The thought had occurred to me that it could be turned around and directed at certain types of theology wonks.

I would say that it’s more “fair and balanced” than anything I’ve read from Dawkins, Dennett or Hitchens, but that’s not saying a lot. Whether it’s an effective antidote for someone who is attracted by the Dawkins crowd … I just can’t say.

Scott Hahn has a new book replying to Dawkins. I haven’t read it, but it might be worth a look. Mark Shea also writes some pretty good stuff, but I don’t think he’s compiled it all together in a book.

My overall impression of the whole debate is that nobody’s trying too terribly hard to be fair. It’s reminiscent of Catholic-Protestant arguments.

About the questionable associations of the authors of various responses to the “new atheists,” perhaps the Arpergers goes both ways, and only socially inept people on either side of the argument care enough to write about it.

Also, I am aware of the fallacy of Guilt By Association, but you see what I’m getting at with my concern about the “baggage” that some of these men are carrying ? My atheist friend will be looking for any excuse whatsoever to disregard any book I give to him , so I am looking for something that doesn’t come with built-in objections based on who wrote it or endorsed it.

I haven’t read too much responding to the New Militant Atheism . Better things to do with my time , but lately a personal relationship with someone who has been spellbound by the Dawkins/Harris/Hitchens gang has given me cause to look closer .

I know nothing about Vox Day except that he writes for WorldNet Daily , which frankly puts me off just a bit .

I see that Doug Wilson has also written a response to Sam Harris’s “Letter To A Christian Nation” in the form of “Letter From a Christian Citizen” , but I’m hesitant to use Wilson’s material too because he’s carrying a lot of baggage. I can just see handing Wilson’s book to my atheist friend and getting a response about : “Oh, yeah… Doug Wilson, the racist guy who defends Southern chattel slavery as ‘not really all that bad after all’ … thanks a lot that really says a lot about your intellectual credibility” . (of course in a perfect world of logical arguments , the fact that Doug Wilson holds some questionable or totally wrong views on some things doesn’t mean he’s wrong on the issue at hand, but you know what I mean ). I’m not even sure if Doug Wilson is as off as he’s been painted by his opponents , but he’s definitely carrying some awkward baggage.

Someone else recommended “Return of the Village Atheist” by a Joel McDrummon , who turns out to work for Gary Demar’s “American Vision” Christian Reconsturctionist outfit and is Gary North’s son-in-law. Gary North wrote the forward. Ok, that again puts me off just a bit . I don’t need the Gary North and Christian Reconstructionist baggage if I’m going to be recommending this book to my atheist friend. Am I being too sensitive about this ?

I see that Alister McGrath has written The Dawkins Delusion responding to Dawkins . Maybe I’ll get that one.

Interesting. Circumstantial evidence, but very intriguing.

I hadn’t thought of that aspect before, but now that you bring it up that makes a lot of sense . The same lack of social skill , inappropriate behavior, language, or rage , general “oddness” . Very interesting .

BTW, Asperger’s isn’t considered autism these days as I understand it. The interesting thing about Asperger’s is that it is characterized by a very low intuitive ability in interpersonal relationships, and a high intuitive ability with what has been called “folk physics,” IOW, an intuitive grasp of physical science. There is no name for the opposite syndrome, because “everybody knows” science is hard. Nobody is surprised when somebody can’t understand science, but they are surprised when somebody can’t understand why it’s rude to interrupt people, or stand too close, or whatever.

And kdeb, “What people _really_ believe shows up in their lives better than in their answers to survey questions.”

You can say that again. Belief shows up in actions rather than creed. People who claim that all is illusion still avoid danger and feed themselves. And people say what they think they are supposed to on surveys.

This morning Wendy told me about a study linking the increase of night-time lighting in the cities to breast cancer. Which means, of course, that people with breast cancer are more likely to leave the lights on.

All these studies of atheists, religious persons, etc., can hardly be believed without a lot more information.
If you go to a Southern college, vs a New England one, you will get very different answers on the question “do you believe in God.”
But as those who proselytize on these campuses know, there is lirttle actual difference in their convictions or lack thereof.
Some people were raised to answer the question a certain way.

If you ask the question “do you believe you’ll go to heaven when you die?” or “is faith important to you?” you’ll find the same thing happening.

What people _really_ believe shows up in their lives better than in their answers to survey questions.