Initial post-talk thoughts: Harris & Dawkins Oxford

Just got home after 3.5 hour drive , so just some quick note taking before I pass out. I may flesh this out tomorrow on the way down to Bristol.

* Overall, Sam was as lucid as ever. Great to see in person

* 20 mins of Sam peddling TML with the usual talk, however each time I hear it he has adjusted things slightly, giving emphasis to different chapters of the book.

*I feel like I’m 80% with him. There are a number of things I have issues with, but as I think about the concept more and more, and source the end notes of the book, the clearer what he is saying becomes. I want to get to the end of the week of talks, re-read the Russell Blackford essay on TML, and then properly write out my thoughts as they currently stand.

* 30 mins of Dawkins probing Sam on potential issues people may take with the books central claims. Also added his own qualms, which seemed developed and genuine. This was the highlight of the evening, as it gave Sam room to manoeuvre around the topic loosely. I find he speaks just as succinctly and poignantly off the cuff as he does with his prepared speeches. I do feel this section could have been even better though. I would have liked to have seen more of a disagreement between the two of them on “ought/is” distinction amongst other things. A genuine back and forth dialogue would have been even better I think. But its not like I’m really complaining, if I’m going to sit through anyone probing/interviewing Harris on his book then its gonna be Richard! Strangely Dawkins started out by reading a few paragraphs from the rather large section in the book where Harris goes off at length re: Francis Collins debacle. Whilst I agree entirely with what Sam has to say, that section simply goes on disproportionately too long for the significance it has on the premise

* Q&A: Without wishing to offend anyone, the questions were pretty poor. I understand that it’s not easy to quickly articulate a question at the microphone, and I don’t really believe I would have necessarily asked anything better, however most of the questions seemed to come out as statements or opinions. “I agree with you but…” The questioner would then wait for Sam to try and explain why he disagreed with their opinion. What this really amounted to was a sort of “bet you haven’t thought of this”. In almost every case, he had thought of that and had even referred to it in his opening remarks. This was the only time Sam seemed ro ramble, and appear slightly lost. For several questions he ended up responding vaguely to the given opinion, then referring back to his earlier introduction. This could appear like a weakness in his argument, maybe it is and perhaps I’m doing people a disservice, maybe when I see the DVD it will seem different again. Or maybe it’s a hard thing to do, get out a question on this tricky subject, and maybe people just haven’t yet read the book and were solely going by what they had heard tonight or from YouTube. :/

* After the Q&A there was a book signing. I got TML and EOF signed. I’m saving LTACN for tomorrow when Sarah will be with me and we can get a cheeky picture taken.

* Speaking of pictures sorry for the appalling shot. I was a good boy and didn’t take my 550d in to the theatre thinking it wouldn’t be allowed. Well turns out it was, and so all I could manage was this from the iPhone. Tomorrow I shall take in the dslr for better pics

One final note, Oxford is gorgeous. A little strange as it seems it is entirely a littlebig student world unlike anything I have ever seen! The Sheldonian theatre was smaller than I was expecting and a great intimate venue for the event.

Right I’m battered, g’night. See you all tomorrow.

dB