Monday, February 19, 2007

Donald Miller's Blog

So as you may know, one of my favorite authors out there is Donald Miller, author of "Blue Like Jazz" which was really good and "Searching for God Knows What" which I thought was even better.

So, he has a blog in which he responds (sort of) to a book I am reading called The God Delusion by famed athiest and evolutionary biologist Richard Dawkins. Dawkins is a really powerful mind, and I first heard about his new book from an article in Wired magazine called The New Athiests .

But I first met Dawkins (yes, I said met) accidentally about 9 years ago at DePauw University. He came to speak about a new book he was writing called Unweaving the Rainbow which further advanced his theory that

    1. The idea of God is really dumb
    2. Humans are entirely motivated by the desire to reproduce (sex) and that the sheer force of that desire drives all human behavior and civilization.
    3. Religion is even dumber than the idea of God

By the way, if you've ever been on a college campus, the idea that humans are entirely driven by the desire to reproduce does seem to hold up. But even in the midst of that, I remember thinking during his presentation that when he posited his claim that the basic, foundational truth about humans is that we want to preserve our our life and that this is the most fundamental evolutionary trait - I remember thinking, "Yeah, that can't be right."

I could see how that might explain a mother's natural defensiveness. But how would it explain a fireman going into a burning building to rescue people, thereby sacrificing his life? Dawkins might say, "He is sacrificing his life for his community, which he believes will provide the best way for his seed to continue to have protection and resources." That seem unlikely. We know instinctively that's heroic, and even a higher form of action than inherent selfishness. We celebrate it. But it seems to go against every grain of our "evolutionary" genes. Maybe, I thought, that selfishness is our default mode, but there is something higher than that default mode which we all instinctively aspire to. And if that's true, then where did that come from?

The ideas of beauty and justice and truth are major questions that athiests and evolutionary biology can't figure out. They cause at least as much doubt in science as suffering causes of God.

At any point, here is MIller's post and his link to an astoundingly persuasive review of Dawkins' book.
warning: I seriously had to read the article with another browser window open linked to dictionary.com. About every other line I had to type in a word I didn't know. I haven't done that in about 3 years. Which probably tells you I'm not reading as academic material as I should. Fulminating? Never heard that word in my life. Going to use it often now.

    Marilyne Robinson has written a response to Richard Dawkin’s book "The God Delusion" that is worthy of a read. I’ve had problems with the arrogance of some scientists, not because these few deny God, but that they create a new God of Science and their own minds. They would accuse those of us who believe in God of doing the same with our Theology (and sadly, many do consider their ability to navigate theological concepts as evidence THEY are supreme) but there is a difference.

    In Theological matters, the study humbles itself to the greater mystery of God, while the ill-informed scientist like Dawkins elevates himself along with other accidental and improbable materials to the state of myth or God. Each, alike, sees the discipline through the lens of his own abilities, and trusts that those abilities are complete. They are not. This is why I appreciate the humble writings of John Calvin, who wrestles the arrogant theologian to the ground attempting to rid him or her of their arrogance, and have them acknowledge the otherness and mystery of God. Such an understanding is difficult, because it acknowledges there are realities greater than ourselves and our ability to understand. These are harsh words, but I believe they are accurate. Robinson speaks more pointedly, and perhaps with more grace. Here is that link:

    http://solutions.synearth.net/2006/10/20

1 Comments:

Blogger KimHelliwell said...

A link to Donald Miller's blog would be nice! I see a link to the Wired article, and a link to Marilyne Robinson's article (which was VERY good, by the way!), but where is Donald Miller's blog? Sounds like a good one...

4:46 PM

 

Post a Comment

<< Home