Richard Dawkins's Film 'The Root Of All Evil'

Dawkins, Richard. The Blind Watchmaker: Why the Evidence of Evolution Reveals a Universe Without Design. New York: W.W. Norton, 1986.

The essay “God, Science, and Imagination” by Wendell Berry discusses fundamentalists, specifically ones of science and religion, and their need to humiliate their opponents through evangelism and conversion. He also criticizes Professor Steven Weinberg’s essay and his opinion on God and religion. Weinberg is in fact a fundamentalist of science who questions the existence of God. But, Berry argues that “If in fact the fundamentalist scientists were as smart as they think they are, and if the religious fundamentalists were as secure in their belief as they claim to be, then they would leave one another in peace… these camps keep pestering each other because they need each other” (25).The same could be said for the contestants in James Fallows’

Lewis and the Case against Scientism" evoked a myriad of emotions, ranging from intrigue to contemplation. C. S. Lewis's profound insights and the documentary's exploration of scientism left me with a sense of wonder and a deep appreciation for the complexities of human thought and understanding. The documentary skillfully unpacks C.S. Lewis's critique of scientism, providing a nuanced perspective on the limitations of reducing all knowledge to scientific knowledge. Lewis's argument against an exaggerated trust in scientific methods resonates strongly, challenging the prevailing notion that science alone can provide a complete understanding of reality. His emphasis on the danger of neglecting morality, philosophy, and spirituality in the pursuit of scientific knowledge prompts critical reflection on the broader implications of scientism.

It is impossible to refute the reality of evil in the world, Hick argues; the Bible, for example, “faithfully reflect[s] the characteristic mixture of good and evil in human experience” (290). Yet such evidence

Throughout many years, religion has been a support for many people; reading the bible and attending to church every Sunday, is essential if someone wants to follow God’s guidance. Even though there are many religions in America, Christianity is the most common one and for most Christian believing in the Theory of Evolution is questioning God’s Guidance which is unacceptable and disrespectful. However, analyzing Kevin Hovind’s overly emotional argument about the Reasons Why Evolution is stupid is notable the lack of logical thinking, unreliable information and offensive language which left the audience questioning about the credibility of his knowledge.

When it comes to origins of the universe, Dawkins scoffs that Christians believe God created the world. But, before we can proceed, it must be recognized that Dawkins himself has faith––his faith rests in human beings. He says:

In the YouTube video by Stephen Fry entitled, “That’s Humanism!” (Fry, “That’s Humanism!”). The introduction of the video started with a question, “How do we know what is True?” “What’s true through the use of evidence and science?” (Fry, “That’s Humanism!”). In response to ‘blind faith,’ the “scientific creationists substitute a materialist definition of faith demanding that science confirm scripture and scripture confirm science, while simultaneously attacking the materialism of scientific explanation”(Aliff 2005). Faith without science is “blind” (Regier 2010). Regier stated, “There is a delicate balance between science and religion, without one the other will produce wrong answers or not produce answers at all” (2010).

In the “Introduction,” Verschuuren introduces the supposed conflict that some believe exists between science and faith. He immediately questions this belief by suggesting that some atheists tried to use evolution to discredit Christianity, and in response, some Christians simply rejected

Biology professor Kenneth Miller’s central argument is that science should not undermine one’s faith in God. “Science itself does not contradict the hypothesis of God.” He makes this argument by stating that science explains the things that God has made and in doing so, trying to prove the existence of God through natural or scientific means does not make sense. Once the supernatural is introduced, there is no way to use nature, thus science, to prove or disprove its existence. Miller argues that science gives us the window to the dynamic and creative universe that increases our appreciation of God’s work. The central point of his argument is evolution. Creationists, of the intelligent design movement, argue that nature has irreducible complex systems that could have only arisen from a creature or designer. This theory is widely supported among devout believers in the Bible and God. Miller argues that if they truly believe this, completely ignoring hard facts and theories, then they are seeking their God in the darkness. Miller, a Christian himself, believes that this “flow of logic is depressing”; to fear the acquisition of knowledge and suggest that the creator dwells in the shadows of science and understanding is taking us back to the Middle Ages, where people used God as an explanation for something they have yet to or want

The text ‘Good and Bad Reasons for Believing’ is written by Richard Dawkins. It is an open letter which he wrote to his daughter, Juliet, when she turned ten and is part of his book, ‘A Devil’s Chaplain’. Dawkins feels his daughter is old enough now to not believe everything she is told blindly but should investigate what she is told to find out if it is true or not. This letter is also meant for theists and religious scholars whom Dawkins attacks in the letter. Dawkins is an evolutionary biologist and author. It is worth mentioning due to the nature of the letter that he is an

LEIBNIZ’S CONCEPTION OF THE PROBLEM OF EVIL BY OKOJIE E. PETER epo4escriva@yahoo.com MAY 2013 INTRODUCTION For many centuries, philosophers have been discussing evil, how it exists in the world, and how this relates to God. The discussion on evil and its relations to us is not an easy one though. It is commonly called the problem of evil. The problem of evil in contemporary philosophy is generally regarded as an argument for atheism. The atheist contends that God and evil are incompatible, and given that evil clearly exists, God cannot exist. The problem is generally used to disprove God’s existence by showing an inconsistency between an all-powerful, all-good, and all-knowing God; and the existence of evil. Philosophers over the centuries

Richard Dawkins and Lawrence Krauss are portrayed as crusaders of science, fighting any type of religion that stands in their way in the movie "The Unbelievers." By promoting a scientific worldview, they believe they are promoting the one thing that makes us inherently human– curiosity. They believe that "there's no one whose views aren't subject to question", saying that religion is no exception to this idea of challenging beliefs. Dawkins and Krauss also emphasized that people should be able to discuss religion, looking at it much more critically than allowed in the past. I think that these ideas of questioning and curiously examining religion are two things we did throughout our class, whether it was discussing our thoughts in class, comparing different interpretations of biblical text, or reading articles that showed more alternative views to the typical Christian fable.

The film I Origins tells a story of Dr. Ian gray and his journey through romance religion and science. Ian is a microbiologist conducting research with his lab partner Karen to eventually be able to create an eye. Doing this challenges ethics, a well-known factor that sets many boundaries in science. Ian and Karen’s research not only test ethical but also religious boundaries in a sense that they are trying to play God. Mike Cahill's I Origins (2014) offers his audience a unique perspective on the infamous debate of science and its opposition religion, by using character Ian Grey’s transition from an atheist, relentlessly pursuing research to disprove God’s existence,

One argues that today we have a crisis of belief, not a crisis of faith. To explain this crisis, I will briefly examine the relationship between faith and belief, explain why cultural shift is important to note when trying to understand religious issues, go into detail on the three hallmarks of each of the two cultures by showing how they compare to each other, show how Tillich’s notion of correlation deals with this idea of culture and a crisis of belief, and explain how Marsh’s notion of a “theology of negotiation” (33) fits with Lonergan’s definition and allows him to argue that film can help us raise theological questions.

"Capitalism is the root of all injustice," a past instructor would remark to me periodically thought out the semester. The past instructor was a woman who was a professor of political science and a supporter of my endeavors in environmental policy, and a feminist. I mention this because it is contrary to the ideas of Dave van Pattern who suggests in his piece that those who study sociology believe "men are the root of all evil." Pattern was a political science graduate, and I myself as a political science major understood where his earlier beliefs about men 's rights came from and I also applaud his later transition away from the previous notions of masculinity. Furthermore, my feminism was built up by largely female professors in my courses ranging from Environmental Science, Anthropology, Ethics, Political Theory, and now Communication Studies 360. However, I am troubled by the statistics stated within some of the articles and texts such as the Backlash article that presented data of how women are not equal and do not "have it all."