Your reasoning that “If Dawkins does not know what caused the universe then Dawkins is not an atheist” is rather bad. Take for example three explanatory hypotheses, h1, h2, h3. Let’s say h1 is the hypothesis that Abraham Lincoln shot Kennedy, h2 is that Oswald shot Kennedy, and h3 is that the CIA did it. If we didn’t know whether h2 or h3 were true, it wouldn’t follow that we also don’t know if h1 is false. H1 is obviously false, in fact it has a 0 probability (But let’s pretend it can be a hypothesis). Just like the 3 hypothesis example it can be true that Dawkins might not know which hypothesis is the best regarding the creation of the cosmos but it doesn’t follow from this that he can’t know which ones are false.

False dichotomy.

Wrote, yes. It was in the questionnaire she responded to. The only thing that comes close is Bunge’s eight volume Treatise on Basic Philosophy, and even that was incomplete in respect to describing a fully integrated worldview (e.g. no volumes on politics or aesthetics).

But if you know of any book (or set of books) that attempts to describe a complete, fully integrated worldview covering (and thoroughly linking together in a coherent fashion) all six Aristotelian categories (epistemology, science, metaphysics, ethics, aesthetics, and politics–a complete integration of which also requires at least basic theories of semantics and metaethics), do let me know.

All links are working as of now. Don’t know what happened.

You didn’t actually say that to her did you?