Richard Dawkins

[Rick]

Before the forum was sacked there was a thread about Richard Dawkins. I just wanted to say that I've since watched a bunch of videos of him and am inclined to think ILE (or possibly LII) instead of a type. He doesn't seem to have values at all -- no sharing of personal sentiments and personally meaningful experiences, little or no concern for the personal sentiments of the people he speaks in front of (when he is discussing the idea of a godless universe), and basically an avoidance of all things personal in the context of conceptual discussions on the nature of life and the universe. Here's a decent sample:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C9HtY1chchM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KZ9JMUFIVqE
He reminds me of David Deutsch and George Soros

In contrast, even LIEs and ILIs -- who are also logical types -- seem to enjoy tapping into personal sentiments and meaningful experiences to add a human dimension to discussions on otherwise abstract topics (including those on this forum).

For an illustration, here's a video about Richard Feynman, a widely recognized LIE in the socionics community:
http://video.google.com/videoplay?do...+feynman&hl=en
He's similar to Dawkins in some ways (maybe it's just the hair?). Granted, this is sort of a biographical video, but Feynman really does love to tell personal stories -- not just in this video. I haven't heard Dawkins tell a single personal story yet, nor can I remember reading or hearing any from ILEs I know. They like to say funny stuff and be witty, but they avoid telling anything emotionally-colored about their lives.

Dawkins uses a lot of thought experiments ("just imagine that that were true," etc.) and likes to talk about things on a purely conceptual level. This is somewhat surprising, since his books (at least the two I have read) were full of example after example. But after watching him speak, his true priorities fall into place.

Comments?