I respect Hitchens in that he is, and has so far as I can recall never said otherwise, a journalist--he makes no claims to strictly philosophical arguments. Even Dennett qualifies his work with frequent 'I may be wrong's. Harris, on the other hand, speaks with an eerily authoritarian certainty at pretty much all times.
As for Dawkins, I'm surprized at the strong endorsement, but I'm also predisposed to write it off as Dawkins being polite. Heh. Then again, given that his direct statement '...science can say nothing about morals.' is so strong, presumably disproving it would be easy, so his endorsement may only be strongly worded.
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
timeasmymeasure
no subject
Date: 2010-11-12 06:51 pm (UTC)As for Dawkins, I'm surprized at the strong endorsement, but I'm also predisposed to write it off as Dawkins being polite. Heh. Then again, given that his direct statement '...science can say nothing about morals.' is so strong, presumably disproving it would be easy, so his endorsement may only be strongly worded.