If he is genuinely happy to alter his opinion given evidence, I'm happy too - as long as his definition of what would constitute evidence doesn't change when it's inconvenient to do so. I have to say, my early encounters with Dawkins' writing (and here I'm talking about 20 years or so ago) do not make me very confident: I suspect that there's a similar mentality on both sides in this instance.
I'd be the first to condemn unthinking faith. But I'd like to see Dawkins pitted against, say, a Jesuit (has he been?) rather than the somewhat low level folk who appear - from reviews, as I have not watched the TV programmes - on the show which features him.
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
timeasmymeasure
no subject
Date: 2007-08-27 02:21 pm (UTC)I'd be the first to condemn unthinking faith. But I'd like to see Dawkins pitted against, say, a Jesuit (has he been?) rather than the somewhat low level folk who appear - from reviews, as I have not watched the TV programmes - on the show which features him.