Eleanor RobertsonĀ dismantles the silly declarations of Richard Dawkins. In herĀ Guardian piece, she traces the maniacal assertions of a man who is “so convinced of his intellectual superiority that he believes the one domain in which he happens to be an expert, science, is the only legitimate way of acquiring or assessing knowledge.” Dawkins builds an entire empire of assertions and trashes anyone who dare confront his scientific appeal. He speaks of the profane and then treats those who view his rants as the indecency of a lunatic as absolutists.
A recent example of this comes from the famous tweets of the All-Learned and Blessed One:
Another day,Ā another tweetĀ from Richard Dawkins proving that if non-conscious material is given enough time, it is capable of evolving into an obstreperous crackpot who should have retired from public speech when he had the chance to bow out before embarrassing himself.
āDate rape is bad. Stranger rape at knifepoint is worse,ā huffs Dawkins. Seeming to have anticipated, although not understood, the feminist reaction this kind of sentiment generally evokes, he finishes the tweet: āIf you think thatās an endorsement of date rape, go away and learn how to think.ā
Suffice to note in this great degree of indecent, inappropriate, and insensitive analogy-twisting is that for Dawkins the concept of evil and greater evil exists. But how does the world of an atheist make sense of any type of evil? Where is the fountain of morality?
Dawkins is truly a crackpot. His hubris has bewitched him. His analogies are grotesque. There is no “worse” in Dawkins’ narrative. There is only unexplained choices, which stem from a non-purposeful universe; the world Dawkins obviously wants us to know he is its intellectual ruler. O, hail, ruler of the absurd!<>
