Sunday, October 22, 2006

Good Takedown of Dawkins:

By Terry Eagleton.

Will the atheist half of Positive Liberty defend dear old Richard?


Anonymous said...

Of course, Eagleton is going to "defend" religious thought, else his Marxist "faith" would also be called into question. Admittedly, Dawkins is no theologian, because his scientific and empirical bents don't allow superstitions. What would he know of angels dancing on the heads of pins? The point is: He doesn't care. It's futile inquiry into futile mythologies that "arrests" intellectual capital development. That Eagleton misses this point only illustrates his own blindspot.

Anonymous said...


It would be helpful if you would explain why you think this is a good takedown of Dawkins? I don't see anything particularly new or interesting in what Eagleton writes other than, perhaps, his notion of God as artist. But that is not an argument; that is the language of poetry. He seems to be saying that Dawkins does not show a sensativity for the many and varied ideas of God people hold. Again, though, that's not an argument.


Jonathan said...

Thanks Andy. I've got other stuff on my plate now. I'm going to explore this issue, eventually in more detail, in the future.