Well I was going to continue in a similar vein to the previous posts, showing that Dawkins is really writing within the scope of theology and philosophy, and therefore needs to act in a "scientific" manner insofar as he should equip himself with a knowledge of the subject - an awareness of what the academic community are saying in the area he is addressing.
Insofar as he clearly hasn't a clue about either subject, how are we supposed to take him seriously about religion ignoring "science" when he is guilty of the same crime? It seems it is not ok for creationists to write about Dawkins' subject with no awareness of the academic community, the history of the subject - no qualifications in the appropriate areas etc etc - yet Dawkins can do the same for philosophy and theology and it doesn't matter. Hmmm.
This of course was shown clearly in his debate with Rowan Williams chaired by Anthony Kenny. Now Dawkins and Williams didn't engage - more on that later - but Kenny and Dawkins did and it was clear - indeed he himself admitted it - that Dawkins didn't have a clue about philosophy.
Anyway, my point actually isn't really going to be about this after all, as I have realised - and this came to me following watching the film Paul - that it isn't actually about God or religion or Christianity at all, it is really all about the creationists - and I guess also the Intelligent Designers. That is who Dawkins has in his sights - admittedly it takes up his whole view, and he sees them as somehow pretty much the whole deal (although he also throws some dirt at random other targets, Islam, liberal Christianity etc) - Fundamentalists are who he wants to bring down.
Well if that's the case we know why Rowan Williams and Dawkins didn't engage, because Dawkins in fact only has a problem with Fundamentalists and really hasn't anything of substance to say to other believers - basically because he doesn't know what they think. He stopped believing at what - the age of 12 or something - so he has a 12 year old's view of Christianity, and the only extra stuff he has taken on is the creationism. So we know he can debate that, let's just let him get on with debating that.
I guess most people who know Fundamentalists are aware that they leave when they are ready to leave. They don't leave when someone argues with them, so whether Dawkins will really make a lot of difference who knows, but if he can, well good luck.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment