Tuesday, February 22, 2005
Interview with Richard Dawkins
American Scientist Online - Richard Dawkins
I normally find Dawkins unbearably arrogant, but this was very interesting. I was struck by his comments on the 'tyranny of the discontinuous mind' and ethics. Much of our ethics assumes a special place for human beings, and Dawkins thinks this is related to the way that we seem so obviously different to other animals. But if our evolutionary intermediates were still kicking around then we would find it harder to so easily distinguish between human beings and other animals, because our link to them would be more obvious, and our separation more arbitrary.
I think Dawkins makes an excellent point here about our unity with all life on earth. By extension you could see the continuity between inorganic matter and organic matter, and hence the unity of all things. This unity is of course a unity grounded in evolutionary history, rather than a 'mystical' unity, but it is a good point.
Having said that, for much of history human beings have been adept at making arbitrary distinctions among human beings based on tribe, race, nationality, religion and so on, in which morality only really applies to your own group - do what you like to anybody else, they aren't like us. We are only just beginning to get a real sense of humanity as a single family. I think it will take longer for a general sense of the 'family of all life' to take root.
As an aside, I find Dawkins comments about belief in a supernatural being interesting. I passionately believe in God, but I no longer conceive of God as a supernatural being. I don't consider myself an atheist, but would others consider me as such?
I normally find Dawkins unbearably arrogant, but this was very interesting. I was struck by his comments on the 'tyranny of the discontinuous mind' and ethics. Much of our ethics assumes a special place for human beings, and Dawkins thinks this is related to the way that we seem so obviously different to other animals. But if our evolutionary intermediates were still kicking around then we would find it harder to so easily distinguish between human beings and other animals, because our link to them would be more obvious, and our separation more arbitrary.
I think Dawkins makes an excellent point here about our unity with all life on earth. By extension you could see the continuity between inorganic matter and organic matter, and hence the unity of all things. This unity is of course a unity grounded in evolutionary history, rather than a 'mystical' unity, but it is a good point.
Having said that, for much of history human beings have been adept at making arbitrary distinctions among human beings based on tribe, race, nationality, religion and so on, in which morality only really applies to your own group - do what you like to anybody else, they aren't like us. We are only just beginning to get a real sense of humanity as a single family. I think it will take longer for a general sense of the 'family of all life' to take root.
As an aside, I find Dawkins comments about belief in a supernatural being interesting. I passionately believe in God, but I no longer conceive of God as a supernatural being. I don't consider myself an atheist, but would others consider me as such?