Thursday, February 16, 2012

Richard Dawkins by his own standard is not actually an evolutionist

Recently the famed militant atheist Richard Dawkins released some statistics which claim that those who identified themselves as "Christian" are not actually Christian because they "couldn’t identify the first book in the New Testament."

So Rev. Giles Fraser interviewed him on radio. It turns out that by Dawkins' own standard he can't be an "evolutionist" since he couldn't identify the whole title of Darwin's On the Origin of Species.

Here's the transcript:
Fraser: Richard, if I said to you what is the full title of The Origin Of Species, I’m sure you could tell me that.

Dawkins: Yes I could.

Fraser: Go on then.

Dawkins: On the Origin of Species…Uh…With, oh, God, On the Origin of Species. There is a sub-title with respect to the preservation of favoured races in the struggle for life.
Fraser: You are the high hope of Darwinism... if you ask people who believe in evolution what that question and you came back and said 2 per cent got it right, it would terribly easy for me to go they don't really believe in it after all. It is just not fair to ask people this question. They self-identify as Christian and I think you should respect that.
Listen to the one-minute-twenty-one-seconds interview (H/T: Uncommon Descent):



Steven Sim said...

To say ppl are not xtians just because they can't quote the bible is not right, it happened to me once - i was told I am not a xtian by an official at the national registrar because the computer said i m a buddhist. I spent 15 mins arguing that I know which religion I profess better than the computer but still could not convince the official. Sigh.

Yet, come think of it, many xtians call other "xtians" not xtians as well because of difference in the knowledge or understanding of the bible. :D

but on the other hand, dawkins got the title almost right, he probably missed two or three words. To be fair to him.

Steven Sim

Sze Zeng said...

The statistics that Dawkins provided is meant to undermine people's self-identity. So it is understandable that Fraser is being polemical there in reaction.

I think Fraser is smart in his response: if Dawkins as the high hope of Darwinism can't utter the complete title of Darwin's book, then if the same survey carried among those who identify themselves as "evolutionist", what hope is there that these other lesser evolutionists able to give the whole title? If they can't, then shouldn't by Dawkins' own principle, these lesser evolutionists should not be acknowledgeds as evolutionist. :)