 Richard Dawkins is quite silly, I think...
Former educated atheist of 10 years here.
I used to bash religion, theism, and spirituality all the time, and I could debate with the best of theologians, especially Christians, Wiccans, and Mormons.
I read the article and found it to be yet another silly Dawkins diatribe in which he makes a common mistake - one that I used to make: trying to define spirituality through a mathematical intellectual system.
When one examines spirituality in terms of mathematical pragmatism (as Dawkins does), it's easy to poke holes in it. I could do it right now.
However, spirituality and faith are not based on concrete facts and figures. The results are verifiable, certainly (eg. look at all of us recovering addicts out there), but not by using the scientific method of absolutes.
Finally, Dawkins also makes another mistake that is all-too-common amongst today's militant atheists (one which I did not make): making generalizations of religion from a Judeo-Christian conceptualization of cosmology and ontology.
Making statements like: "Evolution leaves God with nothing to do" is a gross oversimplification of God as a spiritual entity. It's also a classic Straw Man Argument.
If Dawkins is going to promote logic as superior to spiritualiy, he should try actually employing it in his arguments instead of logical fallacies.
--Outvoid--
|