Freethought & Rationalism Archive

02-13-2003, 07:53 AM

In the Spectator: The Devil's Chaplain

The book is a collection of essays (only available in the UK at the moment, as far as I can see) so Dawkins groupies will have read most already. And they won't like this review (which is, of course, why I posted it here

).

Yours

Bede

Bede's Library - faith and reason

Dr Rick · 02-13-2003, 08:51 AM

This excerpt:

Quote:

The problem with many of these essays � and with Dawkins as polemicist in general � is that in its aggression and unfaltering stridency, his hatred of �non- science� is itself a form of fundamentalism. His jeremiads against religion are guilty of the very crimes they denounce, and the qualities of science (its �wonder�, and its �excitement�) which he uses to browbeat unbelievers are themselves unexamined articles of faith.

...indicates that the reviewer does not appreciate or understand the differences between religion and science or between belief and faith

Rick

Writer@Large · 02-13-2003, 10:43 AM

From the link:

Quote:

To be Dawkinsed, as this selection from his essays of the past 25 years makes painfully clear, is not just to be dressed down or duffed up: it is to be squelched, pulverised, annihilated, rendered into suitably primordial paste.

And? That's why I like reading Dawkins! No wonder this guy didn't like it ...

--W@L

Nickle · 02-13-2003, 02:16 PM

Hey, the word of the day is polemicist. Use it frequently.

Nataraja · 02-13-2003, 09:23 PM

Faith:

Simply
Another
Theological
Asinine
Notion

I'm no fan of Dawkins but criticisms of him from a religious bias have no meaning to me other than being insultingly ignorant.

Nickle · 02-13-2003, 10:00 PM

edit: oops

Big Spoon · 02-14-2003, 12:38 AM

The way in which Dawkins brutally debunks any notion of intelligent design is one of the reason why he's one of the best modern science writers.

beausoleil · 02-14-2003, 01:22 AM

The review didn't strike me as particularly religious. It also struck me as entirely believable given Dawkins's typical appearances in the British media - which I think are compiled in this book.

I find Dawkins's style unpleasant and self-important. He does remind me somewhat of a religious monomaniac when I hear him ranting on the radio. (And I'm not religious.) And the howls of outrage I got here last time I said I didn't like him do make me wonder about the role he plays in parts of the atheist community. Don't want to replace one doctrine of infallibility with another.

Unusual Suspect · 02-14-2003, 12:09 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by beausoleil

I find Dawkins's style unpleasant and self-important. He does remind me somewhat of a religious monomaniac when I hear him ranting on the radio. (And I'm not religious.) And the howls of outrage I got here last time I said I didn't like him do make me wonder about the role he plays in parts of the atheist community. Don't want to replace one doctrine of infallibility with another.

I've long taken the position that extremists for any position (and you might consider Dawkins an extremist) are almost a necessity. They make it difficult to overlook a subject that many would rather not think about, and they make the moderates look that much better in the eyes of anyone who opposes the position.

Catana

Sisyphus · 02-14-2003, 02:05 PM

Sure, Dawkins� aggressiveness is sometimes harsh and may border on arrogance, but I find his brutal directness quite refreshing. There are many other popular science writers today who avoid clear statements about religious issues since they don�t want to offend people too much. Some (e.g. Gould) even try to construct some reconciliation between science and religion. Especially on this issue (also on others) I admire Dawkins for his crystal clear position. (Check out the library:http://www.infidels.org/library/mode...ce/index.shtml)

02-13-2003, 07:53 AM	#1
Bede Guest Posts: n/a	A review of Dawkins new book In the Spectator: The Devil's Chaplain The book is a collection of essays (only available in the UK at the moment, as far as I can see) so Dawkins groupies will have read most already. And they won't like this review (which is, of course, why I posted it here ). Yours Bede Bede's Library - faith and reason

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

02-13-2003, 02:16 PM	#4
Nickle Regular Member Join Date: Oct 2001 Location: Texas Posts: 385	Hey, the word of the day is polemicist. Use it frequently.

02-13-2003, 09:23 PM	#5
Nataraja Regular Member Join Date: Oct 2002 Location: NC Posts: 433	Faith: Simply Another Theological Asinine Notion I'm no fan of Dawkins but criticisms of him from a religious bias have no meaning to me other than being insultingly ignorant.

02-13-2003, 10:00 PM	#6
Nickle Regular Member Join Date: Oct 2001 Location: Texas Posts: 385	edit: oops

02-14-2003, 12:38 AM	#7
Big Spoon Junior Member Join Date: Feb 2003 Location: UK Posts: 74	The way in which Dawkins brutally debunks any notion of intelligent design is one of the reason why he's one of the best modern science writers.

02-14-2003, 01:22 AM	#8
beausoleil Senior Member Join Date: May 2002 Location: US and UK Posts: 846	The review didn't strike me as particularly religious. It also struck me as entirely believable given Dawkins's typical appearances in the British media - which I think are compiled in this book. I find Dawkins's style unpleasant and self-important. He does remind me somewhat of a religious monomaniac when I hear him ranting on the radio. (And I'm not religious.) And the howls of outrage I got here last time I said I didn't like him do make me wonder about the role he plays in parts of the atheist community. Don't want to replace one doctrine of infallibility with another.

02-14-2003, 02:05 PM	#10
Sisyphus Junior Member Join Date: Feb 2003 Location: Switzerland Posts: 7	Sure, Dawkins� aggressiveness is sometimes harsh and may border on arrogance, but I find his brutal directness quite refreshing. There are many other popular science writers today who avoid clear statements about religious issues since they don�t want to offend people too much. Some (e.g. Gould) even try to construct some reconciliation between science and religion. Especially on this issue (also on others) I admire Dawkins for his crystal clear position. (Check out the library:http://www.infidels.org/library/mode...ce/index.shtml)

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.