I am currently reading "The God Delusion" by Richard Dawkins. Though parts of it are dense, in a whole it is very readable and I can only recommend it. I can safely say that I learned a lot about Darwinism, evolution and natural selection.
Personally, I have been an atheist pretty much for as long as I can remember. When I was in first grade, it was the first year that "Religion" (that is to say Catholicism) was not an obligatory class anymore. Having found out about this, I handed back the text book to the teacher on the first day and told her I would be joining the "Ethics" class. From there on, once a week I would join refugees and adopted kids (who were of a different religion and therefore could not attend a class teaching catholicism) in a group of around 5 for a "class" that the crafts teacher pretty much made up as she went along. I have to say though that, by the time I finished elementary school (which lasts until 6th grade in my country), there had been considerable improvements in terms of program and schooling of the teachers responsible for "Ethics" class.
So pretty much my whole life I have grown up looking at evolution as a scientific fact, and regarding everything else as either ridiculous superstition or metaphorical texts with poetic value. However while reading "The God Delusion", I came to realize how little I actually knew about evolution, which is partially due to my lack of talent in biology, physics, chemistry and math. Basically, I only had a very vague idea of what evolution entailed. Thanks to this book I feel that I now have a much better understanding of it, albeit still very basic.
Out of the many interesting aspects that Dawkins describes in his book, one that I can personally relate to very well, is that for some reason, it is generally seen as "disrespectful" and "offensive" to question someone's faith. Tolerance towards religious beliefs is seen as a virtue. Therefore I would like to share with you the following passage of Dawkins' chapter "How 'Moderation' in Faith fosters Fanaticism", which has struck me as particularly interesting.
"Christianity, just as much as Islam, teaches children that unquestioned faith is a virtue. You don't have to make the case for what you believe. If somebody announces that it is part of his faith, the rest of society, whether of the same faith, or another, or none, is obliged, by ingrained custom, to 'respect' it without question; respect it until the day it manifests itself in a horrible massacre like the destruction of the World Trade Center, or the London or Madrid bombings. Then there is a great chorus of disownings, as clerics and 'community leaders' (who elected them, by the way?) line up to explain that this extremism is a perversion of the 'true' faith. But how can there be a perversion of faith, if faith, lacking objective justification, doesn't have any demonstrable standard to pervert?"
- Richard Dawkins
Good night
Personally, I have been an atheist pretty much for as long as I can remember. When I was in first grade, it was the first year that "Religion" (that is to say Catholicism) was not an obligatory class anymore. Having found out about this, I handed back the text book to the teacher on the first day and told her I would be joining the "Ethics" class. From there on, once a week I would join refugees and adopted kids (who were of a different religion and therefore could not attend a class teaching catholicism) in a group of around 5 for a "class" that the crafts teacher pretty much made up as she went along. I have to say though that, by the time I finished elementary school (which lasts until 6th grade in my country), there had been considerable improvements in terms of program and schooling of the teachers responsible for "Ethics" class.
So pretty much my whole life I have grown up looking at evolution as a scientific fact, and regarding everything else as either ridiculous superstition or metaphorical texts with poetic value. However while reading "The God Delusion", I came to realize how little I actually knew about evolution, which is partially due to my lack of talent in biology, physics, chemistry and math. Basically, I only had a very vague idea of what evolution entailed. Thanks to this book I feel that I now have a much better understanding of it, albeit still very basic.
Out of the many interesting aspects that Dawkins describes in his book, one that I can personally relate to very well, is that for some reason, it is generally seen as "disrespectful" and "offensive" to question someone's faith. Tolerance towards religious beliefs is seen as a virtue. Therefore I would like to share with you the following passage of Dawkins' chapter "How 'Moderation' in Faith fosters Fanaticism", which has struck me as particularly interesting.
"Christianity, just as much as Islam, teaches children that unquestioned faith is a virtue. You don't have to make the case for what you believe. If somebody announces that it is part of his faith, the rest of society, whether of the same faith, or another, or none, is obliged, by ingrained custom, to 'respect' it without question; respect it until the day it manifests itself in a horrible massacre like the destruction of the World Trade Center, or the London or Madrid bombings. Then there is a great chorus of disownings, as clerics and 'community leaders' (who elected them, by the way?) line up to explain that this extremism is a perversion of the 'true' faith. But how can there be a perversion of faith, if faith, lacking objective justification, doesn't have any demonstrable standard to pervert?"
- Richard Dawkins
Good night
Facebook
Twitter
Instagram