January 16, 2007
While I was spending my days at the John Radcliffe Hospital in Oxford, one of the books I read was Richard Dawkins’ The God Delusion. I’d been thinking about writing something about it but, having been put on to Terry Eagleton’s review of it in the London Review of Books, feel very little need to say much more. The review is long but well worth reading.
It’s interesting to read someone as well-informed and intellectually rigorous as Eagleton criticising Dawkins for his lack of endeavour in these areas (rather sad in that Dawkins earned his reputation as a public intellectual by using his academic discipline to make acute observations about human nature). It seems to me that Dawkins has surrendered some of his intellectual instincts in order to engage in some sort of crusade.
Another article that my friend and colleague, Malcolm Herbert, sent to me (this time in The Guardian) points out the hypocrisy of “militant secularists” like Dawkins in that they come across as so fundamentalist themselves - rather ironic given that Dawkins is really railing against fundamentalism and not faith, although he doesn’t seem to be clear on the distinction. It’s an interesting sign of the times that those better known for leaning to the left like Eagleton and the Guardian are the ones doing public apologetics for the Christian faith.
January 18, 2007 at 5:05 pm
Wouldn’t it be wonderful if Dawkins(and Steven Hawkins for that matter) had a ‘Damascus road’ experience??!!!
Lets pray they do and are brave enough to negate their current theories!
January 18, 2007 at 7:03 pm
dear Bishop Mike, excellent to see a Bishop blogging! Keep up the good work. I’m looking forward to your further posts on Emerging church and the institution.
January 19, 2007 at 12:24 am
Another good review is in The New York Review of Books, this time by H. Allen Orr, Professor of Biology at the University of Rochester (USA) and titled, A mission to convert
There is also a very good and succinct address on Dawkins’ book by Alistair McGrath available to download at http://www.citychurchsf.org/openforum.htm
January 19, 2007 at 6:22 pm
i agree that it is indeed good to see a man wearing purple blogging
have linked you to my site - hope you don’t mind
ps, i don’t think white on black is that difficult to read….but what do i know
January 19, 2007 at 6:24 pm
dear bishop - my comment was meant to be made on maggi’s blog - oops - i stand by my observation though, and will pop your site to mine!
January 19, 2007 at 6:54 pm
I was intrigued to see Dawkins’ chapter on children. He begins the chapter by describing the historical incident of a child taken from its parents for religious reasons - he is obviously highly critical. However, towards the end of the chapter he suggests that children of Mennonite families should be removed! Whatever the rights or wrongs, it is astonishing that a man of this calibre cannot see the contradictions in his own argument. This is indicative of the style of writing that characterises this book. It is indeed a shame that Dawkins feels the need to conduct himself in this way. It is also unfortunate that he cannot see that Atheism itself is not a neutral position, but is a system of belief that requires extraordinary faith to hold onto.
January 23, 2007 at 4:49 pm
Half way through The God Delusion myself. I can’t recall a book that has frustrated me more. I have always had a deep respect for the rigour of Dawkins’ atheism, and have admired his reasoning both in my athiest past and now. However, with The God Delusion he has taken leave of his usual rigorous intellect, I feel. As Mike says, he seems intent on challenging fundamentalism rather than faith per se. His concern with fundamentalism is understandable. It’s just a shame that he has chosen such a cheap way to approach the debate. Check out for a good review.
January 23, 2007 at 4:51 pm
That review: (didn’t accept it last time)
http://www.nytimes.com/2006/10/22/books/review/Holt.t.html?ei=5088&en=d9a0ba69b41f32df&ex=1319169600&pagewanted=all