Tuesday, November 24, 2009

The Thin Gruel of Karen Armstrong


Yesterday, Nemo posted a link to a Sep. 12 Wall Street Journal piece in which arch-atheist Richard Dawkins and “Kumbaya Gal” extraordinaire Karen Armstrong debated the question, “Where does evolution leave God?”

While Armstrong is a best-selling "
religious scholar," after reading the piece, I am shocked by 1) how ignorant she is about basic aspects of religion, and 2) how she draws terrible conclusions from what little knowledge she has. Dawkins wipes the floor with her. It’s no contest.

Nemo comments:

One of the strange oddities of Armstrong’s devious self-promo is the way her book on theology tossed in the towel on Darwinism.

You would think the great critic of modern scientism, and rationality, would expose the theory of Darwin. But no, that’s too dangerous: best to compromise on that issue.

We could certiainly do with a more compassionate theory of evolution, the more so since Darwin’s theory looks like an ideology designed for anti-compassion.

Later, Nemo also wrote


Armstrong is basically an atheist who is trying to keep her irons in the god fire, so she can be a religious expert.

I responded…
Karen Armstrong sounds like an atheist who grew disillusioned with atheism because it leads to nasty consequences, and thus, tried to salvage God by saying that we should honor “Mystery” itself as a God-like force worthy of worship and sacrifice.

Needless to say, this perspective will not be persuasive to ANY atheist or believer.

Perhaps a few agnostics will find it compelling, and I’m sure the MSM will continue to honor her as a bold, trailblazing thinker (when she’s nothing of the sort). But I guess that’s inevitable when most people are tired of the New Atheists and the New Fundamentalists. They’ll cling to any mushy moderate, even if it’s a total clown like Karen Armstrong.

Nemo replied

Good points. I think that theists will discover to their surprise that Armstrong makes a poor case for god.

*Note: In my writings, I usually refer to Karen Armstrong, Robert Wright, Francis Collins, and their ilk as “Kumbaya Guys.”

The Kumbaya Guys are believers in God who wants to find a “compromise” with atheists by accepting Darwinism without condition – in return for the atheist’s permission that they can believe in a God, as long as that God is separate from the material world. The “Kumbaya Guys” will sell out any religious principle just so they can find “peace” with those who have no interest in “peace.” They’re the Neville Chamberlains of 21st Century religious debate.

Note: Novaseeker has written on this topic too.

2 comments:

Justin said...

Functionally, I guess she is the "useful idiot" for The Big Misinformation Campaign. Kinda like the liberal shows trot out a moderate to debate for the conservative position. A method of marginalizing the actual opposition, implicitly casting them as fringe.

Todd White said...

Yeah, that sounds about right.