Is Dawkins Re-Framing His Position on Science & Religion?


Now that Richard Dawkins has a new book out intended to introduce evolutionary science to a wider audience, is he re-framing his message on science and religion to allow for accommodation? It's too early to say based only on comments made during an interview at Newsweek. Josh Rosenau has the details and a discussion.

More like this

In the comments to yesterday's post about framing, Damian offers a long comment that doesn't actually contradict anything I said, but re-frames it in terms more complimentary to the Dawkins/ Myers side of things. I may deal with some of what he says over there (probably not today, though, as I have…
I was looking for a Hallmark card with that on the cover (and also, preferably, a sad-eyed puppy dog) to send to Josh Rosenau and Chris Mooney, but they didn't have one, so I had to settle for a blog post. Here's the sad puppy, at least. Oh, Internet, you are like a giant greeting card store that…
I guess nobody reads me, and everyone reads PZ, but I am astonished how many people, after my eight lengthy posts on the topic, dozens of posts by others who 'get it' and literally hundreds of comments by people who 'get it', still equate framing with spin. For instance, in his latest post…
Last year I attended a paleontology conference in Cincinnati. While I was there I attended a session on science and religion, during which a parade of people trumpeted the warm relationship between the two. Predictably, there was much bashing of the New Atheists, with Dawkins, Hitchens, Harris…

If he is changing his position it's not apparent in the quote Rosenau posted.

That people can accept evolution and believe in a god is not up for debate, and shows nothing more than that we're capable of holding contradicting beliefs. That seems to have been the anti-accommodationist position all along.

Of course, it doesn't even show that. At most, it shows that humans are capable of holding unrelated beliefs.

By Pseudonym (not verified) on 02 Oct 2009 #permalink

is he re-framing his message on science and religion to allow for accommodation

Trying to make out that he is seems silly to me.

Dawkins wrote books about evolution before writing The God Delusion. They weren't "about" religion either.

You might want to consider that a problem is that others placed on Dawkin positions that he didn't hold and are now these people trying to somehow make out Dawkins has moved his position rather than consider that their misplaced "framing" of Dawkins' position is being shown up. (i.e. they're clinging to the notion that they were right, and creating a rather complicated argument to make that out to be the case, rather than consider it might be that they were wrong.) Just a thought.

I note that you appear to confuse agreeing with the observation that some people hold conflicting beliefs with accommodation (e.g. in your piece in the Huffington Post). The two are quite different things.

By Heraclides (not verified) on 08 Oct 2009 #permalink