Richard Dawkins claims that Religious Belief is unnecessary because of Charles Darwin’s theory of Evolution; Dawkins suggests that there is not a need for religious belief. In this book The Blind Watchmaker, he says that the fact that human being exist is in itself remarkable, therefore there is no significance in looking for a God. This suggests that Dawkins believes that Darwin’s theory of Evolution should be credited and not the ideas from the bible, because Darwin’s theory should be respected and that his ideas are correct, because it is backed up with empirical evidence. Dawkins position on Darwin’s argument is not surprising since he is a biologist and therefore he wants empirical evidence before he believes in a theory and Darwin gives evidence evolution. For example, whilst he was travelling around the world, he discovered that Finches on different islands had slightly different shaped beaks and this was because of the different types of food which they ate. This is evidence which people such as Dawkins say is proof that God did not create the world and that it was evolution and natural selection which created these differences over thousands of years.
Dawkins also criticises religious belief, because he says that beliefs about God creating the world are fundamentally faith claims and this he suggests is a retreat away from rigorous, evidence based concerns of the truth. For Dawkins truth is grounded in explicit proof such as empirical evidence, which is available to everyone to access and that any form of mysticism which is grounded in faith is to be opposed vigorously. Therefore, Dawkins claims that using a supernatural explanation for the creation of the world prevents people from investigating the world further and then there is not a need to ask any questions about the origin of the universe. “I am against religion because it teaches us to be satisfied with not understanding the world”, this shows how Dawkins believes that religion stops people from investigating and having a greater understanding of the world.
Another critique which Dawkins makes about religious belief is that religion offers people a poor vision of the world, so they only see the world narrowly. Whereas Dawkins believes that science contrasts with this view, because it offers a “bold and brilliant” vision of the universe and sees it as grand and beautiful. “The universe presented by organised religion is a poky little medieval universe, and extremely limited”; therefore Dawkins believes that religion makes people see the world in a different way to science, because religion limits the mind of new ideas and interpretations.
Not only does Dawkins not agree with religious ideas, but he also disapproves very strongly of labelling children, especially young children, as something like 'Catholic children', 'Protestant children' or 'Islamic children'. He believes that it is “wicked” because in effect what someone is doing is making the assumption that the child’s beliefs are automatically going to be inherited. He uses the example that a child will not automatically inherit it’s father's sports team. Dawkins does however agree with the idea that very often a child will be influenced by a parent to take up a sport or hobby because it is ultimately the child’s choice. But what he does not agree with is that society assumes without even asking that a child belongs to a religion, he see this as cruel, because he believes that people should have a choice to what they believe. . Dawkins also does not agree with the instruction of young children in what he regards as irrational and unpleasant beliefs. In The Root of All Evil, he gives an example of this, when he visits a Hell House presentation in Colorado. At this event, children were shown frightening images of homosexuals or women who have abortions on their way to hell for eternal torture. Dawkins claims that this type of religious teaching is a form of child abuse.
Dawkins suggest that religion leads to evil; he argued this view in his channel 4 programme The root of all evil. He dismisses faith as: “An indulgence of irrationality that is nourishing extremism, division and terror”, this he likens to a spiteful virus which infects the human mind. This argument is the most moral, because it is a moral rather than a scientific objection to religion. Dawkins uses range of evidence to draw this conclusion; he is mainly concerned with the beliefs and practices of fundamentalist Islam (obedience to a set of basic principles from the Qur’an) and evangelical Christianity (abiding solely to the bible, its rules and principles). He believes that both of these are misleading education within schools. The misleading of education is within the teaching of creationism and not treating evolution equally with creationism. Dawkins also questions the relationship between religion and morality, because he links the events of 7/7 in London and 9/11 in New York with religiously motivated terrorism. Therefore he believes that due to all of these factors that religion causes evil and suffering within the world and that society would be a superior place if religion was out of the question.
There are people who support Dawkins view on religion such as D’Holbach who wanted to sweep away belief in God altogether, claiming that belief was the result of misguided human imagination. Therefore it is not just Dawkins who believes that people who believe in God are delusional, because there are many philosophers who Dawkins agrees with when it comes to his anti – theistic views towards religion. Although Ayer suggests ‘It is now generally admitted, at any rate by philosophers, that the existence of a being having the attributes which define the God of any non-animistic religion cannot be demonstratively proved.’ Therefore Ayer is not claim that God does not exist; but he is arguing that the existence cannot be proved, as we do not have the tools to do so.
In conclusion, Dawkins is criticising the whole of society who are religious leaders, because he believes that religion is misguiding both children and adults. Dawkins is an anti – theist, because he is not just being an atheist and disbelieving in God, but he is preaching to others that worshiping God is the wrong thing to do. Therefore Dawkins scientific critique of religious belief best supports an atheist view, because it is against the idea of believing in a God and not being unsure whether there is a God.
