The popular evolutionary biologist, and God critic who wrote


The God Delusion


honestly admits there are limits to explaining humans.


We appreciate that…but

[for MORE use the DOOR.]




We inject this now because it has just come off the press (Belinda Luscombe, “10 Questions,” Time, Sept. 30, 2013, p.72).


Richard Dawkins, in the back-page “10 Questions” segment is asked,


…How would you explain the evolutionary advantage of teaching people to whom one is not related? [Interesting question!]


Dawkins:  This is just one of the very many things which make humans very peculiar, and it’s not just teaching–it’s doing music, it’s doing logic, it’s doing mathematics, it’s doing philosophy, it’s writing books. Just about everything we do doesn’t have a simple, naive, evolutionary explanation.  [Underlining ours]


For the record I [the "we" here] have read every word and have underlined parts of Dawkin’s best-selling The God Delusion¹ which takes to the woodshed people who are silly enough to still believe in God. Though it’s over the top, it can still make you think…but you need to read carefully to see what Dawkins is up to.

In this general, on-the-spot 10-Questions interview, it’s interesting to see just what Dawkins is saying here. Evolution, commonly conceived, implies a natural, step-by-step progression from simple to more complex, and given enough time committed evolutionists believe they will be better able to explain how those “accidental” changes take place. [Remember, there's no outside "purpose" at work in Darwinian evolution except, of course, a fierce desire to pass on our genes to future generations]. With new discoveries evolutionists believe they can better justify the “evolution factory,” replacing the secular faith “gaps” with facts. In the meantime, however, if at recital time we continually say “Evolution is fact fact fact fact fact fact fact fact fact fact” 10 times, in place of, perhaps, The 10 Commandments, or The Pledge of Allegiance, we can brainwash everyone into submission to the “inevitable.”

But naturalistic evolution is not fact.

It is a strong theory that explains some change, but it has blind spots, and should be carefully studied on all levels where questions are allowed².

If questioning is forbidden or censored, true science teaching has ended, and evolution shouldn’t be mentioned at all.

As we have said, or implied, many times, the human mind or human consciousness is unbelievably complex and vastly more complex than that of any primate or any other animal. But Dawkins is right in this interview. The human activities he mentions certainly don’t “have a simple, naive, evolutionary explanation.”

It would be enlightening to openly discuss all this in schools and public forums where scientists, not fearing being denied tenure, also sit at the table..


¹ Richard Dawkins, The God Delusion (Houghton Mifflin, 2006).

² I’m by no means condoning every manner of religious expression that cuts off, or restricts, opinions of scientists that disagree with them. I’m just asking for fair play, which seems to becoming rarer each day. Real learning can begin when differences are presented, argued, and defended. Unfortunately, that’s not happening in many of our public schools.