Thomas wonders why high profile atheist provocateurs like Richard Dawkins seem to know so little about the religions they criticize and frequently traffic in straw-man arguments. He also excerpts a take down of Dawkins’ latest book by agnostic Thomas Nagel.*

Scientific popularizers like Dawkins often seem to think that their expertise in one field translates into a general expertise about broader philosophical issues. Not that nonspecialists should be forbidden from discussing these things (among other things that would rapidly put most blogs, including this one, out of business), but there is still an obligation to familiarize oneself with the arguments of the field one is wading into.

For instance, a recent interview with Dawkins gave me the impression that he thinks that the history of religious belief is neatly dividable into the pre-Darwin era where most people believed in God based on some version of the argument from design, and a post-Darwin one where theology is shown to be intellectually bankrupt. This evidences a profound ignorance of the history of philosophical theology. If anything, theism has made a remarkable comeback in the last few decades in philosophical circles.

Unfortunately, Dawkins is able to impress people with his status as a member of the high Priesthood of Science. And his bombastic pronouncements drown out more nuanced thinkers like Michael Ruse. Ruse and Nagel, though nonbelievers, recognize that matters aren’t as clear-cut as Dawkins would have them and that well-informed intelligent people are to be found on all sides of the debate.
—————————————
*I discussed Nagel’s The Last Word here and here.