Be interesting to see an example argument for that opinion. I expected to find that impression of Harris when I read him (having previously read Dawkins and already decided he was an arrogant nutcase, despite Dennett being already being a hero of mine) but in fact I found both Harris and Hitchens to be subtle and sophisticated in their arguments. Plenty of "nastiness" in their examples of extreme religious practices ... of which they clearly express their "intolerance" ... but the headlines seemed to be representing them as much more "shrill" than their actual arguments.
Ian On Wed, Apr 21, 2010 at 5:52 PM, John Carl <[email protected]> wrote: > More from a link I sent to Jon B regarding what the author calls, "the > neo-atheists". The author himself is an atheist, so I find his criticism > more cogent than I could provide. > > http://www.city-journal.org/html/17_4_oh_to_be.html > > "This sloppiness and lack of intellectual scruple, with the assumption of > certainty where there is none, combined with adolescent shrillness and > intolerance, reach an apogee in Sam Harris’s book *The End of Faith*. It is > not easy to do justice to the book’s nastiness; it makes Dawkins’s claim > that religious education constitutes child abuse look sane and moderate." > Moq_Discuss mailing list > Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc. > http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org > Archives: > http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/ > http://moq.org/md/archives.html > Moq_Discuss mailing list Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc. http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org Archives: http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/ http://moq.org/md/archives.html
