Genome mapper Francis Collins vs. evangelical atheist Richard Dawkins: Why is Collins in religion section but Dawkins in science?

A friend tells me that in the wacky world of book classification, genome mapper Francis Collins' book, The Language of God: A Scientist Presents Evidence for Belief is classed in the "Christian inspiration" section, and Richard Dawkins' anti-theistic tract The God Delusion is shelved in the "science" section.

My friend worries that the move was an attempt to denigrate the contents of Collins' book. Well, maybe, but perhaps works that entirely lack rigorous science content may be shelved in science sections if they attack traditional religions, and works that have lots of science content may be shelved in religion sections if the scientist is a Christian. And nonetheless people wonder why there is an intelligent design controversy ...

Of course, one reason that Collins' book ended up where it did is its title and back cover endorsements: (Archbishop Desmond Tutu, Naomi Judd, Bill Phillips (a Nobelist who talks a lot about God on the back jacket), and Robert H. Schuller.)

Still, Collins' book should have been in science - autobiography. But maybe his publisher (Free Press) hoped to make more by flogging it on the "inspiration" shelf. Shame.

If you like this blog, check out my book on the intelligent design controversy, By Design or by Chance?. You can read excerpts as well.

Book review: Andrew Brown on Dawkins' The God Delusion

No friend to religion, Andrew Brown nonetheless says that Richard Dawkins's "incurious and rambling" diatribe against religion "doesn't come close to explaining how faith has survived the assault of Darwinism," opening with

It has been obvious for years that Richard Dawkins had a fat book on religion in him, but who would have thought him capable of writing one this bad? Incurious, dogmatic, rambling and self-contradictory, it has none of the style or verve of his earlier works.

It gets better from there - or worse, I guess, if you bought The God Delusion. Which reminds me to come to the point of this blog: When was the last time Dawkins had an original idea in biology? I don't mean an idea that works. Hey, I'm not that fussy. I just mean an original idea. Why is he always writing trash about religion now?

Oh, and here is Dawkins' own comment on his book.

Plus (!) here is further comment from Andrew Brown:

I have just finished reviewing Richard Dawkins' new book on God for someone else and spent a sleepless night wondering if I should really have been so cruel about it. It's rubbish, of course; but why say so? What is it about the jeering, smug atheism so well represented on the internet, as well as in Dawkins' books, that makes me so very angry? Perhaps this is a rage at heresy, since in lots of ways I think he's right, and our disagreements ought to be quite trivial. But the more I think of them, the more serious they become.

Brown - to his credit - realizes that a book is a bomb if he feels forced to say nice things about it.

If you like this blog, check out my book on the intelligent design controversy, By Design or by Chance?. You can read excerpts as well.