Dawkins in The Times

May 9, 2007 at 11:39 PM
4 comments

For all the railing I did the other day on journalists not listening to what Richard Dawkins, Christopher Hitchens, Sam Harris and Daniel Dennett are trying to say, I feel a bit of obligation to point out when they get it right. This is a recent Times article by Ruth Gledhill, a Religion Correspondent and believer of some sort (it's not clear exactly what her beliefs are, as is far too common with sensible believers), that gets it right. Mostly.

I don't agree with some of her conclusions about Dawkins, or even some of her musings. I think she misses the point just slightly in her zeal to align Dawkins with her "camp." But her attempts to listen to, understand, and have a meaningful dialogue with Dawkins is apparent, insightful, and very refreshing.

For those of you who have only had a brief glimpse into the complex personality that Richard Dawkins is, who have had their opinions of him swayed by slack-jawed articles with no understanding or compassion, this is a marvelous article.

Design geek tangent: I think the Times Online website rivals the New York Times website for best designed newspaper website on the web. It's fantastic.

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Tags:

This also appears in:

Comments

[this is good]

Thanks for that. It's a very revealing article. Last night I stumbled on Alvin Plantinga's review of The God Delusion. Plantinga is nothing if not snide and smug in his criticisms of Dawkins. Much of what he says is over my head and I had to stretch my brain to try to comprehend some of what he was saying. I can't say whether I agree with his assessment of Dawkins' book because I haven't read it yet, however, Plantinga's tone at times frustrates me.

Gledhill's article provided a balance for me, particularly since I don't have much history with Dawkins and am still forming my opinion of him and what he believes (or doesn't). I really appreciate that she engaged him respectfully, with an open mind, and attemtped to build bridges of common ground rather than to assault. People everywhere could learn from her example. Thanks for posting this.

[this is good]

That *was* very refreshing. I get a lot more out of Dawkins when he doesn't have to put up with idiots. :)

Thank you for posting this.

great dialogue - and it really was a dialogue - fantastic not to have to read another crazy born-again go all "incoherent righteousness" on Dawkins - i think it's funny that while lots of people don't believe in god, they may believe in some higher form or transcendent "being" - i'd call these beings a-l-i-e-n-s - very few of these people allude to that possibility out loud - i guess they don't want to be thought of as nuts:)

[this is good]

Funny what Dawkins says, and how some people can be just as extreme as the extremist christians that they criticize. It's like in Song of the Dodo when David Quammen goes into a long rant about how the events in the Bible could not have possibly happened; the book was about Darwin and Wallace and extinction. Why get distracted by religion? Someone has to think clearly.

Dawkins in The Times

Comments

Post a comment

About Me

Web 2.0, Bitch.

My Groups

Neighborhood

Tags

Archives