Don’t know if I’ll be able to stomach Richard Dawkin’s new book, "The Greatest Show on Earth: The Evidence for Evolution." Yeah, it’ll have a ton of interesting science in it. But I took a look at an excerpt in Newsweek, and it has the same attitude as all the rest of his books: I’m right about. You’re wrong about creationism. And you’re stupid.
What Dawkins doesn’t get is that people aren’t supporting creationism because they misunderstand the evidence. It really doesn’t matter to them whether the evidence for evolution my natural selection is good or bad. This is simply a matter of faith. Evidence that "seems" to contradict the Bible is simply a test of that faith. No amount of evidence will turn that argument around.
So why, you may ask, do creationist devote so much energy trying to poke holes in the evidence?
Undoubtedly there are some creationists who don’t even understand that their position is faith based, and they are consoled when someone tells them that the evidence for evolution is flawed. But those who understand the faith argument still may argue against the evidence for the same reason that Dawkins tries to promote the evidence: to persuade the fence sitters.
Another thing that Dawkins doesn’t get is why people are scared by evolution. He titled his most famous book "The Selfish Gene." And this is what people fear. It’s the Hobbesian idea that nature is selfish and cruel. Most religions share this bleak view of nature and humanity, but religions find consolation in God’s grace.
Dawkins’ evolution has no consolation. (Or, the consolation is found in the fine print, which is just as bad.)
What makes Dawkins view so detrimental to science is the obvious fact that, if the natural world is what it is because of evolution, then kindness and generosity evolved just as much as selfishness did.
(The truth is that Dawkins would agree with all this. It’s in his fine print. Only Darwin knows why he persists in selling the nasty side of evolution. Of course, nastiness sells books. Kindness doesn’t.)