« Perhaps a Little Gasoline Will Put Out This Fire
Main
Dennett on the Evaporation of the Mystique of Religion »
January 24, 2007
An Interesting Take on Dawkins
Brian Leiter points out a discussion by physicist and astronomer Steven Weinberg in which Weinberg discusses Richard Dawkins' The God Delusion, the historical larger context of its claims and offers a truly unique, and I think correct, critique.
Where I think Dawkins goes wrong is that, like Henry V after Agincourt, he does not seem to realize the extent to which his side has won.
Later he points out what has been my own experience here in California,
My many good friends in Texas who are professed Christians do not even try to convert me. This might be taken as evidence that they don’t really mind if I spend eternity in Hell, but I prefer to think (and Baptists and Presbyterians have admitted it to me) that they are not all that certain about Hell and Heaven. I have often heard the remark (once from an American priest) that it is not so important what one believes; the important thing is how we treat each other.
I heard the same think from a priest who worked at the Vatican in the early '70s and many clergypersons commonly express this view when you ask them directly. They almost never bring the issue up on their own. If they are just being polite, then they are trading my potential eternal damnation for earthly good relations. It seems like a fair enough trade to me but it is a little surprising that they would think so.
And Steven Weinberg concludes with this,
Dawkins treats Islam as just another deplorable religion, but there is a difference. The difference lies in the extent to which religious certitude lingers in the Islamic world, and in the harm it does. Richard Dawkins’s even-handedness is well-intentioned, but it is misplaced. I share his lack of respect for all religions, but in our times it is folly to disrespect them all equally. [emphasis added]
The whole piece is of considerable interest and well worth reading.
Posted by Duane Smith at January 24, 2007 9:28 PM | Read more on Religion |
Trackback Pings
TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.telecomtally.com/mt/mt-tb.cgi/2004
Comments
You do not think that the fact that "professed Christians do not even try to convert" you or Brian is simple a recognition that crude attempts to convert you would be counter-productive and a waste of time and effort?
Posted by: Tim Bulkeley at January 25, 2007 3:01 PM
Tim,
That's an interesting possibility. I do wonder. While I don't make as big a deal of it as some, most people who have know me for any length of time find out that I am a secularist and some find it interesting in an intellectual sort of way. Some have trouble understanding how I can be a secularist and still be interested in the Bible. But, with the exception those who try to sell their religion door to door, very very few seem to think anything particularly negative about me beliefs or lack of same. For example, with only an exception or two, no anyone asked me is I worry about the afterlife.
I do worry that this general "tolerance" may be due to some subspecies of post modernism that not only thinks there are private opinions but also private facts, thus making it OK for anyone to believe whatever they want about just about anything.
Posted by: Duane at January 25, 2007 3:22 PM
Weinberg's diatribe begins with the "Flat Earth Theory", apparently oblivious to the fact that the flat earth theory was invented by Washington Irving and peddled by 19th century modernists for the purpose of scoffing at Christians. The Agincourt comparison is a good way to view how modernism triumphed, but that was a hundred years ago.
As I look at your posts on archaeology, I am impressed with how much territory the modernists have been forced to abandon over the last century.
Posted by: Looney at January 26, 2007 11:02 AM
Sorry, comments are closed for this post.
Send me an email if it is important.