The God Truthiness II: Sticks and Stones

Half way through He-Who-Must-Not-Be-Not-Read. Can't write about that, so let's return to Dawkins.

The major complaint I've read leveled at Dawkins is that he's "shrill, strident, intemperate, intolerant, [and] ranting" (Dawkins 16). dr clam says Dawkins has a "style of ridiculing his opponents rather than trying to understand what they are saying". In those same comments another blogger michael krahn directs me to "The Dawkins Defeat", an article about Dawkins failure to lure “dyed-in-the-wool faith-heads” to atheism because "most non-atheist readers will not read 375 pages of valid arguments if they are constantly interspersed with derision".

Now come on people, this is so not an issue. Next non-atheists will be attacking his grammar. As I said I wasn't concerned about his style when I first read the book. I've since reread some parts and found that ridicule is one of the more pointed arrows in his quiver. And I've got to admit that some of them would cut close to the quick if I had any leanings towards belief.

But if you don't like his barbs then remember the reader has all the power with how to engage a book. Or to put it another way - the author has only the power that you abdicate to him or her. Remember this isn't a conversation. Dawkins isn't in the room actually ridiculing you to your face. Put the book down and take a step back. Have a breather. Use the space for milk, cookies and to contemplate the "valid arguments" Dawkins has written.

The complaint that follows from this advice will be that that is all too much trouble. Well that's your choice if you don't want to take responsibilty for how you engage a book. But The God Delusion is the latest criticism of religion by possibly the world's highest profile atheist. To disprove Dawkins' ridicule of believers as being at best indoctrinated innocents or at worst dangerous fanatics then one has to come up with a more persuasive argument than, "He made fun of me so I don't like what he had to say."

To wax speculative Dawkins has made a smart move in writing abrasively. In 2006 Dawkins started The Richard Dawkins Foundation for Reason and Science. He's mounting a campaign against religion. Campaigns require money and publicity sells books. Dawkins style has really attracted publicity. As michael krahn shows even Christians are writing articles about Dawkins. Negative the article may be, but it's still generating publicity, selling books and putting the word "atheism" on the lips of those who may never have heard it. So in one sense it doesn't really matter if Christians who bought the book finish reading it or not. You can be happy dr clam that you borrowed it free from the library.

And while I'm entertaining flights of fancy, despite Dawkins stating that "if this book works as I intended, religious readers who open it will be atheists when they put it down" (28) this book's intended purpose is not so much to convert believers into non-believers, but to "help people to come out [as atheists]" (27). Dawkins envisages his book fostering a groundswell of support for atheism, and to help put atheists together The God Delusion's Appendix has "a partial list of friendly address, for individuals needing support in escaping from religion." Dawkins himself recognizes that atheists are not organized as a group. If this book empowers atheists to hoist their colors and make a stand with like-minded people, then at this opening salvo of the campaign he's achieved his aim. Dumbledore is building and army, are you going to fight?