Skip to Main Content (access key 1)
Skip to Search (access key 2)
Skip to Search GO (access key 3)
Skip to comments (access key 4)
Skip to navigation (access key 5)
Skip to top of page (access key 6)

Comments by Tim Nelson


1. The Dawkins Delusion (Different Article, Same Stupid Title)

Comment #150435 by Tim Nelson on March 26, 2008 at 11:02 pm

Religious apologists, including McGrath, make frequent attacks on "atheism" by trying to bring it down to their own level: they kid themselves (and try to kid others) that atheism is a "belief", or more ludicrously a "religion" in its own right and hence subject to all the same weaknesses and flaws of their own nonsense.

Without going into the details, which are fairly obvious, I can understand the naïve psychology of this tactic. However, atheism is not a "belief" at all; it is the natural, neutral state of the human mind. No baby is ever born with an innate, instinctive belief in a supernatural god, let alone the authorised, Judeo-Christian version. We are all born atheists; we all choose our beliefs in a god or gods. Unfortunately, many of us have our beliefs "chosen" for us by our parents, teachers, peer groups, and above all, by the society or culture into which are born and raised. Many of us, however, when we are old enough, and after we have been exposed to sufficient rationalist education and freedom, recognise that belief in a supernatural god and the claims of religion do not make sense and we abandon them and return to our "atheist" roots. Some people (mostly the less well-educated) maintain their religious beliefs into adulthood and throughout their lives; others even change to a different, but equally irrational set of beliefs about "God".

"Atheism" is also a natural consequence of being a rationalist. Attacks by religious believers upon "atheism" are therefore de facto attacks on rationalism. Thus it perplexes and dismays me when former rationalists such as McGrath abandon rationalism and become "converted" to believe in ancient and medieval religious superstition.

McGrath should have persevered with his biochemistry. To have got to Oxford he is without doubt highly intelligent, and had he stayed in science, he might have contributed something of tangible, practical benefit to the human race. Unfortunately he has squandered his intellect by voluntarily dumbing himself down and choosing to practise as a witch-doctor for Christianity.