Changes

[[Vox Day]] noted that the Richard Dawkins cult has some similarity to the cult of [[Scientology]].<ref>[http://voxday.blogspot.com/2014/08/the-cult-of-dicky-dawk.html The Cult of Dicky Dawkins]</ref>

[[Vox Day]] noted that the Richard Dawkins cult has some similarity to the cult of [[Scientology]].<ref>[http://voxday.blogspot.com/2014/08/the-cult-of-dicky-dawk.html The Cult of Dicky Dawkins]</ref>

Dawkins was one of the founders of the New Atheism movement. The [[New Atheism]] movement, which has waned in recent years, was called a cult by the [[agnosticism|agnostic]], journalist Bryan Appleyard in a 2012 article in the ''New Statesman'' in which he describes the abusive behavior of New Atheists.<ref>[http://www.newstatesman.com/religion/2012/02/neo-atheism-atheists-dawkins ''The God wars'' by Bryan Appleyard], ''New Statesman''</ref>  Although the New Atheism movement does not perfectly fit the various characteristics of a cult, it does fit some of the characteristics.<ref>[http://shadowtolight.wordpress.com/2012/11/20/how-cultish-is-new-atheism/ How cultish is the New Atheism?]</ref>

Dawkins was one of the founders of the New Atheism movement. The [[New Atheism]] movement, which has waned in recent years, was called a cult by the [[agnosticism|agnostic]], journalist Bryan Appleyard in a 2012 article in the ''New Statesman'' in which he describes the abusive behavior of New Atheists.<ref>[http://www.newstatesman.com/religion/2012/02/neo-atheism-atheists-dawkins ''The God wars'' by Bryan Appleyard], ''New Statesman''</ref>  Although the New Atheism movement does not perfectly fit the various characteristics of a cult, it does fit some of the characteristics.<ref>[http://shadowtolight.wordpress.com/2012/11/20/how-cultish-is-new-atheism/ How cultish is the New Atheism?]</ref>

==Abrasiveness of Richard Dawkins==

==Abrasiveness of Richard Dawkins==

== Dogmatic arrogance of Richard Dawkins ==

== Dogmatic arrogance of Richard Dawkins ==

Using special text analysis software, the social psychologist Jonathan Haidt found that [[New Atheism|New Atheists]], such as Richard Dawkins, very often wrote in dogmatic terms in their major works using words such as  “always,” “never,” “certainly,” “every,” and “undeniable.”<ref>[http://www.thisviewoflife.com/index.php/magazine/articles/why-sam-harris-is-unlikely-to-change-his-mind10 Why Sam Harris is Unlikely to Change his Mind] by JONATHAN HAIDT, February 3, 2014 8:36 pm</ref>   

Using special text analysis software, the social psychologist Jonathan Haidt found that [[New Atheism|New Atheists]], such as Richard Dawkins, very often wrote in dogmatic terms in their major works using words such as  “always,” “never,” “certainly,” “every,” and “undeniable.”<ref>[http://www.thisviewoflife.com/index.php/magazine/articles/why-sam-harris-is-unlikely-to-change-his-mind10 Why Sam Harris is Unlikely to Change his Mind] by JONATHAN HAIDT, February 3, 2014 8:36 pm</ref>   

Yet, the works of New Atheists, including Richard Dawkins, often betray an amateurish knowledge of philosophy, religion and science. For example, [[Vox Day]]'s book ''[http://www.voxday.net/mart/TIA_free.pdf The Irrational atheist]'' found multiple errors in reasoning and factual errors when it came to the works of New Atheist authors.<ref>[http://creation.com/review-irrational-atheist-by-vox-day Excellent refutation of ‘new atheists’ flawed by heterodox open theism],  A review of The Irrational Atheist: Dissecting the Unholy Trinity of Dawkins, Harris, and Hitchens by Vox Day, Benbella Books, Dallas, TX, 2008, reviewed by Lita Cosner</ref> See also: [[Richard Dawkins and pseudoscience]]

Yet, the works of New Atheists, including Richard Dawkins, often betray an amateurish knowledge of philosophy, religion and science. For example, [[Vox Day]]'s book ''[http://www.voxday.net/mart/TIA_free.pdf The Irrational atheist]'' found multiple errors in reasoning and factual errors when it came to the works of New Atheist authors.<ref>[http://creation.com/review-irrational-atheist-by-vox-day Excellent refutation of ‘new atheists’ flawed by heterodox open theism],  A review of The Irrational Atheist: Dissecting the Unholy Trinity of Dawkins, Harris, and Hitchens by Vox Day, Benbella Books, Dallas, TX, 2008, reviewed by Lita Cosner</ref> See also: [[Richard Dawkins and pseudoscience]]

 

In a 2014 New Republic article entitled ''The Closed Mind of Richard Dawkins: His atheism is its own kind of narrow religion'', the atheist philosopher [[John Gray]] wrote:

In a 2014 New Republic article entitled ''The Closed Mind of Richard Dawkins: His atheism is its own kind of narrow religion'', the atheist philosopher [[John Gray (philosopher)|John Gray]] wrote:

{{cquote|One might wager a decent sum of money that it has never occurred to Dawkins that to many people he appears as a comic figure. His default mode is one of rational indignation—a stance of withering patrician disdain for the untutored mind of a kind one might expect in a schoolmaster in a minor public school sometime in the 1930s. He seems to have no suspicion that any of those he despises could find his stilted pose of indignant rationality merely laughable. “I am not a good observer,” he writes modestly. He is referring to his observations of animals and plants, but his weakness applies more obviously in the case of humans. Transfixed in wonderment at the workings of his own mind, Dawkins misses much that is of importance in human beings—himself and others.<ref>[http://www.newrepublic.com/article/119596/appetite-wonder-review-closed-mind-richard-dawkins ''The Closed Mind of Richard Dawkins''], New Republic by John Gray</ref>}}

{{cquote|One might wager a decent sum of money that it has never occurred to Dawkins that to many people he appears as a comic figure. His default mode is one of rational indignation—a stance of withering patrician disdain for the untutored mind of a kind one might expect in a schoolmaster in a minor public school sometime in the 1930s. He seems to have no suspicion that any of those he despises could find his stilted pose of indignant rationality merely laughable. “I am not a good observer,” he writes modestly. He is referring to his observations of animals and plants, but his weakness applies more obviously in the case of humans. Transfixed in wonderment at the workings of his own mind, Dawkins misses much that is of importance in human beings—himself and others.<ref>[http://www.newrepublic.com/article/119596/appetite-wonder-review-closed-mind-richard-dawkins ''The Closed Mind of Richard Dawkins''], New Republic by John Gray</ref>}}

In a April 2013 article in The Spectator entitled ''Richard Dawkins has lost: meet the new new atheists'', [[Theo Hobson]] declared:

In a April 2013 article in ''The Spectator'' entitled ''Richard Dawkins has lost: meet the new [[New Atheism|new atheists]]'', [[Theo Hobson]] declared:

{{cquote|The [[New Atheism|atheist spring]] that began just over a decade ago is over, thank God. Richard Dawkins is now seen by many, even many non-believers, as a joke figure, shaking his fist at sky fairies. He’s the Mary Whitehouse of our day.<ref>[http://www.spectator.co.uk/features/8885481/after-the-new-atheism/ Richard Dawkins has lost: meet the new new atheists] by [[Theo Hobson]], The Spectator, April 13, 2013</ref>

{{cquote|The [[New Atheism|atheist spring]] that began just over a decade ago is over, thank God. Richard Dawkins is now seen by many, even many non-believers, as a joke figure, shaking his fist at sky fairies.<ref>[http://www.spectator.co.uk/features/8885481/after-the-new-atheism/ Richard Dawkins has lost: meet the new new atheists] by [[Theo Hobson]], The Spectator, April 13, 2013</ref>}}

== Richard Dawkins, pseudoscience, and other errors ==

== Richard Dawkins, pseudoscience, and other errors ==