, there is no bad publicity. nt

[rug]

24. Do you prefer The Guardian?

http://www.guardian.co.uk/education/mortarboard/2011/jun/07/university-tuition-fees-controversy-live-blog

[Pale Blue Dot]

21. Nice ad hominem non sequitur straw man!

It's like a triple threat! :rofl:

It's fascinating to see people so frightened of Dawkins ideas that they'll do anything - short of actually addressing his points - to discredit him. Yet the best that they can come up with is that he might be teaching at a (gasp!) "elitist" university.

Thank you - this was hysterical! :rofl:!!!