Dawkins the Intellectual

Written by

in

If we’ve got to have public intellectuals, then we could do a lot worse than Richard Dawkins. Here (via Butterflies and Wheels) he’s interviewed by the Beeb:

Do you get tired of being asked about the debate between science and religion – do you think it is time to move on?

We can’t move on as long as more than 50% of American voters believe the entire universe began later than the Middle Stone Age, and Tony Blair encourages such teachings in English schools on grounds of “diversity in education”.

I agree with him that Tony Blair’s enthusiasm for faith-based schools is unfortunate, but it’s interesting – and entirely typical – that his major concern as far as religious fundamentalism goes is with Christian fundamentalism in the US. I wonder if, post 9/11, he might consider that there’s an elephant in the room which he’s just not seeing.

Comments

  1. Paul Craddick Avatar

    Mick,
    In my view Dawkins is “The Blind Calumniator.”
    His expertise is in the biological sciences, yet he makes bold to hold forth authoritatively on moral-political and sociological matters. No one can blame him for caring about these things, obviously, but qua scientist – talk of “selfish genes” notwithstanding – he has no particular expertise here.
    Scientists rarely make good cosmologists, anyhow – cp. “What is Faith?” by Sir Anthony Kenny (a self-described “agnostic”), which shows pretty clearly that Dawkins misunderstands traditional, philosophical theism (sc., “natural theology”).
    Those of us who are atheists and understand our views to be grounded in reason shouldn’t look on Dawkins as much of an ally – or so it seems to me.

  2. Backword Dave Avatar

    I think Jamie put it best.
    http://bloodandtreasure.blogspot.com/2004/07/vote-for-me.html
    “Richard Dawkins is a nice guy and fully on the side of the apes, but I’m not sure that jihad is the best way of promoting atheism.”

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *