Chp 6 – The God Delusion – The roots of morality – why are we good? - My initial thoughts

Chp 6 – The God Delusion – The roots of morality  – why are we good? - My initial thoughts

Professor Dawkins begins this chapter referring to hate mail he received from people who make some reference to being religious. It is obviously paradoxical and hypocritical that religious people (or at least people who profess to be religious) show non-religious traits but I don’t think that this is a scientific proof for the non-existence of God. The logic is almost like saying that the UK’s most prolific serial killer was a medical doctor (Dr Harold Shipman) therefore this says something negative about the medical profession. Not really.

I certainly would agree that it seems that a lot of people who profess to be religious are anything but.

Professor Dawkins refers to the ideas of the selfish gene and reciprocal altruism as the main Darwinian pillars of thought when it comes to what appears to translate into good and bad behavior. Whilst the gene is selfish insofar as it is a unit of life which is essentially in a battle of survival against other genes there are instances where selfish behaviour isn’t the only way to achieve such survival and Professor Dawkins provides 4 possible examples where altruistic behavior could perhaps assist in gene survival - (1) altruism where there is a genetic kinship – in the sense this is furthering your genes by assisting the genes of kin which carry genes similar to your own; (2) reciprocity – where an altruistic act invites one in return; (3) Darwinian benefit for acquiring a reputation for generosity and kindness; and (4) conspicuous generosity as a show of strength.

Certainly I find this very interesting but I am not convinced of the scientific basis of this.

From the section of the chapter entitled “A case study in the roots of morality” the point that seems to be made is that it isn’t religion that drives our morals but instead we (humans) seem to have an inbuilt moral compass.  From this Professor Dawkins makes the point we don’t need God to be good or evil. As a Muslim, I would look at this differently. In Islam, we have the idea of “fitrah” that we are all born, pre-programmed if you like, to believe in God and also to know the difference between good and bad.  I think that the references Professor Dawkins provides does support the idea that we seem to be born with the capacity to believe in God and we seem to have a moral sense (albeit that professor Dawkins would say that these traits have evolved over time and there is no pre-programming). I for one feel that I have a moral sense and certainly when I speak to those around me it seems to me that they also have a moral sense. Professor Dawkins seems to acknowledge this - where we differ is how we got this moral sense. 

I do find the idea of morals as very interesting and I wonder why we have this. As I mentioned above I am not convinced of the Darwinian explanation here which I am sure Professor Dawkins will agree isn't concrete. I would also say that having a moral sense and behaving morally are two different things and in Islam this is essentially the test (combined of course with belief in God). It therefore comes as no surprise to me that whilst we all have a sense of morality, both religious and non religious people can act morally/immorally. In Islam, the key consideration is why you act morally. If your act of kindness is to win a favour in return or to appease an aggressor then you cannot expect any reward from God (Allah) for such an act unless also you are in  a state of belief and that your act is part of your overall life in servitude to God (Allah).

Whilst I do enjoy reading Professor Dawkins I do sense his bias to conclude there is no God. For example, he “suspects” there are few atheists in prisons.  As a man of science there should be some evidence to support such a comment. You cannot write a book saying people who believe in God are deluded and then throw in a loose remark that you suspect there are few atheists in prisons. This is very much misleading in my opinion. On this issue I would like to see some evidence – also, what number of prisoners become religious inside prison? In any event, what is the correlation between the beliefs of prisoners and the existence of God? I do find it amusing when Professor Dawkins accuses religious people of being unscientific and not using evidence to support their beliefs. Pot, kettle….