The fall of religion?
Despite the polish of this recent article on atheism, is anything compelling to those not already convinced? Intelligent people with (since we're throwing them out) credentials and respect (i.e. Plantinga, Alston, van Inwagen) simply disagree with Dawkins and Dennett. Why is it that those who aren't convinced by naturalism or atheism are automatically superstitious, tooth fairy believers? Why does Dawkins think atheism is going to solve the world's problems (see Stalin and Mao)? Many atheists do think that cosmology, archaeology, science, etc. conflict with religion, yet many religious think the opposite! In all these cases this article really gives no good reasons to believe either way. The problem is that this article contains no substantial argument to really give a 'neutral' observer any information. The only people who would find convincing this article are atheists or those who think the mere assertions of one side in this active controversy should be accepted at face value.
Jeremy
Denver, CO
