---

Dawkins' God

Two books I want to mention - Richard Dawkins' 'The Blind Watchmaker' and Alistair McGrath's 'Dawkins' God'

First - the Blind Watchmaker. Hardly the sort of book to see promoted on a theological discussion board, but there you go.... At school, I failed to properly grasp the mechanics of evolution because it was either badly taught or we were too busy harping on at the teacher with "but my (non-scientifically trained) minister says....." Consequence - teacher tells us to learn off a few facts and quote in the exam. Oh, and a bundle of people who fail to understand any of how it is meant to work. Some, who did their homework, concluded science disproved God (because Dawkins says so).

The Blind Watchmaker is a brilliantly clear description of the thinking behind evolution. I don't agree with 100% of what he says but for anyone wanting to seriously engage with the thinking unbeliever, a knowledge of this book is vital. If your unbelieveing friend has not read Dawkins for themselves, they are probably well-acquainted with his 'disciples'.

One big problem though - when it comes to science Dawkins is well researched and brilliantly argued. Then he leaps to religion and writes it all off as fantasy, showing a lack of research in that area. Religious people are condemned as mentally unsound and God's existence written off with zero evidence. Indeed, God's existence is written off for being beyond understanding (as if ten-dimensional membrane theory is easy to understand).

The title draws from William Paley's 'Watchmaker' analogy, from the 1850s (a watch is so complex, it couldn't arise by chance - it needs a designer and maker, etc - likewise the world is full of complex structures, etc). Using Paley - who by the time of Darwin was out-of-favour in the church for causing more problems than solutions is a reflection of how Dawkins picks on a few selected examples of religion and writes the whole of religion off as sheer madness. Anyone familiar with his work will have seen this - his fanatical hatred for religion is as zealous as any fire-and-brimstone preacher.

Such is his contempt for proper theological work that heavyweights such as John Stott, John Blanchard and others have been ignored when attempting to create a debate with him - instead Dawkins often refers to a 1970s University debating society incident as proof of why debating with Christians is a waste of time.

Thank heaven, then, for Prof Alistair McGrath- a heavyweight Theologian and scientist, lecturing at Oxford. As well as being a professor in Theology, McGrath studied the natural sciences at Oxford to PhD level. He has an excellent command of the history of both science and theology and the current state of both. Carefully and respectfully he examines Dawkins' writings, all the way back to his post-grad thesis, showing that when it comes to science Dawkins is generally unbelievably thorough in his research. He also examines Dawkins' views on God and with disarming ease shows Dawkins to have little credibility in this area - Dawkins' research and lack-of-understanding are worryingly poor for a man with such a place in public thought-forming.

The Blind Watchmaker, from a scientific perspective is clear and well written. Dawkins' insistence that you must agree with him (or you are mad) and therefore conclude God does not exist (or you are mad) is worrying. Such is the force of his rhetoric I would not ask a 'weak' Christian to read it without being prepared to sound-off to an older believer. He is persuasive, until you go away to think about it. So many of his ideas are in popular culture though that anyone wanting to broaden their horizons should read it. DO NOT read it though without 'Dawkin's God' or further research, lest you mess your head. It is a dangerous volume - but, very influencial to those we want to reach and will help us understand their ideas. Didn't Paul know the Greek philosophies?

Dawkin's God - a vital companion to the Blind Watchmaker - clearly shows that when it comes to demonstrating current thought on evolution (which, of course, is subject to revision), Dawkins knows his stuff. It also shows that scientists such as Stephen Jay Gould and other leading names think science far from disproves God's existence: science explains the data, based on available evidence, not how the data arose or what evidence may be missing. Dawkins' God also shows that when it comes to discussing religion, Professor Dawkins should stop embarassing himself with ill-researched nonsense.

The wisdom of the cows (2)

Me: "There are a lot of cows in that field"

Wife: "Are there a lot of cows, or are there a normal number of cows all bunched together?"

My wife, the philosopher

Driving through the countryside the other day, I noticed a field that was so unbelievably full of cattle as to be made up.  It was stuffed to the gills (do fields have gills?).

"Good grief!", I said, "There are an awful lot of cows in that field."

"Is it a lot of cows", replied my wife, "or is it a normal amount of cows and a small field?"

Profound.

My mother - too awful to be made up

Two weeks ago the big reunion took place - me and my mother, for the first time in over twenty years. Over the years, a number of people have expressed puzzlement at my general lack-of-emotion towards her - often thinking of me as harsh.

Maybe I was harsh - maybe they could not understand my view because they were not in my situation.

Well, we had the reunion and.... I feel almost nothing towards her - pity for a hopeless old woman, perhaps, but little else. I let her do most of the talking for the first hour - her recollections of when she left and what happened since then. Some of it makes sense and in her own mind she is probably quite justified but I have a feeling that she is emotionally still frozen in the mid-1980s. I imagine a long session with a trained counsellor or psychologist might do her a lot of good.

In due course, my lovely wife came along to join the party as did my mother's family (hubby, my half-siblings). It was all weird and strange and a bit like watching Eastenders - lots of depressing caricatures that I had a lot of difficulty connecting with.

I don't want to sound like a middle-class snob, but I am very thankful for my (dirt-poor) upbringing. My grandfather never let up with his ambition for me that one day I would be able to pay someone else to paint my house or cut my grass (as he did for other people). The only way up, in his view - education and hard work.

Some of my siblings work - good, I am glad they have a positive view on life and a desire to do well. Others.... why earn a living when the DHSS can provide for you?

My mother - almost sixty, completely lacking in motivation and waiting for the next Bacardi and Coke, while waiting to die. I hope I have been the catalyst in waking her up from a 20-year daze.

24 hours to go

So, what exactly do you say to someone you haven't seen in 22 years - especialy when it's your mother?

It's nice weather we are having here.

Fancy a pint?

This should be interesting!

On meeting my mother for the first time since 1985

A few people have asked how I feel about meeting my mother (plus assorted half-siblings) for the first time since I was 9 years old. It's weird - I have a sister I remember as a toddler, another whose last memory is me changing her nappy and a brother I have never met.

My mother had me (father is a mystery, to me at least) and seven years later, while pregnant married her current husband. She had a couple of holidays at home then things drifted apart completely.

My memories are positive- I got on well with her though for a long time thought I was going with her. My Grandfather insisted I did not - he had serious misgivings about her husband. I got on fairly well with him but seem to remember him being a little physical...

After a while I decided I hated her. How much of this is based on latent memories of her, or how much is an angry teenager who was seriously pissed off at being different is another matter. How much was mis-information based on other people's opinions?

When you are the only kid in your class without a father and whose mother cleared off, you are an easy target. Does it mean she was a bad mother or did she simply get out while she could to make a new start while trusting I would be okay? - the best of a bad situation.  I did write her a letter a few years ago when my sister first made contact, telling her and her husband, in no uncertain terms to clear off - a venting of the teenage anger that I now regret and wish I could undo.  Some of the feelings were valid but the way I expressed them was really nasty and not needed and probably did more harm than good.

My feelings now are... well... I'm not sure. I'm not angry, nor full of excitement. The past is in the past. I don't want to rant at her - letting her tell her side of the story would be better. There are probably a lot of things that the young me was not told and with time have been forgotten. Her husband... well, maybe he was a little physical and maybe I am confusing dreams and half-memories with reality. Either way, he is not the person he was then.  Likewise, she is not the 20-something single mother she once was. The fact they are still together says a lot. Time to give them a break?

Did the people who coloured my opinions have them all wrong? Should I have gone with them to England? There's little point with the what-ifs though - they are in the past and we need to move on.

Maybe we will get on - maybe we'll have nothing in common. It would be a shame not to find out, especially if I never get another chance.