(May 17, 2012 at 12:48 pm)liam Wrote: Sorry for commenting tangentially from the current discussion but despite being thoroughly in favour of any non-religion I can't help but feel that Dawkins has set the atheist argument back in terms of reasoning and logic, and his self-proclaimed 'militant atheism' is incredibly frustrating. Having read the god delusion I honestly feel personally offended that his collection of crass and amateurish arguments are considered to be a philosophical text. To be perfectly honest I'd sooner be forced to ingest Hemlock than group myself with Dawkins.
I don't think Dawkins ever claimed his arguments to be philosophical in nature. You have examples of any arguments you consider particularly crass and amateurish?
