[MD] Richard Dawkins vs John Lennox Redeaux

[nom de plumeweb]

Howdy,

Many thanks for your polite and considerate responses.  In reading
these initial comments it is gratifying to see that there was not an
immediate brouhaha between atheists and theists.

Otherwise, I have again (sigh) relearned rule number one—always say
what you have to say as opposed to assuming that folks can read your
mind.  Then again, it is interesting and enlightening to see how the
excerpt was snapped into the construct of the forum.

What struck me hard, in the video, was that each debater could ground
his arguments in Pirsig's Quality and achieve, a less disjointed, in
the case of Dawkins and a more direct, in the case of Lennox,
understanding.  Pirsig's work speaks to the crux of the matter.
Quality has the ability to provide a foundation, a methodology?, to
guide natural selection beyond Dawkins' “undirected process” and
without Lennox's appeal to the supernatural.

As I understand the debate:  after Dawkins dismisses religion as
“superseded”, he does not have a fundamental organizing concept, other
than to later state, that natural selection is an “undirected process”
which is not chance but the “very opposite of chance”; while Lennox,
in refute amplifies and hopes to reduce to absurdity, an argument in
Dawkins book by denying that scientific theories are produce by “an
unguided, random, mindless process” which is mere reductionist
materialism.  He is then left to ground his argument in the
supernatural.

The relevant quotes from the two men, as best I could hear, are:
Dawkins, “...That this (Darwinian evolution) can not only be explained
by a, an, undirected process[sic].  It's not chance by the way. It's
entirely wrong to say it's chance.  It's not chance.  Natural
selection is the very opposite of chance and that's the essence of it.
That was what Darwin discovered...”;
and Lennox, “If, in the end, my beliefs, my theories, my scientific
theories are the results ultimately of the motion of atoms in my brain
produced by an unguided, random, mindless process...”

The surface form of this debate led me to think that Pirsig was driven
by something similar.  This is why I posted the link.

Addendum:

One, This video is only an excerpt.  I do not know all that was said;

Two, Obviously, and I hope honestly, I have selected statements which
best illustrate my proposal; and

Three, Don't let me put my words into your mouths.  Watch the video
and think for yourselves.  Based on what I've read on MOQ, this last
one is a given.

Best Regards