Richard Dawkins
The blind watchmaker was the first I heard of Richard Dawkins and his scientific escapades. His throttling clarification of Darwin’s ‘On The Origin Of Species’ is the backbone of his conscious, religious criticisms and scientific principles. Although I was impressed with Dawkins’ logical reasoning behind natural selection, I didn’t pursue my interest in his ideas until I picked up a copy of his latest novel ‘The God Delusion’.
With a title as bold and ballsy as this, it is easy to see there are no misconceptions about the direction Dawkins’s science has taken him in. The arrogant atheist I had read about was not only baring his teeth, but sinking them deep into the major arteries of every religious community around the world.
“But why do such a thing?” was my immediate response. Why would an intellectual scientist as keen and curious as Dawkins dedicate such efforts in crafting this novel when there are so many scientific mysteries out there he could be unravelling? Well, according to Dawkins there are thousands upon thousands of children around the world who are being purposefully brought up to believe in a non-existent and hideously flawed theology. The professor’s fundamental concerns lay with the psychological abuse that is passed down from generation to generation in the way of various personal belief systems. Dawkins observes that people’s religious beliefs are default depending on the era and location that they are brought up in. This may be true, but people convert from one religion to another - do they do this for purely theological reasons? If so, how often does this occur and why is it prone to happening? These are but two of the many questions that Dawkins leaves unanswered in his book. His dismissal of Buddhism as not being a religion is also astonishing, as is his sheer persistence and determination to sweep the reader off of their feet and into a state of non-belief.
The book demonstrates some examples of how creationist schools in the UK are teaching the bible’s scripture as scientific fact. Dawkins goes on to reveal some creepy examples of Bible content (Judges 19:25 is perhaps the most disturbing) and toys with the idea that perhaps human beings do not derive their morals from scripture… one of the key arguments discussed in the need for religion in society.
I approached the author’s views with pessimism. There are so many things that science is unable to explain, why should I be torn between believing in a God that can’t be disproved to exist and a science that can’t yet provide the answers?
It was after I asked myself this question that I realised I was missing a significant point in Dawkins’ message, whether it is intentional or not. I was raised Catholic and I was taught not to question my belief system or else be damned. This is surely all that Dawkins is asking his audience to do… albeit in a roundabout, challenging and almost ferocious manner…
…To step back and really look at the evidence they see before them before they enforce what they have been told onto impressionable people who point blank believe everything that they are told (children).
To be able to question and debate spiritual, political, religious, ethical, artistic, economical and historical issues is a gift. A gift that I have often squandered myself, and this is something that Dawkins has helped me to realise.
I was sent to a Catholic primary school and the religious attitudes of my educators taught me not to question what I was told. This destroyed any enthusiasm I had for learning and, in tern, led to me failing my 11+. I did not get into grammar school so I was enrolled at a Catholic secondary school, where the attitudes of my teachers differed very little from my primary school. I recall being twelve years old when Mr Granville Powell stepped in to substitute a geography lesson one spring afternoon. Mr Powell was an energetic man from Yorkshire with an obscure attitude and a deafening scream. While we were supposed to be learning about arable farming, he told us a story about a group of children that were on a school trip a few years previous. He said that the teacher in charge told the students that they must do whatever they were told without question. The trip was going very well until the students were asked to cross a busy road; the students were almost all the way across when the teacher yelled ‘Jump!’ All of the students leapt forward onto the curb except for one. One boy stood where he was and asked the question ‘Why?’ and, according to my substitute teacher, because he questioned authority he was “smashed to bits” by an oncoming lorry.
This story maybe useful when teaching children the importance of road safety, but as a lesson on questioning elders, it is absolutely absurd. My teacher’s story petrified me; it scared me into believing that I should never even consider questioning anything that was presented to me by an authoritative figure. This, once again, led me to ignoring everything altogether, if I couldn’t question was I was told I was not interested. I became so disassociated in class that when my time at secondary school came to an end, I had to attend evening classes and an extra year at College to make up for my wasted time.
What would it have been like for me as a child, I wonder, if I was taught to question ideas and theories as opposed to point blank except, and subsequently ignore, everything. Of course there is no way of finding out. All I can do is extend my appreciation for people like Richard Dawkins who, even if they are a little controversial, are trying to make things a little easier for future generations growing up in this ever complicated, vastly unexplained and desperately interesting planet.
Professor Richard Dawkins
Copyright Daniel Emmerson 2008 all rights reserved
