Eagleton on Dawkins
In his review of The God Delusion in the London Review of Books, Terry Eagleton plays Devil’s Advocate for theology in order to make some pointed criticisms of Dawkins’ rhetoric. As a firm atheist, I’m looking forward to reading The God Delusion over the festive season, and as someone who respects Terry Eagleton’s scholarly work, I was equally interested to read what he has to add to the debate.
It’s facinating how atheism can also imart a kind of religious fervour. At Uni I went to a lecture by the Reverend Lionell Thanthorpe (of Fortean Times fame). My genetics lecturer Glynis, usually a quiet type, spent the whole lecture with her hand in the air and demanding how he could justify his belief in the existence of God. The poor guy was just their to tell us amusing stories about Yeti’s and sing a few songs about UFOs. I don’t think he was expecting to be attacked by a tiny rabid atheist geneticist. Blaming all the ills of society on religious beliefs seems as crazy as blaming them on the devil or evil pixie squirrels. Everyone knows it’s the fault of the paint colour magnolia.
He’s not blaming *all* the world’s ills on religion Maz, although it’s true that he (and many atheists) find religion at best baffling and at worst harmful. Certainly I think that if religion ceased to exist we would be no nearer eradicating the need for groups to define themselves in opposition to others.
However, in most conflicts bewteen groups religion is almost always either a root cause, or is dragged in by one or both sides to justify their actions.
Also, I’d question whether atheists feel a “kind of religious fervour.” Certainly Glynis exhibited a strong sense of commitment which wasn’t appropriate or relevant to the occasion, but that kind of commitment isn’t exclusive to religion.
Lionel Fanthorpe is an interesting chap. I remember one episode of Fortean TV in which he happily expounded on the pre-Christian roots of Christmas. Did you know that the precursor to tinsel (apparently) is animal entrails strung through the trees?
I just remember Kiwi Paul going off on one and refusing to allow anyone their own beleifs at my birthday a couple of years ago. Someone made the mistake of saying that they had had a profound religious experience and he ranted at the person until they were forced to leave. He then continued to rant at anyone he could after that until he effectively killed the party. With Paul, though, it’s difficult to work out whether the religion caused the fervour or the 8-12 pints he’d had. I wish I could have prayed to the evil pixie squirrels to have removed him that night…
I know Dawkins isn’t. He says so himself in the book, there’s even a chapter largely dealing with Hitler and Stalin being atheists and yet still being big old bastards. Not all scientists/atheists are able to be objective however, and I think that atheism can become a religion in it’s own right when pursued with enough fervour. I myself simply believe in everything – mine is an equal opportunities religion. Most atheists get hung up on the idea that God doesn’t exist because you can’t scientifically prove his/her/their existence. Most religions get hung up on the idea that ancient knowledge is the only truth and that it’s wrong to try and expand on that knowledge. At it’s core, Buddhism has the potential to harmonise the quest for knowledge with the need for spirituality, since originally the Buddha pitched the whole thing as a non-theistic way of life that allowed it’s followers to continue to believe in their original model of God, or no God at all. Becoming a religion with monks and all has kind of wrecked this though, since now Buddha is regarded as a God. It’s curious how many religions deify what was essentially just a bloke with some interesting ideas, despite them being recorded several times as saying how they weren’t any more a God than the next bloke.
I like the area where science and religion meet too. String theory is in the Kabala, and the Kabala’s ‘Aleph’ (not only a letter, but the concept of a everything in the universe being also in one single point, just there infront of your nose, and Oh, over there, and over there…) is Holograms and new theory on the nature of space-time. Is DNA reincarnation? General religions talk about future/past/present distinctions being irrelevant, and Science is too.