Richard Dawkins is challenging the idea that a Deistic God created the universe
and set it in motion and then keeps aloof. In other words, according to
him we believe in an absentee God who seems to be indifferent to what
is happening in the world. But if He in fact does create individual
souls ‘off and on’, then he should face the problem of evil that exists
in the created universe in the form of sorrows and sufferings,
injustice, exploitation, birth-based deformities. Why should there be
any birth-based differences that make some more privileged than others?
Besides, aggressive atheists who deny the existence of God do so because believers have been committing horrible
acts of commission and omission in the name of religious creeds and God.
Despite this, it is said that the so-called all-powerful, all-good, and
all knowing God remains silent. Therefore, God’s silence is equated
with God’s non-existence by materialists and atheists.
Howeveer, the wonderful structure of the
universe and of the things and beings in the universe does seem to
suggest the existence of a Grand Design, which needs explanation. Can it
be due to matter and motion? Though human reason is capable of
understanding a lot, it points to the existence of Universal
Consciousness or Cosmic Intelligence, and this, say nay-sayers, is more
faith than fact.
The theistic world view gives cosmic
support to the believers. After all, the question of all questions is
whether the universe is friendly or inimical to life in general and
human life in particular. Long before the ‘Sun’ in the solar system was
seen as the friend of humans. So the believer bowed before the Sun and
said, “Aum Mitrya Namah” – O Lord, I bow to you, our friend. Darwin’s
theory of biological evolution is a grand hypothesis to explain the
origin of species on this planet. He never claimed that he could explain
the ‘arrival of life to evolve in favour of the fittest’ in the world.
How did the rudimentary amoebas evolve; out of nothing? Biologists aver
the principle ‘life begets life’. Can they reduce biology to physics?
Can they accept biology as a branch of physics? The usual and answer to
this is ‘no’. Moreover, physics itself is becoming a science of the
minute following the discovery that atoms can be split! The concept of
God is not a stupid idea. It cannot be done away with so cursorily. It
was the agnostic H Spencer who applied the concept of evolution to the
evolution of the cosmos. Later philosophers formulated different ideas
of evolution, as did S Alexander in the idea of Emergent Evolution, H
Bergson in the concept of Creative Evolution.
The tiny logic and intellect of man
should not be elevated to the status of God or the Cosmic Intelligence;
perhaps its role in human affairs ought not to be dismissed or
underestimated. Such a stand has its own limitations. German
philosopher Kant refuted the traditional rational argument addressed in
support of belief in God. Yet he formulated the Moral Argument. For
belief in the existence of God – and morality are special to human
beings. Unless we accept the moral in the universe it is very difficult
to make the universe morally intelligible. The discussion cannot be left
in the hands of priests and pundits. Education in humanities will help
believers liberate religion from the clutches of the priestly class. For
aren’t modern liberation theologians willing to learn from Karl Marx to
solve the issue of hunger and injustice?
Courtesy: Speaking Tree
