I love what I found regarding Mary Midgley's complaints about Richard Dawkins.
"[There is] widespread discontent with the neo-Darwinist — or Dawkinsist — orthodoxy that claims something which Darwin himself denied, namely that natural selection is the sole and exclusive cause of evolution, making the world therefore, in some important sense, entirely random. This is itself a strange faith which ought not to be taken for granted as part of science."
People with such a profoundly inadequate understanding of science shouldn't be asked questions about its ability to comment on the existence of God.
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
timeasmymeasure
no subject
Date: 2008-06-25 02:23 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2008-06-25 02:37 am (UTC)All pretty awesome, though. :)
no subject
Date: 2008-06-25 02:42 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2008-06-25 04:37 am (UTC)"[There is] widespread discontent with the neo-Darwinist — or Dawkinsist — orthodoxy that claims something which Darwin himself denied, namely that natural selection is the sole and exclusive cause of evolution, making the world therefore, in some important sense, entirely random. This is itself a strange faith which ought not to be taken for granted as part of science."
People with such a profoundly inadequate understanding of science shouldn't be asked questions about its ability to comment on the existence of God.