...But who are the losers
As a person with a total disbelief in such things as gods, fairies, ghosts, magic or
miracles it is strange that I find myself at odds with a person such as Professor
Richard Dawkins. Like myself he is an Atheist and I agree with much of what he
says, indeed his attacks on religious dogma and blind faith are compelling as are
his arguments relating to Darwinism and Genetics. Although I am not an expert
Human history reveals evidence that religions and gods have come and gone, are
replaced or modified to meet the needs of society, sometimes these changes are
swift others slower to take hold, but change they do, one could say they evolve.
The history of Science is also revealing, theories are proposed changed modified
often requiring bewildering leaps of the imagination to even begin to understand
them, again that expression, science can be said to evolves.
Scientists have trouble keeping up with changing ideas and theories, how they
impact on their particular field of study, what chance then for ordinary men and
women to understand the complexities of such scientific disciplines as Genetics,
Cosmology, Geology, Mathematics or that very strange world of fundamental
particle Physics. The real world of ordinary men and women cannot be reduced to
a mathematical formula it is bound by faith, be it a faith in an almighty God,
Politics, Justice or simply in your football team. Faith in this respect does not
require the individual to have an expert knowledge, only an overwhelming desire
and want, that the things he or she believes in are true or will come true, and the
continuity that faith or beliefs bring to their existence will be handed down to their
children. The world, we know, is full of charlatans and despots, the persuasive
powers of some are extra ordinary indeed, these people are prepared to go to any
lengths to impose their ideas, or to exploit the beliefs and faith of ordinary people
and destroy this continuity by controlling what we do and what we think mainly
for the purpose of lining their own pockets.
Science too is riven with its own egotistical, greedy despots, unwilling to alter their
views even in the face of overwhelming Empirical evidence, particularly if it
conflicts with their own established ideas, theories or more importantly, impacts on

future funding. As for morality and ethics scientists can be as hypocritical as any
religious zealot. The mantra that we need to expand human knowledge, often at a
very high cost, is sheer arrogance expounded by most scientists and could be easily
mistaken for dogma. The ‘we know best attitude’ or its for the betterment of
mankind proclaimed by men of science throughout the ages mirrors closely that of
Bishops and Priests etc of all religions and like them is often driven by egotistic
vanities and greed. Medicines are developed not for mankind’s benefit but rather
the share holders of the large pharmaceutical companies, medicines are not
clinically assessed they are cost benefit analysed for the best possible profit
margins they are only made available to poor countries when something more
profitable comes along or it is economically efficient to do so. The global warming
gravy train is yet another example of this, preached mainly by scientists after
funding for their own pet projects and nothing what so ever to do with the
alleviation or prevention of the suffering they foretell.
The belief in the existence or not of a God or Gods is not a question for science but
one of Faith and hope which cannot be separated from the social economic factors
prevalent at a particular point in time be it in the far past or near present, religions
and Gods as a whole are intrinsically bound by the complex interactions of politics
and economics. The histories of people are at the core of most religious belief
systems and how they perceive their Gods. To attack them from a particular
politico social economic climate or scientific stand point in light of today’s
understanding, is to demean the ordinary people around the world and borders on
the same bigotry that Professor Dawkins hates so much, as is attempts to portray a
particular religious belief system as being closer to the truth than any other in the
same way one scientific discipline cannot claim to have superior knowledge to
another. Conflicts between different societies are not caused solely by religious
beliefs; they are caused by social and economic pressures, by natural or manmade
disasters, and through exploitation of fear and ignorance and the political
machinations of the ruling classes, by use of propaganda and threats that others
beliefs and customs will somehow disrupt their way of life.
If the belief in a God or Gods, and their attendant religions, is, as theorised by
Sigmund Freud,” nothing more than a device of the unconscious which needed to
be decoded by psychology. Or that a personal god was nothing more than an
exalted father-figure and the desire for such a deity sprang from infantile yearnings
for a powerful, protective father, for justice and fairness and for life to go on
forever, and God is simply a projection of these desires, feared and worshipped by
human beings out of an abiding sense of helplessness. That Religion belonged to
the infancy of the human race; that it has been a necessary stage in the transition
from childhood to maturity. It had promoted ethical values which were essential to
society. Now that humanity had come of age, however, it should be left behind”,
(From, A History of God.) Mr Freud was making a huge assumption, has humanity
really come of age? One only has to take a look at the real world where the
struggle to survive from day to day is far more important than what some scientist

has found at the bottom of a test tube or what the next generation of space
telescopes will see. Let us not forget there are still people on this planet who are
not that far removed from the Stone Age, and there is much we could learn from
them.
People I hope would recognise the historical importance if not the scientific one, of
these scientists that have gone before and would not refer to them as liars or
charlatans because their ideas and theories no longer fit their or the established
scientific model of the world, but agree that their efforts were necessary steps in
the evolution of science and mans understanding of the universe. Only a few
decades ago scientists proclaimed that there were no longer any important
questions left in physics and mankind was very close to understanding all there is
to know about the universe, how wrong they were. Religion and Gods have not yet
ran their course in human evolution and still have an important role to play if for
no other reason than to be a counter balance to those scientists who want to play at
being god or think they know what being human is all about.
The human mind is a wonderful thing capable of the most amazing ideas in art,
music, the sciences and literature, how and why it does it are questions for science,
what we think or believe in, are not. I hope that future generations will not look
back to this century and say that Professor Dawkins preaching’s were merely the
mutterings of an infantile mind that didn’t quite understand fully what it is to be
human even though he knew a bit about genetics. Or that you have fitted a
particular religious system around your want to believe in something.
What I believe, is, that there are an awful lot of people around the world that
believe in gods and get fulfilment and comfort from their beliefs and faiths. The
reality is that whatever medical breakthrough comes from Professor Dawkins
research, it will only benefit those that can pay, which will leave the vast majority
of the world but one option, to pray to their own god or gods
Jim666