An unexpected treat.

[rinnia]

While cruising Google News, I stumbled across this article. Being that it came courtesy of NewsCorp, I was ready to be enraged, and sure enough, the first few lines of the article got me notably riled up. My intended line-by-line dressing down, however, isn't what I'm ending up writing. Okay, a quick snip - if God is omniscient and omnipotent, why does evolution have to disprove his existence? Couldn't you believe that he directed evolution to lead to the final result of humanity? I don't care if people believe in God, as personal beliefs are just that, but denying reality in favor of spiritual beliefs is a real societal problem. You must believe in evolution. It's true. If you want to believe in God, believe he directed it; disbelieving in evolution is just not an option. Also, natural selection is not "blind". The description you're looking for would probably be "not sentient". Blind is far from an appropriate term to describe the process.

One of these times I'll type up the simple paper dots and patterned fabric exercise that simulates natural selection. It's a great way to introduce the concept to those who've never seen/understood it before.

The anger at the intro to the article wasn't the surprising part, nor was the fact that I enjoyed Dawkins's piece. No, what stunned me was just how big I was smiling when I reached the end of the article. What Dawkins says in that article is not just correct, not just logical, but also utterly and completely beautiful. I honestly barked out a laugh of appreciation at "God is not dead. He was never alive in the first place." I've been joking lately about how I want a bumper sticker that says, "God is not dead!" and beneath that, in smaller letters, "He just never existed." Reading his part of the article was a bit like reading my own thoughts, and the idea that someone who is so prominent and in control of such pleasant prose is saying what I wish I had the platform to declare is very satisfying.

Read it. Think about it. Rejoice in the lovely, comprehensible, not at all theological or supernatural process that brought us to where we are and marvel at the scene outside your window, molecules, cells, electric impulses all working together to make the living world we inhabit.

Beautiful.

Comments

[draconox.livejournal.com]

Richard Dawkins is a fantastic, articulate writer with some brilliant ideas (have you read his book "unweaving the rainbow"? It's all about the awe that he has for science and nature, etc. Pretty good. The God Delusion was also an interesting read). I share his wonder at what evolution has created, and his disbelief in god.

That said, where does he get off telling people what to believe? Evolution is true - you know it, I know it, and all the evidence is for it. That doesn't give anyone the right to force that knowledge or belief on anyone else, especially in this country. I understand the frustration with people who refuse to believe it because it goes against something they've been taught, but the thought police don't exist yet, and hopefully never will. You want to believe in evolution? Fine. Reconcile that with God however it works for you - but don't blame the people that don't have the advantages of your education and your experiences for believing what they were taught. Try to teach them, but you can't force them to realize that something is true.

When I get home tonight I'll look up a part of the god delusion that really irritated me about Dawkins - it has something to do with him pointing out an issue regarding religion and children and giving no way to solve what he sees as a problem. I think what bugs me most about him is that he is arrogant enough to believe with absolute certainty that he is right in all cases - but he doesn't have answers for things that he calls problems. If someone is going to point out a flaw, they'd better be prepared to discuss ways to fix it, in my mind.

Also: I need your current email so I can send you that picture. I haven't forgotten. :)

[rinnia.livejournal.com]

I haven't read anything by him, actually, which is why I was pleasantly surprised by the article. I've seen some of his television specials. Mixed feelings there - he has a lot of good ideas and makes some good points, but he also does it in a condescending way at times. You're not going to sway anyone by talking down to them.

So yeah, basically, I think you've got a really good point there. You can't tell people what to believe; it's insulting and it ultimately gets you nowhere. The best answer is, I think, to have civil discussions and try to explain why you hold the views you do. I had a good talk with my brother (who attends church every Sunday with his girlfriend) while I was in Reno visiting about religion and about how I'm fine with him being religious and believing in God, so long as it doesn't interfere with his views on science. My brother's a smart kid who's had access to a good education - he agrees that evolution is true. He just thinks that God made evolution happen, which is fine. It's not what I think, but then, if everyone thought the same, what sort of world would we have left to live in?

My issue isn't so much with people who have been raised on religion and haven't been exposed to other beliefs; it's more with the people in this country who have access to information and choose not to use it and instead claim they know what evolution's about when they clearly don't. Saying you didn't descend from a chimpanzee is not an argument against evolution. It's actually quite accurate. It's these people, who could learn, who could at least check their definitions before spouting misinformation that really get my ire up. If you don't know about evolution, that's okay. You don't have to. I don't know a lot about philosophy, which is why I don't get into deep philosophical debates - I only argue general topics and specifics that I've researched and am knowledgeable about. I just ask that if people don't know about evolution, they keep out of debates about it's validity or do some research before joining in.

As far as children go, my only real opinion is that they should have access to good education, including (but not limited to, of course) evolution. I know this is a pipe dream and never going to happen for most of the world, but it's what I wish could happen. Since that's unlikely, people should instead work on making scientific information available to adults, so that they can come to educated conclusions. If nothing in their belief systems change, okay. At least they had the opportunity to learn and really think about it before settling there.

I'm kind of rambling now, and have no idea how to end this, so... end.

Send it to rinoaheartilly[at]gmail[dot]com please! :D