batmannow
ELITE MEMBER
- Joined
- Jan 28, 2008
- Messages
- 18,830
- Reaction score
- -19
- Country
- Location
A question of faith
dawn.com
By Irfan Husain
October 08, 2008 Wednesday Shawwal 8, 1429
AMONG the many changes in attitudes that took place in the West in the wake of 9/11, one was in the way people viewed religion. For the evangelical Christians, the attacks on America by people thought to be Muslims were seen as a new offensive in a centuries-old conflict. But for many atheists and agnostics, 9/11 was a reminder of the bloodshed that has historically accompanied all religious belief, particularly monotheistic faiths.
In England, particularly, Christianity has been at a low ebb for a long time, with church attendance down to under a million in a population of 60 million. Indeed, going to church on Sunday is now more of a social occasion than a religious experience.
With this background, it is easy to see why people simply cannot grasp the motivation of Muslims who are willing to kill and be killed in the name of their faith. To them, this kind of behaviour is not only abhorrent, but also completely irrational.
And while many openly articulate their lack of belief, the two most persuasive voices in England are Richard Dawkins and Christopher Hitchens. The latter now lives in America, but his best-selling book, ‘God is not great: how religion poisons everything’, has become a bible for atheists. In this polemical work, Hitchens lays down his core belief thus:
“God did not create man in his own image. Evidently, it was the other way about, which is the painless explanation for the profusion of gods and religions, and the fratricide both between and among faiths, that we see all about us and that has so retarded the development of civilisation…”
Richard Dawkins is an acclaimed biologist who rests his atheism on the cornerstone of Darwinian evolutionary theory. He was catapulted to fame with his book, ‘The selfish gene’, and has published prolifically over the years.
He appears with religious figures in conferences and TV talk shows, and with his articulate views and scientific training, elegantly demolishes the arguments put forward by religious scholars.
In his recent book, ‘The God delusion’, Dawkins describes an experiment that involved 1,802 patients who had received coronary bypass surgery. They were divided into three groups. Group1 received intercessory prayers and knew it; Group 2 received no prayers and did not know it; and Group 3 received prayers and didn’t know it.
Prayers were offered at three churches distant from the hospitals participating in the experiment. Those offering the prayers were given only the first names of the patients, together with the first letter of the surname, and were told to pray for successful operations and quick recovery without complications.
The results, reported in the April 2006 issue of the American Heart Journal, showed there was no difference between those patients who were prayed for and those who weren’t.
Darwin’s theory postulates the gradual emergence of mankind (and all other species) through a gradual series of evolutionary steps. This progress was made as a result of survival challenges successful species faced and overcame along the way. All physical and mental attributes we have acquired over the eons can be traced to this constant battle for survival. Thus, our thumbs with opposing fingers helped us to craft tools; the peacock’s flamboyant tail gives the male an instrument to attract females. Dawkins quotes Darwin: “…natural selection is daily and hourly scrutinising, throughout the world, every variation, even the slightest; rejecting that which is bad, preserving and adding up all that is good; silently and insensibly working, whenever and wherever opportunity offers, at the improvement of each organic being.”
So what evolutionary benefit does religion confer on its followers? Clearly, a child born into a faith will probably cling to it as it has few options until it is an adult. Thus, a boy raised as an animist on a remote island will not even have heard about other religions, and in his worldview, everybody believes in the same gods. For this boy, following the faith of his parents is the way to survive. There is no element of choice here: children believe in whatever doctrine they are taught to believe.
At the end of his book, Dawkins gives a sample list of websites that feature a variety of agnostic and atheistic opinions. Clearly, there is huge ferment over the questions of faith on the internet. Among the scientific community, there is almost complete consensus on the existence of an all-knowing, all-powerful Creator.
Ten years ago, Edward Larson and Larry Withan wrote an article in the Sept 1998 issue of Scientific American in which they placed the number of scientists who did not believe in God at around 70 per cent.
It would be safe to say that in the decade since this article appeared, the number has probably gone up.
Although atheism and agnosticism have increased in academia and western Europe over the last 50 years, faith in religious beliefs is going up in the United States and the Muslim world. These divergent worldviews have produced a mutual incomprehension and suspicion on both sides of the divide.
This gap is most visible in the ongoing electoral battle in the United States. Although both candidates profess strong Christian belief, Obama is widely viewed as the secular candidate, while McCain is seen as the flag-bearer for the muscular brand of right-wing evangelical Christians who are becoming increasingly political.
It is a telling comment on these days of acute polarisation that both candidates are required to take a public stand on their beliefs. Normally, religion is a private matter between an individual and God, should he believe in a deity. But across the world, people now tend to wear their faith on their sleeves. Obviously, in Darwinian terms, this display is an evolutionary survival mechanism in a dangerously divided world..
dawn.com
By Irfan Husain
October 08, 2008 Wednesday Shawwal 8, 1429
AMONG the many changes in attitudes that took place in the West in the wake of 9/11, one was in the way people viewed religion. For the evangelical Christians, the attacks on America by people thought to be Muslims were seen as a new offensive in a centuries-old conflict. But for many atheists and agnostics, 9/11 was a reminder of the bloodshed that has historically accompanied all religious belief, particularly monotheistic faiths.
In England, particularly, Christianity has been at a low ebb for a long time, with church attendance down to under a million in a population of 60 million. Indeed, going to church on Sunday is now more of a social occasion than a religious experience.
With this background, it is easy to see why people simply cannot grasp the motivation of Muslims who are willing to kill and be killed in the name of their faith. To them, this kind of behaviour is not only abhorrent, but also completely irrational.
And while many openly articulate their lack of belief, the two most persuasive voices in England are Richard Dawkins and Christopher Hitchens. The latter now lives in America, but his best-selling book, ‘God is not great: how religion poisons everything’, has become a bible for atheists. In this polemical work, Hitchens lays down his core belief thus:
“God did not create man in his own image. Evidently, it was the other way about, which is the painless explanation for the profusion of gods and religions, and the fratricide both between and among faiths, that we see all about us and that has so retarded the development of civilisation…”
Richard Dawkins is an acclaimed biologist who rests his atheism on the cornerstone of Darwinian evolutionary theory. He was catapulted to fame with his book, ‘The selfish gene’, and has published prolifically over the years.
He appears with religious figures in conferences and TV talk shows, and with his articulate views and scientific training, elegantly demolishes the arguments put forward by religious scholars.
In his recent book, ‘The God delusion’, Dawkins describes an experiment that involved 1,802 patients who had received coronary bypass surgery. They were divided into three groups. Group1 received intercessory prayers and knew it; Group 2 received no prayers and did not know it; and Group 3 received prayers and didn’t know it.
Prayers were offered at three churches distant from the hospitals participating in the experiment. Those offering the prayers were given only the first names of the patients, together with the first letter of the surname, and were told to pray for successful operations and quick recovery without complications.
The results, reported in the April 2006 issue of the American Heart Journal, showed there was no difference between those patients who were prayed for and those who weren’t.
Darwin’s theory postulates the gradual emergence of mankind (and all other species) through a gradual series of evolutionary steps. This progress was made as a result of survival challenges successful species faced and overcame along the way. All physical and mental attributes we have acquired over the eons can be traced to this constant battle for survival. Thus, our thumbs with opposing fingers helped us to craft tools; the peacock’s flamboyant tail gives the male an instrument to attract females. Dawkins quotes Darwin: “…natural selection is daily and hourly scrutinising, throughout the world, every variation, even the slightest; rejecting that which is bad, preserving and adding up all that is good; silently and insensibly working, whenever and wherever opportunity offers, at the improvement of each organic being.”
So what evolutionary benefit does religion confer on its followers? Clearly, a child born into a faith will probably cling to it as it has few options until it is an adult. Thus, a boy raised as an animist on a remote island will not even have heard about other religions, and in his worldview, everybody believes in the same gods. For this boy, following the faith of his parents is the way to survive. There is no element of choice here: children believe in whatever doctrine they are taught to believe.
At the end of his book, Dawkins gives a sample list of websites that feature a variety of agnostic and atheistic opinions. Clearly, there is huge ferment over the questions of faith on the internet. Among the scientific community, there is almost complete consensus on the existence of an all-knowing, all-powerful Creator.
Ten years ago, Edward Larson and Larry Withan wrote an article in the Sept 1998 issue of Scientific American in which they placed the number of scientists who did not believe in God at around 70 per cent.
It would be safe to say that in the decade since this article appeared, the number has probably gone up.
Although atheism and agnosticism have increased in academia and western Europe over the last 50 years, faith in religious beliefs is going up in the United States and the Muslim world. These divergent worldviews have produced a mutual incomprehension and suspicion on both sides of the divide.
This gap is most visible in the ongoing electoral battle in the United States. Although both candidates profess strong Christian belief, Obama is widely viewed as the secular candidate, while McCain is seen as the flag-bearer for the muscular brand of right-wing evangelical Christians who are becoming increasingly political.
It is a telling comment on these days of acute polarisation that both candidates are required to take a public stand on their beliefs. Normally, religion is a private matter between an individual and God, should he believe in a deity. But across the world, people now tend to wear their faith on their sleeves. Obviously, in Darwinian terms, this display is an evolutionary survival mechanism in a dangerously divided world..
