Dawkins Dubiously Debunks Divinity

I stumbled across a link to an article by renowned atheist Richard Dawkins titled What Use is Religion?.

With a title like that, how could I not read it?

I was disappointed. Dawkins is a skilled essayist–even though I usually disagree with him I enjoy his writing style. He throws in the most fascinating illustrations, and his logic is engaging.

This article, however, fell flat.

The key paragraph:

So religious faith is a byproduct of childhood naivete?

The problem with his argument is that it doesn’t explain why so many adults continue to believe this specific “bad advice” received in childhood.

After all, we reject both specific mythologies (Santa Claus) and specific beliefs (bad people always have bad things happen to them). Why then do so many keep believing in God (especially so many smart ones) if it’s just another piece of bad advice?

Also, I’m not sure his theory could account for adult converts from atheism.

His argument, intriguing though it is, doesn’t hold water.

Dawkins hatred of religion is fairly well known, and has always interested me. It’s one thing to not be religious, it’s another thing to hate religion utterly.

That’s why I was struck by this anecdote:

I don’t know Dawkins, but I can’t help but wonder if that story (and others like it) help account for his zealous atheistic convictions.

While trying to explain away adult beliefs via childhood experiences, it seems that Dawkins inadvertently does the same to himself.