If by happiness you mean that he's comfortable with himself, and he has all the things that he wants, well, yes, he's probably happy. Many people who want to control other people are very, very happy. Many of the great intolerant minds of the age have been very satisfied with their personal lives - it was other people's lives that bothered them.
His intolerance for anything other than his own beliefs is disturbing, and his ambitions to eradicate MY belief systems and MY happiness are horrible. But if you are simply judging a man by whether or not he is happy in his own life and exulted by others, then I guess you would call him happy.
Hitler was happy too.
If by happiness you mean that he's comfortable with himself, and he has all the things that he wants, well, yes, he's probably happy. Many people who want to control other people are very, very happy.
---
Who exactly do you think Dawkins wants to control? He has expressed an opinion that the world would be better off without religion. Now, you may disagree or agree with that position. I happen to disagree, I think that all the evil things that people do in the name of religion would be done in the name of other things, and similarly with the good things they do in the name of religion. However, he has at no point expressed a desire to actually PREVENT people from being religious.
--
Many of the great intolerant minds of the age have been very satisfied with their personal lives - it was other people's lives that bothered them.
--
Well, yes, Dawkins is intolerant. But he is no more intolerant than some of the religious fundamentalists that he rails against. Indeed, he is no more intolerant than lots of the people on this forum.
--
His intolerance for anything other than his own beliefs is disturbing, and his ambitions to eradicate MY belief systems and MY happiness are horrible.
--
Again, he has never expressed a desire to actually eradicate any such thing. However, lots of the people he interviewed in his latest TV show DID express the desire to eradicate opposing belief systems.
--
But if you are simply judging a man by whether or not he is happy in his own life and exulted by others, then I guess you would call him happy.
--
Well, if we are changing the subject towards judging, then my judgement of Dawkins is pretty much as follows: I think he is one of the acknowledged experts in his particular academic field. However, he is also a man of very strong views on a particular subject and he tends to rant somewhat on that subject. However, as a citizen in a free (for now) country, he is perfectly entitled to rant against religion (for now). In my opinion, while he is sometimes able to draw out intruiging, and somewhat incriminating statements from religious fundamentalists, he himself is something of a fundamentalist himself, and is not particularly interested in actually listening to what people have to say on the matter.
--
Hitler was happy too.
--
You do realise how silly it makes you look when you compare people to Hitler dont you? After all, Hitler killed millions of innocent people and the most that Dawkins has done is go on TV and suggest that maybe the world would be better if people werent religious. Hardly a comparable action, is it?