I see a huge difference between what the Times Literary Supplement is doing and what you’re trying to imply by showing Hitler’s Picture.
Firstly, let us not conflate THE TIMES LITERARY SUPPLEMENT and TIME Magazine. These are TWO DIFFERENT MAGAZINES.
Secondly, There is a HUGE difference between being selected BOOK OF THE YEAR BY THE TLS ( especially when the REASONS provided are detailed ) and being selected MAN OF THE YEAR by TIME.
Notice how the Times Literary Supplement DESCRIBES Meyer’s book :
“Meyer is a Christian, but atheists, and theists who believe God never intervenes in the natural world, will be instructed by his careful presentation of this fiendishly difficult problem.”
That sounds like a complement to me. In other words, his book was selected BECAUSE of the care in which it was researched and presented.
TIME MAGAZINE on the other hand tells us how a MAN OF THE YEAR is selected. HE OR SHE IS SOMEONE WHO : “for better or for WORSE, ...has done the most to influence the events of the year.”
TIME, I believe selected Hitler ( or the Ayatollah Khomeini in the late 70’s ) as people who FOR WORSE, has influenced the events of the year.
Let’s NOT try to IMPLY that the Times is calling Stephen Meyer’s book one of the worse ( as in Hitler’s selection ) because the explanation they provided on why it was selected does not tell us that at all.
I do have a problem with a philosopher, regardless of notoriety, providing critique on a field outside of his expertise. He may be perfectly capable of commenting on the skill with which an argument is made, but nothing on the basis for the argument.
I would also point out another author so honored as a TLS Book of the Year recipient - Barack Obama.