Credit: Neil Swaab
Science writers like Gould, Goodenough, Sagan, or Dawkins often aspire to communicate the wonder they feel at the beauty, complexity, and diversity of nature. It's a natural consequence of a career in science—perhaps even a prerequisite for one—to marvel at stars in the sky or strange creatures of the deep, or even the miracle of our own flesh. Great science writing tries to transmit that same sense of amazement to the reader. In return, all too often these writers are paid the backhanded compliment that they, who do not believe in spirits, are "spiritual;" that the joy they take in the universe is their "religion."
"But is religion the right word?" asks eminent Oxford scholar Richard Dawkins in his newest book, The God Delusion(B&N). Though the appropriation of the term may seem innocuous, in Dawkins's view it's part of a larger and more dangerous trend. His reply—"I don't think so"—sets the tone for the book.
Advertisement
This habit of confusing respect for nature with a belief in a higher power is convenient. It's easy to take a scientist's love of the cosmos or appreciation of humanity, slap the label "spiritual" on her rational, albeit appreciative, worldview and turn her into a poster child for religious belief. Albert Einstein was guilty of casually using the word "god" to refer to the impersonal forces of the universe, and his aphorisms are now routinely trotted out by the faithful. In fact, when Einstein clearly spelled out his disbelief in dogma, orthodoxy, organized religion, and a personal creator in a 1941 paper, he was publicly scorned and urged to silence himself, or return to Germany.
No one would ever mistake Dawkins for a friend of religion—or be shocked that he does not believe in gods. With his latest book he draws a hard, bright line and states unequivocally that he believes neither in the supernatural nor in any kind of deity. Dawkins rigorously outlines his rationale and takes it a step further: He suggests the reader think twice about adopting or harboring religious beliefs, going so far as to say, "If this book works for you, you will be an atheist when you put it down." So be warned. Dawkins makes his case calmly, but his usual fierce clarity is ever-present. The God Delusion is a guide for secular evangelization, one that makes a direct assault on the premises of religion. Freethinkers will welcome it; the dogmatic will likely damn it as devil's catechism; and people of faith will read it as a thoughtful challenge.
The first half of The God Delusion delivers a thorough overview of the logic of belief and disbelief. Dawkins reviews, dismantles, and dismisses the major arguments for the existence of the supernatural and deities; this section culminates in a chapter entitled "Why there almost certainly is no God." Believers will not take solace in that "almost"—it's a nod to the provisional nature of all scientific conclusions, not an admission that any evidence of God, however slight, exists and is under debate. Many of Dawkins's arguments have been around for centuries, but he presents them in a fresh, lucid fashion.