|The Courtier's Reply - a change of mind
||[Jun. 6th, 2008|01:28 am]
I realise PZ was right all along. Having examined again the review of TGD that he was respoding to when he wrote the Courtier's Reply, I can see definite "Emperor's New Clothes" similarities - that Dawkins needed to "engage with religious thought", implying no need to engage with the truth of religion before that engagement.
There was a subtlety in this matter I had missed, such as the use of the term "theology" for discussions of proof of God is in itself question-begging, as would be the use of the term "UFOlogy".
Ah well. It was fun being pedantic.