Why There Almost Certainly Is a God: Doubting Dawkins

Keith Ward's "Why There Almost Certainly Is a God: Doubting Dawkins" constitutes a direct philosophical counterattack against Richard Dawkins' "The God Delusion," specifically targeting the claim that God's existence is highly improbable. Ward, drawing on his expertise as both a philosopher and theologian, systematically dismantles what he perceives as Dawkins' philosophical naivety and scientific overreach in pronouncing on metaphysical questions.

The work centers on exposing fundamental category errors in Dawkins' argument. Ward contends that Dawkins misunderstands the classical conception of God as a simple, necessary being rather than a complex entity subject to evolutionary explanation. Where Dawkins argues that any designer must be more complex than what it designs, Ward counters that this betrays a failure to grasp the metaphysical distinction between contingent physical entities and necessary being. God, in classical theism, is not a complex arrangement of parts but pure actuality without composition.

Ward's method combines philosophical analysis with scientific literacy, challenging Dawkins on his own territory. He argues that contemporary physics, particularly quantum mechanics and cosmological fine-tuning, points toward rather than away from divine design. The emergence of consciousness and the unreasonable effectiveness of mathematics in describing physical reality receive treatment as phenomena better explained by theism than naturalism. Ward particularly emphasizes how the laws of physics themselves require explanation, rejecting Dawkins' assumption that science can operate without metaphysical foundations.

The text engages broader debates about the relationship between science and religion, positioning itself within a tradition of sophisticated philosophical theism that includes Swinburne and Plantinga. Ward critiques the new atheist movement's tendency to attack caricatures of religious belief while ignoring rigorous philosophical theology. His approach demonstrates how classical arguments for God's existence remain viable when properly understood, particularly the cosmological argument from contingency.

Ward's contribution lies in showing how scientific materialism, when pressed to its logical conclusions, faces explanatory gaps regarding fundamental features of reality. His work serves as a philosophical bridge, demonstrating to scientifically-minded readers why theism remains intellectually respectable. The monograph succeeds in shifting the burden of proof back onto naturalists to explain why anything exists at all, why the universe exhibits rational order, and how consciousness emerges from purely material processes. This reframing of the debate challenges the new atheist assumption that science has rendered God obsolete.