Dawkins misunderstands
From Dr Robert O.J. Weinzier
Sir: Rod Liddle’s recent article ‘A man who believes in Darwin as fervently as he hates God’ (9 December) summarises very neatly one of the main problems concerning the current debate about Darwinism.
The theory of natural selection, explaining the evolution of different life forms from a common ancestor, provides a consistent conceptual framework that is no longer controversial in scientific circles. Contrary to Mr Liddle’s assertion, the theory of natural selection will not have to be amended beyond recognition (or discarded altogether), because it reflects a fundamental principle to which any replicating entities are subjected. Evolution is thus an inherent property of any form of life.
Many problems in the communication of biological insights to the general public arise because some scientists, like Richard Dawkins, ultimately fail to understand that the theory of evolution has absolutely no bearing on the existence of God. There are many areas, like the origin of the universe, the meaning of life etc., that are beyond the questions that can be addressed by scientific investigations in a meaningful manner. This space is the realm of religious belief. There are areas where science has nothing to say, and religion should not meddle with scientific theories about the reality accessible to our senses. The ultimate tragedy is, of course, that Richard Dawkins is ‘Professor of the Public Understanding of Science’. His failure to comprehend some of the most basic principles of science does no favour to efforts to explain evolution to the general public.
Robert Weinzier
Senior Lecturer, Imperial College, London SW7 From John Barrett
Sir: The most cogent comment that I have read about Richard Dawkins’s beliefs was on an internet forum: ‘Richard Dawkins gets to marry Lalla Ward and he still doesn’t believe there’s a God?’ John Barrett Sandgate, Kent
Previous page
