(December 5, 2012 at 2:31 pm)downbeatplumb Wrote: Dawkins may be rather blunt and dismissive but in what way is he in error?
The problem is not bluntness. Although submissiveness of reality is a problem.
The problem is not adequately answering the most sophisticated problems of theism, but still eagerly holding on to the mantle of the frontman of atheism.
His best argument is "...well who designed the designer?". Critics have panned The God Delusion.
This man is a PhD Biologist, spent a lifetime in academia, and has no idea his own coworkers mock this argument for its lack of intellectual merit. He's embarrassing.
He claims to want to talk to and/or debate anybody and everybody on the merits of atheism vs religion, but he failed to do the debate everybody wanted to see. And he gave the silliest reasons for backing out.
He's even being mocked by Bible-thumpers for it. As well as his own critics. Other atheists have accused him of cowardice in refusing to do the debate.
And email records about the Richard Dawkins Foundation (as part of the evidence in the Josh Timonen case) allegedly showed that he was having an affair with his secretary for some time.
But the worst part of all is that he is blind to all of this. He's indifferent. He doesn't care about his own coworkers who say "Listen Richard, this argument doesn't work, because of the definitional semantics in play here."
And instead of listening, he puts it in a book!
If you are looking for an atheist celebrity to be a fan of, please, be a fan of Michael Ruse.
