No, I read that. Not all creationists believe that the universe is less than ten thousand years old.
Another quote:
My own position would be that if a young earth creationist (YEC, the barking mad kind who believe the entire universe began after the domestication of the dog) is "breathtakingly above the other candidates", then the other candidates must be so bad that we should re-advertise and start afresh.
He seems to be specifically addressing "young earth creationists", and possibly even a subset of those (the "barking mad" ones).
Section 4 of the essay suggests that his guidance would not even be limited to religious beliefs: any beliefs, religious or otherwise, that pose a conflict to one's work position should be considered as grounds for non-employment. That's my reading of it, anyway.
Well, knowing Richard Dawkins, he thinks more or less any religious person is "barking mad." It sounds to me like he is just advocating for discrimination against people with stupid beliefs (where "stupid" is up to the employer to decide, I suppose), on the grounds that just being stupid is enough to put the quality and honesty of someone's work in doubt.
Personally, I think his position is barking mad itself. I mean, this statement
"Moreover, I would regard his equanimity in holding two diametrically opposing views simultaneously in his head as a revealing indicator that there is something wrong with his head."
is completely absurd. I'd love Mr. Dawkins to point at the human who has a full set of rational beliefs which are completely consistent with each other and consistent with his or her day-to-day life. If I were hiring a manager, I would discriminate against Mr. Dawkins in favor of someone who doesn't reject good workers on a whim.
Another quote:
My own position would be that if a young earth creationist (YEC, the barking mad kind who believe the entire universe began after the domestication of the dog) is "breathtakingly above the other candidates", then the other candidates must be so bad that we should re-advertise and start afresh.
He seems to be specifically addressing "young earth creationists", and possibly even a subset of those (the "barking mad" ones).
Section 4 of the essay suggests that his guidance would not even be limited to religious beliefs: any beliefs, religious or otherwise, that pose a conflict to one's work position should be considered as grounds for non-employment. That's my reading of it, anyway.