Richard John Neuhaus on Dawkins on Behe
First Things has a review of Dawkins’ review of Behe’s book. Neuhaus was far less sympathetic to Dawkins’ review than I was, although like myself he did focus on the limitations of Dawkins’ appeal to authority.
However, I did think that RJN was very unfair in taking the New York Times to task for asking Dawkins’ to review Behe’s book. As the title of his article suggests, he believes that in asking a militant atheist to review a book by a proponent of intelligent design they were “pandering to prejudices”. In reply I would say:
1) As a leading militant atheist, [to what extent Dawkins is still a practising scientist is for his peers to decide] Dawkins’ opinion on a book by a leading proponent of intelligent design is of public interest.
2) Contra RJN I would say that there was far less “bluster, abuse, [and] caricature,” then is common in Dawkins, and he was actually as close to irenic as we will ever see.
3) It seems hard to understand how RJN’s policy could be applied consistently. Would a Christian magazine be pandering to prejudice by asking NT. Wright to review a book denying the resurrection of Christ, because Wright is a strong advocate of a physical resurrection?
Tags: Atheism, Dawkins, evolution, Neuhaus
You can comment below, or link to this permanent URL from your own site.