Re: [asa] dawkins and unbelief (again)

*@ From the horses' mouth:

Dawkins: "I don't think you can disprove God. But I don't think you can
disprove God as you can't disprove fairies and unicorns. It's a kind of
scientific purism that makes me say I can't be an absolute 100 per cent
atheist."*

... Which has nothing to do with saying God is ultimately ineffable --
except maybe that it is the exact opposite of saying God is ineffable. For
Dawkins, the concept of God is entirely effable, and the words he uses to
explain it are, as you've noted, terms like "fairies" and "unicorns."

If you're trying to link Dawkins to some kind of postmodern distrust of
reason -- which is where Campolo is coming from -- you're barking up the
wrong tree, IMHO.

As the trajectory from Dawkins to Campolo to Robert Mugabe, that perhaps is
itself a bit of postmodern textual criticism, but I don't think even Derrida
could have come up with that one.

On 4/2/07, Janice Matchett <janmatch@earthlink.net> wrote:
>
> At 05:03 PM 4/2/2007, David Opderbeck wrote:
>
> Janice said:
> @ Campolo ididn't say that God is above or beyond reason alone, he
specifically said that "..God is beyond the rational categories of thought.
.." ~ Tony Campolo http://www.ewtn.com/library/ISSUES/RELEFTCO.TXT
>
> That is Dawkins position.
>
> No, it is not. Dawkins' position is that there is no God. ~ David
>
> @ From the horses' mouth:
>
> Dawkins: "I don't think you can disprove God. But I don't think you can
disprove God as you can't disprove fairies and unicorns. It's a kind of
> scientific purism that makes me say I can't be an absolute 100 per cent
atheist."
>
> ~ Janice
>
>
>
>

To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@calvin.edu with
"unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.
Received on Mon Apr 2 17:30:46 2007