Darwin, Dawkins, God and Me. All in 417 Words

This is not a radical post – it is my opinion.

If, all those million years ago, the tiny life-like particles had come together and “discovered” a DNA-like way of copying themselves, but, one that was perfect, I mean 100% perfect, letter for letter, chemical for chemical, then we’d still be sitting in a primordial soup. The sheer fact that we cannot copy ourselves perfectly has enabled us to become what we are today, and isn’t that incredible? – Me, 2006

Evolution by natural selection is an amazing thing, and in my opinion, explains everything there is to know about the origins of us, and every other living thing on the planet. Richard Dawkins also believes this, and I am currently reading his book “The Blind Watchmaker”, and it is fantastic. Full of beautiful metaphors and well explained theories (though his analogy of DNA to the ROM of a computer was extremely confusing), it is well worth reading. However, I think if he is going to more widely spread the amazing news that is neo-Darwinism he is going to have to divorce it from his arrogant atheism.

Now, I’m not religious, and I don’t really believe that there is a God – perhaps I’m hedging my bets – an agnostic. As I’ve said, my beliefs about the origin of life are the same as Dawkins’s, but that’s not the point. That does not immediately disprove the existence of a God. God and evolution (even evolution by natural selection) are not mutually exclusive, it just simply gives a different role for a deity. All the species we have on this earth today are descended from an original (or a few original) ancestors, and that’s great, but so what? Maybe once all religious experts realise that evolution did happen, and that natural selection is the perfect, most logically perfect way to explain this, and people like Dawkins realise that while it may disprove the book of Genesis as a literal fact, it does not prove organised-religion to be a breeding ground for unintelligent, uninformed, brainwashed fools perhaps we can all get on. Religion in general makes a lot of people happy, and I believe has helped us set up a large majority of the moral codes we hold today. I have no problem with peaceful religiousness; it’s just not for me.

Aside from these religious misgivings, the book is well worth reading and shines a glorious light on all that is natural. Completely natural, and beautiful.

Anyone else’s opinion would be welcomed!

Tom