Here is a review of Richard Dawkins‘s latest book, The God Delusion, by biologist H. Allen Orr. Here is my favorite paragraph:

One reason for the lack of extended argument in The God Delusion is clear: Dawkins doesn’t seem very good at it. Indeed he suffers from several problems when attempting to reason philosophically. The most obvious is that he has a preordained set of conclusions at which he’s determined to arrive. Consequently, Dawkins uses any argument, however feeble, that seems to get him there and the merit of various arguments appears judged largely by where they lead.

One would expect philosophers such as Brian Leiter to take Dawkins apart, but they won’t.  They’re more interested in solidarity than in truth.  Socrates would be appalled.