Q: You criticize intelligent design, saying that "the theistic answer"--pointing to God as designer--"is deeply unsatisfying"--presumably you mean on a logical, scientific level.Tags: Richard Dawkins, Religion, Atheism, Intelligent Design.
A: Yes, because it doesn’t explain where the designer comes from. If they’re going to emphasize the statistical improbability of biological organs—"these are so complicated, how could they have evolved?"--well, if they’re so complicated, how could they possibly have been designed? Because the designer would have to be even more complicated.
Q: Obviously, a lot of people find the theistic answer satisfying on another level. What do you see as the problem with that level?
A: What other level?
Q: At whatever level where people say the idea of God is very satisfying.
Well, of course it is. Wouldn’t it be lovely to believe in an imaginary friend who listens to your thoughts, listens to your prayers, comforts you, consoles you, gives you life after death, can give you advice? Of course it’s satisfying, if you can believe it. But who wants to believe a lie?
Saturday, December 17, 2005
Dawkins: The problem with God
Laura Sheahen of Beliefnet interviews evolutionary biologist Richard Dawkins about intelligent design, dishonest Christians, and why God is no better than an imaginary friend. Excerpt: