Re: [asa] An Evolutionary Theory of Right and Wrong

Good points, yes atheism is in some countries still a bad word and it
would not surprise me that atheists are reluctant to identify
themselves as such. Nevertheless, there appears to be quite some
interest in books by "notorious" atheists.
Dawkins indeed has quite some interesting things to say about
evolution. But once one uses science to explain the (non)-existence
of God then one makes a big mistake.

Despite all this. Dawkins' book seem to be selling quite well and
perhaps his message reaches more people's hearts.

On Nov 1, 2006, at 10:17 AM, Rich Blinne wrote:

>
>
> On 11/1/06, Janice Matchett <janmatch@earthlink.net> wrote:
> At 01:19 PM 10/31/2006, Pim van Meurs wrote:
>
>> It's remarkable how much inroad atheists are making. ~ Pim
>
> @ Like me, Dr. Larsen would disagree with you that atheists are
> making any more inroads than they have ever made. On Thu, 19 Oct
> 2006 - http://www.calvin.edu/archive/asa/200610/0327.html - here
> is what I wrote to you (did you miss it?):
>
> Dr. Timothy Larsen, professor of theology at Wheaton College in
> Illinois, says any growth in interest in atheism is a reflection of
> the strength of religion -- the former being a parasite that feeds
> off the latter.
>
> That happened late in the 19th century America when an era of
> intense religious conviction gave rise to voices like famed
> agnostic Robert Ingersoll, he said.
>
> For Christianity, he said, "It's very important for people of faith
> to realize how unsettling and threatening their posture and
> rhetoric and practice can feel to others. ...." [snip] http://
> www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-religion/1722230/posts
>
> And you don't have to take Dr. Larsen's or Janice's word for this.
> Go to npr.org and listen to the recent Science Friday interviews of
> Richard Dawkins and EO Wilson. Dawkins related letters where
> atheists do not admit they are such because it is so unpopular and
> they feared persecution. Now this may be the almost universal
> perception of the embattled minority that some evangelicals also
> feel but then there was Wilson's comments. Wilson told Ira Flatow
> the reason why he made entreaties to evangelicals was because that
> was where the power was as there was only a relative handful of
> secular humanists. If he is going to promote biodiversity he needs
> to convince evangelicals that they had common ground with the
> humanists here. It doesn't sound to me like the atheists are
> arguing from a position of strength.
>
> I agree with Pim to the extent that we shouldn't make Dawkins into
> a bogeyman. When Dawkins is discussing the standard exposition of
> evolution he is quite good. But, once he leaves that subject and
> gets into sociology, religion, and his meme hypothesis he is really
> out of his depth. IIRC, Dawkins claims to be one the "brights". A
> car analogy comes to mind. One headlight on high beams and the
> other broken.

To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@calvin.edu with
"unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.
Received on Wed Nov 1 15:08:04 2006