(http://theweek.com/articles/552685/new-a...-than-ever)
In this engaging article, the author sets out to point out the mistakes Daniel Dennett makes in an editorial. Daniel predictably spins the facts to make it sound like the data supports atheism, and it called out, point by point, on his errors. But along the way was this interesting description of why atheistic criticisms of theism fail:
In this engaging article, the author sets out to point out the mistakes Daniel Dennett makes in an editorial. Daniel predictably spins the facts to make it sound like the data supports atheism, and it called out, point by point, on his errors. But along the way was this interesting description of why atheistic criticisms of theism fail:
Quote:The faith that the New Atheists set out to mock, refute, and dispel was invariably the least impressive, least informed, least sophisticated, most easily dismissed form of the world's great religious traditions. If faith for you is believing in the most scripturally literalistic, doctrinally fundamentalist, ahistorical, credulous, theologically illiterate variant of devotion, well, then Harris-Dawkins-Hitchens probably rocked your world. But as any reader with even a cursory religious education discovered by about page 3 of any of their books, the not-great God of the New Atheists was nothing more than a big old Straw Man in the Sky.Is atheism built on one big strawman? If so, that would make atheism irrational.
