Further! When we spread our investigative net wider, we find that Barrett DOES believe that children have an innate belief in god, but that he denied (on at least one occasion that he meant to imply the claim that Perry makes.
On the site: Patheos
( http://www.patheos.com/blogs/epiphenom/2009/01/childish-beliefs-of-dr-justin-barrett.html )
there is an account of an attack on Barrett's claims by another Oxford academic:
Here’s what Grayling had to say about it:
Barrett and friends infer from the first half of these unexceptionable facts that children are hardwired to believe in a supreme being. Not only does this ignore the evidence from developmental psychology about the second stage of cognitive maturation, but is in itself a very big – and obviously hopeful – jump indeed. Moreover it ignores the fact that large tracts of humankind (the Chinese for a numerous example) have no beliefs in a supreme being, innate or learned, and that most primitive religion is animistic.
- See more at: http://www.patheos.com/blogs/epiphenom/2009/01/childish-beliefs-of-dr-justin-barrett.html#sthash.bEFiYEEC.dpuf
In response to that attack:
Barrett responded by complaining:
Had Grayling attended the seminar as Brown did (or read my book, Why Would Anyone Believe in God?), he would know that I do not say that religion is “hardwired” or “innate” – rather that children have propensities to believe in gods because of how their minds naturally work.
- See more at: http://www.patheos.com/blogs/epiphenom/2009/01/childish-beliefs-of-dr-justin-barrett.html#sthash.bEFiYEEC.dpuf
So Perry, your christian brother Barrett, cuts the ground right away from under you, so that you fall into the chasm of being a mere propagandist.
A 'propensity' (tendency) is a long way from everyone "knowing" that god exists.
Footnote: the link again for that discussion is:
http://www.patheos.com/blogs/epiphenom/2009/01/childish-beliefs-of-dr-justin-barrett.html