> Allow me the indulgence of quoting myself: "I frown upon the production of
> ill-considered, poorly-reasoned crap, which is what nearly all New Atheist
> (pseudo-)philosophy seems to be on those occasions when it deviates from
> announcement of the obvious, as a general rule."
Of NAs I've only read Dawkins, but complaining about their obviousness strike a bit like complaining that Sagan's Cosmos wasn't peer reviewed. Dawkins, whatever his faults, is not aiming at an academic audience. I'd guess most people have never been exposed to any kind of systematic argument along these lines.
-- Andy