Richard Dawkins branded ‘secularist bigot’ by veteran philosopher, Antony Flew (Telegraph)


By Martin Beckford, Religious Affairs Correspondent:

The prominent scientist Richard Dawkins has been denounced as a “secularist bigot” by a philosopher who was himself once renowned for being an atheist.

He is accused by Prof Antony Flew of being more interested in promoting his personal views than finding the truth, in the latest controversy over his best-selling book The God Delusion.

Prof Dawkins, professor of the Public Understanding of Science at Oxford University, is also said to have “scandalously” selected particular quotes from Einstein to back up his claims that God does not exist and that people who believe in a divine creator despite an abundance of contradictory evidence are delusional.

Full article: Richard Dawkins branded ‘secularist bigot’ by veteran philosopher – Telegraph

This entry was posted in Noted with Interest. Bookmark the permalink.

2 Responses to Richard Dawkins branded ‘secularist bigot’ by veteran philosopher, Antony Flew (Telegraph)

  1. Rob says:

    What abundance of contradictory evidence is that then? And what, exactly, is the truth then?

    Do the followers of ‘faith-based’ views not promote their own point of view and what evidence is there to support their hypothesis of a divine creator?

    Are they more entitled to have their views acknowledged than Prof. Dawkins even without the support of evidence than he has with it?

    When push comes to shove, there are always more questions they have to answer than they ever can!

  2. Steven Carr says:

    Here is what Dawkins writes on page 18 of The God Delusion

    ”A theist believes in a supernatural intelligence who in addition to his main work of creating the universe in the first place, is still around to oversee and and influence the subsequent fate of his initial creation… A deist too believes in a supernatural intelligence, but one whose activities were confined to setting up the laws that govern the universe in the first place.

    The deist God never intervenes thereafter, and certainly has no specific interest in human affairs.’

    Here is what Flew writes in his review :-

    ‘A less important point which needs to be made in this piece is that although the index of The God Delusion notes six references to Deism it provides no definition of the word ‘deism.’

    The book that Roy Varghese wrote for Flew contains no definition of the word ‘deism’ and how it differs from theism.

    Flew seems to have forgotten what is in his ‘own’ book…

    He certainly has no idea what is in The God Delusion.

    And it is very ironic that Flew attacks Dawkins for faults which are in Flew’s book, not Dawkins.

    That does not stop Flew rambling on about Gilbert Ryle, in paragraphs which have nothing to do with deism, The God Delusion or anything at all that is relevant to whether or not Flew’s God of not-Christianity exists.

    Incidentally, Flew charges Dawkins with bigotry in not talking about Einstein’s ‘integrated complexity’, when Einstein himself never talked about ‘integrated complexity’.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s