Darwin's rottweiler Richard Dawkins in The Enemies of Reason. Photograph: Channel 4
Last night saw the return to our screens of Darwin's rottweiler and tormentor of the devout, Professor Richard Dawkins, with The Enemies of Reason, his two-part broadside against irrational belief systems, astrology, complementary medicine, psychics, crystal merchants and dirt worshippers.
While the critics generally found themselves in alignment with Dawkins' argument, most struggled to see the point of the show. Writing in The Scotsman, Paul Whitelaw said: "It's an enjoyable piece of polemic, even if Dawkins is, as ever, preaching to the converted." The Times' Andrew Billen felt the good Professor was getting upset over nothing: "What Dawkins doesn't seem to get is that for most people clairvoyance is not a rival to science but part of the entertainment industry". Whereas The Guardian's Sam Wollaston simply saw a bit of a mismatch, pointing out that, "These people are bonkers. Pitching Professor Dawkins against them is a little unfair."
The Daily Telegraph summed up the consensus: "Sympathetic as one may be to his ideas, it's hard to imagine anyone but him wanting to live in a world run by his rules."
So have they got the show about right? What exactly is Dawkins' role? Are believers in astrology harmless or dangerous? And is this the coming of the Age of Aquarius? Your views please.
