Dawkins is a very important scientist, but a pretty crap philosopher. Like C.S.Lewis, who was a third-rate theologian although a great literary critic and historian, he should never have strayed beyond his speciality.
I confess to never having read Lewis with any sense that his writings were original or academic theological writings. He might draw from theological ideas but is an apologist. If anything he is an explainer of theology in which case he was first rate.
As far as Dawkins is concerned, having ''Got'' Darwinism myself years earlier I confess not to seeing Dawkins books as anything startling. They are not scientific papers and one must see what their actual effects were in academic science. But he is more instrumental in the invention of a new stealth religion whereas Lewis is part of a long line.
Dawkins religious achievement is crystalising a cosmic view based on Universal Darwinism, Defining atheists as a social and political group, scientism, and evangelical atheism, a fundamental antitheism, the moral imperatives of the New atheism.
I agree that most think he is a crap philosopher.
