Richard Dawkins

There’s a brand new show on TV right now called Sex Death and the Meaning of life. By Richard Dawkins. If you are unaware about who this man is, he basically is the worlds biggest atheist and is most famous for the book ‘The God Delusion’ – a best selling non-fiction book. He basically goes around debating and shouting at religious people about how wrong they are.


If you aren’t already aware, I am Christian, so essentially this should be a terrible thing to watch. But the series itself is not bad, it merely points out that humans are becoming more moral and and nicer to each other due to learning and natural selection. What really cuts deep about the series is the shear conviction Richard Dawkins has about the non-existence of God.

If we take an outsiders opinion on this subject then you’ll finding that it is impossible to prove or disprove a God using the knowledge we have. Evolution is still missing ‘the link’ and the only reason a Christian finds God is because he/she takes a leap of faith.

What is funny however, is that atheists like Richard Dawkins seem to go out on a personal attack against Christians whilst Christians stay back and take it. Here’s an example:



Click here to see the series

4 thoughts on “Richard Dawkins

  1. Hi there,

    Couple of questions/points:

    1)Do you believe that Dawkins’ conviction of the non-existence of a deity is stronger than most religious people’s conviction of the existence of one?

    2) Dawkins accepts that it’s impossible to disprove the existence of a god (as it’s impossible to disprove the existence of anything). It’s not impossible to prove the existence of anything though, so it’s possible to prove to him that there is a god, you’d just need some evidence (like the sort of reported intervention in the bible, that doesn’t seem to have happened since, despite the desperate pleas for help in prayer from millions of people for 2,000 years). He actually classes himself as an agnostic, that lives as if he were an atheist (doesn’t allow a fear for God to influence his day to day life, but can’t disprove there is a god.)

    3) The example you give of him launching personal attacks on christians isn’t there (no link). I’d be interested to hear an example of dawkins personally attacking a christian, as opposed to a christian taking offence to him asking them to justify their unproven statements of fact or to justify their truth claims, for which they have seem to have no justification.

    If he held views about anything other than religion, nobody would take offence. You wouldn’t find a critic of a particular political world view getting called “militant anti-conservative” like he is called a “militant atheist”, mainly because religious views seems to be afforded a privilege that no other type of view has, which is ridiculous and shows bias to belief systems that deserve no bias. In the same way, children of parents of any other world view are not labelled with their parent’s beliefs.

    No other field can make truth claims that are exempt from question. People should be able to believe what they like, but the moment you try to influence society, education, politics etc with your supernatural beliefs, is the time when your beliefs are no longer beyond question and are fair game to be criticised and held to account, as any other belief (like the world being flat, the planets orbiting the earth, or humans being created in their current state.) Everything is open to question, nothing is exempt from this.

  2. Oh,

    Here’s another Dawkins documentary you may find interesting:

    Tackling the subject of homeopathy, interviewing homeopaths and sitting in on their appointments with patients, discussing the amount of research that has taken place in the homeopathic world and… best of all:

    – covers every single pier reviewed study that scientifically proves homeopathy to have a better than placebo effect.

  3. Hi Scott, firstly I hope you’re good, I miss you all at Ratio!
    Secondly I will give this homeopathy program a watch. It seems really interesting and is really relevant considering my mums occupation.

    Apologies about the lack of example. I actually phrased it slightly wrong. I meant to use the photos of the car emblems as an example of Darwinist attacks toward Christianity, rather than Richard Dawkins himself personally launching attacks.

    In my experience, I do find Dawkins’ conviction to be more powerful than a Christians. And I find your view that nobody would be as offended if he expressed opinions on a different subject extremely interesting and in some ways very true. But I feel that his opinion is stronger and people are particularly offended by it because of the power he (and atheism) holds within the limelight. And this reflects massively on public opinion. Religion is becoming less and less important in the community and on countless occasions I have found that this power builds bad understanding toward Religion and total obedience to the media (which seems only to convey negativity toward religion). It is because of this that atheists sometimes blindly offend Christianity this is good argument that illustrates my point.

    But people like Richard Dawkins do not help these situations, as his bold convictions can potentially inject ideologies into society. This TV program opens with the line “more and more people are realising there is no God”. This is surely a massive claim?
    More examples of his boldness is seen in this debate: here.
    Interestingly, at the end of this clip it claims that if God didn’t exist then atheism wouldn’t exist. Which brings me to my next point: God, or the idea of a God has always existed. But God is more of an entity that lives within the spirit of peoples faith rather than a personified bearded geezer in the sky (a common misconception). When someone showing kindness is described as an “act of God”, this is not meant quite so literally. Kindness is branch from morality which all human beings posses. This innate knowledge of right and wrong is what C.S Lewis describes as “God” or “knowledge of God”. And sin is an absense of God, like darkness is an absense of light.
    As a Christian, I see the power of Gods grace within my community almost every week (both naturally and supernaturally). It’s just not publicised on the same scale as science. So yes it may appear that on the face that millions of prayers have gone unanswered. But actually, this is untrue.

    I acknowledge that religion holds some privileges that other subjects do not. However, from this side of the fence, it is atheism that holds other privileges that Religion does not. Darwinism, Agnosticism and non-creationist theories hold equal opportunity within education, if not more. For example: abilities to take double & triple science in comparison to RS which now accounts to a half course.

    Throughout this, my main concern is that much science tries to disprove creationism. I have my own loose theories that join the two. They may even hold agnostic opinions, which leads me to occasionally sympathise with Dawkins.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>

Current day month ye@r *

Protected by WP Anti Spam