[tallhappy]

What are you talking about?

Who ever said or thought the right was anti-Sceince.

Who ever thought Dawkins isn't a hardcore leftist.

[Tomalak]

Creationists are invariably on the right.

[Reactionary]

The left has "appropriated" the extreme right's literary tradition, I'm afraid.

Who are the literary heroes of the postmodernists? Martin Heidegger, Friedrich Wilhelm Nietzsche, Paul de Man. None of those men was a friend to liberal democracy. All of them were anti-Enlightenment, anti-rationality, anti-science.

Heidegger, perhaps the greatest philosopher of the 20th century, was a member of the Nazi Party. De Man wrote pro-Nazi articles in his native Belgium. Nietzsche made war upon Christianity and proclaimed the death of God.

At least those men could write. The tenured radicals who inhabit our universities not only lack that ability, they lack the ability to make sense of what they've read. They give mediocrity a bad name.

[general_re]

If I may, can I suggest we not look at this through the "creation versus evolution" lens for a moment? Yes, it's true that Dawkins is a leftist, but it's also, but it's important that cogent criticisms of pomo nonsense come from leftists like Dawkins and Sokal (who is a wholly unreconstructed socialist himself). While much good and valuable criticism of postmodernism hascome from writers like Roger Kimball, Hilton Kramer, and Gertrude Himmelfarb, it's all too easy for the leftist practitioners of such quackery to dismiss conservative criticism as being biased and flawed.

Ultimately, the goal of postmodernism in general is to deny the reality of objective truth, and objective fact, and to render everything in terms of opinion and feelings and so forth. One may disagree with Dawkins et al about what exactly the truth is, but let us at least give him credit for standing up for the notion of truth in general. Let's not disagree with him strictly for the sake of disagreeing with him ;)