Ok, if that is what works for them...but what about nice, gentle things like freedom and morals, do you not like these easy subjects?

and who the fuck is Dawkins??

Ok, I will leave you with this....

“Nothing is more despicable than respect based on fear.”
Albert Camus

Of the Concern in Being Good

The stage of complete freedom is a place where the being perceives himself under the realization that to nothing owes genuine interest. It is a peculiar form of consciousness, aware of its finitude, random and devoid from probabilistic gender. It is a result of the evolutionary process and the interaction with everything that with it coexists. In a way, being becomes fervently desirable and undeniable. By this, comes the fact that morality, as a concept, is a skilful tool of self-manipulation, and whose derivative fear is counternature and subject to deconstruction. The concern to be good is an artifice that relieves the burden of being. It is also the result of yearning for non-existence.

So you want to ply a little, or is this boring for you? Do you want a good question or a twisted idea?

Yes I know what you mean, but it´s this kind of questions, posed this way, that drives good "minds" from looking for the answers

First of all i don´t mean no disrespect. And also sorry for my English, it is not my native language.

What i have to say is: what are these questions of mind and matter mingled with idealism and materialism?
Matter is being purchased by physics, well advanced and on tracks. Mind is a definition still very unclear and unknown (I believe that psychology is a form of witchcraft, we understand almost nothing of the brain, much lesser that we understand matter - and this is fine, brain is a lot of matter interacting, so first we need to understand basic matter).

On the other hand, idealism is a concept, a construction of the so called mind. Also as materialism. They are just consensual taxonomy.

Maybe all of this is correlated, but at this point of humanity, how in the world can you demonstrate it?

Just imagine how Kierkegaard perceived gravity or aspirin.

Maybe it is me that I´m limited, but I can even start to make sense of your questions....