Questions for Dr. Dawkins and his disciples

I have some questions for Dr. Richard Dawkins and his disciples:

  1. Are all terrorists terrorizing the world for a religious cause? What about Sri Lankan Tamil Tigers? What does this tell about the origins of terrorism or the evolutionary explanation for altruism?
  2. Is religion the only root of all evil? In the absense of religious morality, will other roots of all evil be prone to justification as a consensual morality generally agreed upon in society? How will the other roots of all evil identified and rectified if many of them can be justified?
  3. How can you be sure that religion is NOT a contributing factor to moral conditioning of our super-egos? Can you be really sure that religion is NOT a contibuting factor to keep criminal behavior in society under a check? What is better: crime prevention using technology(wire-taps), crime prevention using religious conditioning or punishment of criminals?
  4. Is there any other meme which is just as good as religion & faith when it comes to moral conditioning of people?
  5. Do all people always have the intellectual calibre to rationally arrive at a moral decision in every instance of their lives, without relying on religion or faith as their crutch?

I think people get what they deserve and they deserve to be deluded with fallacies.

Advertisements

One thought on “Questions for Dr. Dawkins and his disciples

  1. 1. Are all terrorists terrorizing the world for a religious cause? What about Sri Lankan Tamil Tigers? What does this tell about the origins of terrorism or the evolutionary explanation for altruism?

    1. No, in fact, a large group of terrorists are not really considered with religion. Terrorism is a political response, not religious. Even the Israel – Palestine conflict is concerned more about the presumably illegitimate occupation of Palestine by Israel. In my opinion, terrorism and other sources of conflict is the product of two fundamental thoughts:

    (a) The self is righteous [always good and always right]
    (b) There are two categories, the self and the non-self.

    Note that self is not just an individual [it could be],it is a group that an individual identifies.

    I believe the evolutionary explanation for altruism still holds. The cause for altruistic genes would be the concept that there is a reproductive advantage by being altruistic. And this certainly true to some level. If a group of individuals help each other for mutual benefit, there is a better chance, they would live well and long enough to find mates. An so there is an evolutionary advantage for being altruistic. But they key assumption is that there is a genetic basis, I don’t see why this is necessary. For example, I may learn that altruism helps me live longer hence I should be altruistic. And this may be learned generation to generation…

    And religious thought could be also explained from evolution… [I won’t go into this, unless you want me to …]

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s