Uncommon Descent Serving The Intelligent Design Community

Sunday Times calls Dawkins’ autobiography “fatally smug”

arroba Email

That’s hard on the old atheist pope, maybe harder than recent uproars around his views on the relative harmlessness of soft pedophilia. Smug is boring. The Pope in Rome can be boring and it doesn’t matter, but the Arch-Darwinist can’t be. Jenni Russell tells us,

Richard Dawkins made his name by delving beneath the surface of human beings to reveal the scientific drivers of our behaviour. Judging by his memoir he is strikingly lacking in an equivalent curiosity about the inner motivations and emotional lives of the people around him. He isn’t observant, has no gift for conjuring up characters or situations, and is unwilling to reveal anything other than the most superficial emotions in himself.

Most of the article is paywalled, but when you read the rest of what’s free, you will shortly see why someone else should have written the book.

Richard Dawkins probably only feels "superficial emotions" because atheism requires one to "simply enjoy life, because there's probably no god." No need for deep thinking there. Barb
I don't think they ever put on debates between children. Do you have Viking Norman ancestors or are you Scandinavian, VM? Axel
I find Richard Dawkins "fatally smug". My contact with him (thru limited interviews, articles) reminds me of a character from the 1940s book (and later famous movie) "Laura". The key book narrator...quotes regularly, but essentially just quotes his earlier works. Waiting for the KILLER DEBATE with Dawkins and an opponent who is in his "curriculum vitae" weight class! vikingmom

Leave a Reply