Dawkins is at it again. I’m not sure how good a scientist he is. I don’t know a great deal about science, and so I am no judge of a great or a middling scientific mind. What I do know is that Richard Dawkins is an atrocious philosopher and critic of religion. His personal atheism and his sincere rejection of religion are to be respected. There can be little doubt that these are questions he has thought about, at some considerable depth, for many years. His continual and cheap assaults on religious belief, coupled with his blatantly bigoted opinion of Catholicism, quickly get tiresome. For a man who puts such emphasis on his dislike of religion, he spends a great deal of his time and energy in the work of proselytising people to his zealous form of anti-religious atheism. Perhaps this would make sense if religion posed a serious risk to the future of the human race or the planet. No doubt he believes that it does, and he stops at nothing to cherry-pick the most outrageous examples of ‘religion’ in order to draw general conclusions on the nature of religion – and people who have a religious faith. This behaviour is reminiscent of the behaviour of cults; making him more ‘religious’ than he might care to admit.
What culture would seriously behead a real, live, thinking, feeling, human being for the "crime" of tearing a book, or drawing a cartoon?—
Richard Dawkins (@RichardDawkins) February 25, 2015
A few years ago I read the God Delusion because, according to my militantly atheist friends, it was the most comprehensive debunking of religion yet written. It turned out that it was the claim – admittedly made for the book by Dawkinsian devotees – that was comprehensively bunk. Every page made another bold statement proving the case for atheism, and on every page I agreed! See there is the thing, and many atheists actually imagine that religious people are not intelligent enough to understand it; religious people don’t believe these things. Had religious thought to be founded on the absurd summations of Dawkins then religion would have died out many years ago. It troubles militant atheism that religious people are capable of rational thought. One of my closest friends – in a moment of angry honesty – once confessed that he thought me less intelligent than himself because I was religious. It hurts, but reflection teaches us that the real problems with cognitive functioning is with those who can be so easily convinced that other people are not capable of the same complexity of thought. This helps me to see why it is Darwinianism – rather than religious ethics – that lie behind genocide and mass murder.