Just wanted to point out the irony of Richard Dawkins, who "has spent his adult life researching animal behavior and evolutionary biology
," writing a book on religious philosophy
(something about people who know nothing about a subject and unfounded opinions?). Apparently scientists are allowed to play upon their credentials in the field of evolutionary biology to write a philosophically vapid book on a COMPLETELY different subject.
Also, NOMA does work...provided it remains N-O. But wait, Dawkins (the only scientist who ever mattered, to some) has objections to this, too...
OP - Go to ND. Your 1L you'll be too busy trying to figure out how to flourish in law school. 2L you'll be in London (and among many an atheist). 3L you'll be prepping for the bar and looking for a job. Not much time to concern yourself with how religious campus is or is not. If your profs bring up religious ethics in class and it makes you uncomfortable, call them out on it. Be careful though, as they are much smarter than you and will probably make you look silly in front of your peers.
If you go to Minnesota you'll always wonder if you should've shelved the atheist badge you wear on your sleeve for 3 years and risked occasional discomfort for better name recognition, job placement, salary, etc. etc. Who knows, you may come away from ND a more well-rounded, open-minded, tolerant (gasp!) individual.
The original Dawkins comment was to do with intolerance. As I said, it's perfectly clear why he wrote the God Delusion. You don't address this at all. Religion has an impact on day-to-day life, including science, with no basis other than "Because we said so because our ancient text says so".
Perhaps I'm misguided here, but shouldn't lawyers be looking to use evidence rather than revelation?
I think scientists, professionals who do careful analysis and use evidence, are well-placed to look into religion.
Besides, how is TGD vapid?
Why should OP shelve his atheist badge, if he even has one? Seems less apparent than someone wearing a crucifix.
Perhaps OP doesn't want to get into a slanging match with a professor on certain aspects of religion. Shit, OP is going to law school for a legal education/ to think like a lawyer/ to be in huge debt/ etc
I don't know the atmosphere at ND or Minn, but if ND doesn't feel right because the religious angle is pushed too much for OP, then OP shouldn't go.
And now we're back to the tolerance thing. Would going to ND make
OP more tolerant?