I’ve recently been re-reading Richard Dawkins’ The God Delusion, and one question keeps gnawing away at me: Why does Dawkins think that he’s qualified to write about philosophical theology?

Dawkins is, no doubt, a good evolutionary biologist, and he’s certainly a very good communicator of science to the masses. But that doesn’t mean that he knows anything about theology.

And as a scientist, Dawkins must know a bit about logic; interpreting evidence requires an ability to think carefully about what conclusions can be drawn from it, and with what degree of certainty. But that doesn’t mean that Dawkins knows anything about philosophy.

Yet Dawkins does, for some reason, feel qualified to write about philosophical theology. Why?

The most natural explanation is that he is more than just a scientist. There’s no reason why someone with a background in science shouldn’t also know theology and philosophy. Perhaps Dawkins has spent sufficient time studying religion to be an expert in that too.

And yet he clearly hasn’t. Dawkins occasionally expresses doubt about whether philosophy and theology are subjects in which one can possess or lack expertise. He then answers these doubts by demonstrating his ignorance of each.

When it comes to theological doctrines and philosophical arguments, Dawkins isn’t an expert. So why does he pick up his pen?