Should Atheists Reach Out to Christians?
Expectedly, my argument last week that the randomness of Darwinian evolution poses a major but not necessarily insuperable problem for the Christian has brought down on my head the wrath and contempt of the New Atheists. (The junior ones at least. The senior ones, like Aristotle’s unmoved movers, are so busy contemplating their own perfection, that they have no thoughts for chaps like me.)
Loveable, predictable Jerry Coyne is “baffled” by my constantly trying to find ways of reconciling science and religion. He thinks it a “waste of good philosophical brainpower.” (I note the adjective. Thanks for the compliment!) In exasperation he declares: “If you seek a theological solution to a scientific dilemma, then you’re not reconciling science with faith—you’re distorting science to comport it with faith.” And he exhorts me to stop catering to “unfounded superstition.”
Helpfully, Coyne does not only quote at length one (“Pianiste”) who commented here on my piece - “Ruse is being a bit disingenuous about this ‘accommodation’ business” - but directs the reader to another website, run I believe by a former Anglican priest.
Michael Ruse is tiresome, at least when it comes to talking about religion. Like Terry Eagleton, he seems to have a gene for silly religious thinking. In the end, you wonder whether they really mean it when they say they don’t really believe, or are they hedging their bets and cramming for the finals?
There is more in the same vein, and - oh my goodness - when you get to the comments! At least I am not alone in being thus excoriated:
I never associate reasonable thought with Aquinas or Augustine - I’ve always thought of them as utterly vile and revolting people with defective brains. If you read any of their claimed proofs of anything any sensible person cannot help but wonder what the hell they’ve been smoking.
This is from “Madscientist.” Well said!