Again accused of ignorance of theology. But what is there in “theology” to be ignorant ABOUT? Tell me 1 theological fact & I’ll learn it.
Dawkins is evidently ignorant of the obviously and necessarily theological character of his atheism; or unaware, or incapable of recognizing, that any atheist argument is expressly and necessarily a theological argument, or that there is no conceivable significance of atheism intrinsically (as ideology or belief system or ism, arguably also as phenomenon) that would not be inherently a theological significance. Atheism offers as theological fact a supposed, and supposedly significant, non-factuality of the subject of theology. The notion of a non-existence of theological fact is the opposite of the atheist thought, which originates in, constitutes, and upholds a position on its own absolute theological facticity. The doubt as to the existence of theological fact at all would be the beginning of the agnostic or possibly the anismic, not the atheist, inquiry.