Lesson 7 Flashcards
Dawkins key points in the god delusion
-Religion depends on belief in God (he calls this the God Hypothesis).
-The God Hypothesis is flawed, so God does not exist.
-Religion is a primitive error which has spread like a virus. People can be morally good without the influence of religion.
-Religion undermines science and promotes fanaticism and bigotry.
-Religion is a bad influence on society because it causes division.
-Teaching religion by parents and in schools is mental abuse.
-Religion does not answer people’s big questions - they should instead turn to science and philosophy.
What fundamental distinction does god make?
Dawkins makes a fundamental distinction between supernatural religion - belief in the existence of a God or gods, miracles, life after death and suchlike - and the natural sense of awe and wonder.
This distinction depends on a very shallow view of God as a supernatural wonder- worker.
What does Dawkins do wrong in the god delusion that Christian’s disagree with
-In The God Delusion Dawkins is attacking very specific beliefs in a supernatural realm and religion based on it.
-He assumes that most people find meaning in life and aim to develop moral principles without reference to religion or a supernatural God.
-Dawkins assumes science leads to atheism.
-many Christians share the view that God, understood as the reality within which ‘we live, move and have our being’ (St Paul) or ‘the ground of Being’ (Tillich) is in no sense a supernatural magician.
-This better reflects the view of many of Christianity’s greatest thinkers - including Augustine and Aquinas.
What does Alister McGrath argue about science
-The Christian theologian Alister McGrath argues that science is not in a position to adjudicate on matters of religion - whether or not a God exists - and that both science and religion must therefore keep to its own sphere of operation.
What is science?
Science is limited to those things that are discoverable through reason and experience.
God delusion other set of issues
-In the broader context of secularisation, The God Delusion raises another important set of issues.
-These are attitudes to homosexuality, abortion, inclusiveness, and freedom of choice in matters of religion or religious education (particularly of children by their believing parents).
What is the god delusion?
-The God Delusion represents a popular twenty-first-century secular viewpoint.
-Dawkins’ outlook is scientific, in that he is committed to reason and evidence.
-It is also humanistic, in that he criticises events described in the Bible from the standpoint of a humanistic valuation of life.
-He claims that children might be deprived of a normal education because their parents hold religious views that conflict with a normal educational curriculum.
What is the view of most?
Most people now hold the view that individual human beings have rights and should be respected and treated as of valuable in themselves.
What does Dawkins assume?
-Dawkins criticises a narrowly supernatural religion, and the unquestioning commitment to a literal understanding of the Bible, because it just does not fit the general assumptions of modern life.
-In this, he is criticising a minority view that is not shared by most Christians, but he assumes that such views represent Christianity as a whole.
Mc Grath as a counter to Dawkins
-McGrath points out that Dawkins assumes that science leads automatically to atheism.
-This suggests that scientists who accept the possibility of God, or see value in religion, must be deliberately going against what they know to be the case.
-By giving examples of distinguished scientists who accept the possibility of God, McGrath shows that Dawkins’ view is very narrow.
-McGrath also shows that there are limits to what science can demonstrate. Science cannot demonstrate the ‘true’ nature of reality, because there are no tests or observations that can show where that truth lies.
-Stephen Jay Gould has proposed a ‘middle way’ arguing that science and religion each deal with their own sphere of human experience.
-Dawkins opposes this by arguing that there is only one sphere, the physical sphere that is understood by science.
-McGrath opposes both Gould and Dawkins because he thinks that religion and science do have some areas of overlap and can therefore enrich one another.
What does McGrath say about Dawkins choosing a small supernatural view to oppose?
-McGrath notes that Dawkins deliberately chooses to oppose supernaturalist fundamentalism, which is an easy target for reason and evidence.
-Dawkins ignores the ‘liberal’ approach to religion. He complains that supernatural religion is not open to argument, but holds to its beliefs unquestioningly.
-However, it is clear that he himself holds to some basic atheist views unquestioningly.
-He refuses to believe that anyone can genuinely come to a different conclusion, even someone with a distinguished background in science.
-In other words, he opposes one form of fundamentalism with another.
McGrath potential weakness
McGrath too, has weaknesses in his arguments. He suggests that atheism may be a response to the human need for ‘moral autonomy’ and that atheism is an excuse for immorality…
McGrath on Dawkins with a cognitive bias
-Atheists do argue that humans should take responsibility for their own moral decisions, but that is not primarily the reason why people claim to be atheists.
-In general, therefore, McGrath complains that Dawkins suffers from ‘cognitive bias’; in other words, he favours evidence that supports the point of view he has already chosen.
-It is a key feature of science, however, that it attempts to eliminate any such bias. In this respect, Dawkins ceases to think as a scientist when he considers religion.
What does McGrath set out to do?
McGrath does not set out to prove that Christianity is true.
What he does argue, effectively, is that Dawkins’ attempt to show that belief is a delusion is not persuasive.
It is deeply flawed, both from a scientific and a religious point of view.
What is McGraths argument overall?
Overall, therefore, the argument is that Dawkins repeats some well-known criticisms of religion without attempting to present a fair and balanced view.
McGrath points out that he is, therefore, simply backing up his prejudice, rather than attempting a serious study.
