Dawkins, for example, argues as a scientist that religion is comparable to a mental virus or “meme” that can be explained through evolution, that religious believers are delusional, and that in contrast, atheists are representative of a healthy, independent, and pro-science mind. In making these claims, not only does Dawkins use his authority as the “Oxford University Professor of the Public Understanding of Science” to denigrate various social groups, but he gives resonance to the false narrative of social conservatives that the scientific establishment has an anti-religion agenda.
… Or simply correct (that would be my view)?
Matt Nisbet is revealing the meat of a chapter he’s written for a forthcoming book on communicating the biological sciences. Here is Matt’s blog post.
So, what’s going on here, folks?