Re: [asa] Dawkins, religion, and children

From: PvM <>
Date: Mon May 07 2007 - 23:18:02 EDT

This is interesting, people doubt me being a Christian, consider me to
'lovingly' quote from Dawkins and now have resorted to insisting that
I must be brainwashed?
And for what reason do I deserve this interesting treatment?
I am glad to hear that there are indeed some on this list who seem to
have read Dawkins but then I wonder how the reach conclusions which do
not seem to follow from Dawkins' arguments. I am not sure what this
conclusion is that you reached independently from Plantinga, but let
me assure you that Plantinga is arguing quite a strawman here.
So far I am not impressed by plantinga's response which consists of
some ad hominem remarks, some fallacious claims, and a review of
Dawkins' other book rather than a review of the arguments made in TGD.

On 5/7/07, Iain Strachan <> wrote:
> On 5/7/07, PvM <> wrote:
> > As I have shown however, Dawkins argument is not presuming that
> > materialism is true, on the contrary. Plantinga is arguing a clever
> > strawman of his own creation here. Having read Dawkins, I do have to
> > admit that I may have some advantage here.
> Have you any idea how arrogant and presumptuous that sounds? You can't
> claim to have an advantage over me because I also have read Dawkins (and
> plenty of other people on the list have read him as well - how can you
> presume that you're the only one who's read him properly??). I've read The
> Selfish Gene, The Blind Watchmaker, River out of Eden, and, as of today
> around 180 pages of The God Delusion, including the central chapter on "Why
> God almost certainly does not exist". I arrived at precisely the same
> conclusion as Plantinga independently - that the probability argument only
> works if you treat God as part of the material universe. Dawkins wants to
> show that God can only have arisen via an evolutionary process - a
> completely ludicrous idea unless you insist that God is only a part of the
> material universe.
> You can't claim superiority because you've read Dawkins and I haven't. I've
> read it with just as much care as you have, and I've come to a different
> conclusion to you - that his argument is a load of baloney.
> Others have pointed out your apparent brainwashing. I agree with them.
> Iain

To unsubscribe, send a message to with
"unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.
Received on Mon May 7 23:18:21 2007

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Mon May 07 2007 - 23:18:21 EDT