Richard Dawkins Quotes

I preferred the weapons of dialectic to all the other teachings of philosophy, and armed with these, I chose the conflicts of disputation rather than the trophies of war.

I enjoyed debate on the floor but it's not really debate in the same way.

I'm a better polemicist in prose.

I was on the debate team.

That's the beauty of argument, if you argue correctly, you're never wrong.

They dispute not in order to find or even to seek Truth, but for victory, and to appear the more learned and strenuous upholders of a contrary opinion. Such persons should be avoided by all who have not a good breastplate of patience.

Facts are not liberals' strong suit. Rhetoric is.

He who frames the question wins the debate.

There is no philosophy without the art of ignoring objections.

There's nothing I like less than bad arguments for a view that I hold dear.

The duty of rhetoric is to deal with such matters as we deliberate upon without arts or systems to guide us, in the hearing of persons who cannot take in at a glance a complicated argument or follow a long chain of reasoning.

I love arguing. I always say that I'll never win a physical battle, but I can always win a mental battle. I mean, not really, because I never really argue with anyone.

Though we cannot out-vote them we will out-argue them.

The object of oratory alone is not truth, but persuasion.

Use your logick, and then your rhetorick. Rhetorick without logick, is like a tree with leaves and blossoms, but no root; yet I confess more are taken with rhetorick than logick, because they are catched with a free expression, when they understand not reason. Logick must be natural, or it is worth nothing at all: Your rhetorick figures may be learned.

The purpose of oratory or philosophy [is to] respectively leave people in a fighting or thoughtful mood.

Ron Paul is very smart, so I don't want to talk to him too long for fear that he will convince me.

Political speeches are a particularly low form of rhetoric.

I want to win every debate and I think I do.

I'm a fan of robust debate, and I'm not averse to engaging in the odd ad hominem attack myself.

I'm not saying Michael Moore's smarter than Sean Hannity, but Michael Moore is better at running interviews than Hannity, even though Hannity's running the interview!

By the rules of debate, if you lose your cool, you've lost the game.

I enjoy a good reasoned argument. I love the power of logic.

A lot of people ask me, did debating help me as a writer, and I honestly don't know.

I consider myself to be quite persuasive when I want.