Richard Dawkins Narrow Mindedness

I sat down with my I phone and scanned the u-tube platform looking for something to amuse myself with for an hour or so before settling down for the night when I came across a talk by Richard Dawkins and Lawrence Kraus. I decided to spend the time really examining what they did believe.

Admittedly it was more light-hearted at times than a serious expose of their work. They declared that they had decided not to run with a moderator for it was their belief that inevitably a moderator intervened a bit too much and was inclined to stultify the conversation by leading the discussion into unwarranted areas. They were inclined to stop the flow of conversation into important areas when the thought pattern was becoming serious. My conclusion was that it might have been better if they had gone with the moderator than the meandering nature of their attempt.

It was far from an auspicious start as the conversation quickly degenerated into a belittling of Christianity and eminent church leaders who had been pitted against them in prior debates. They are eminent scholars at the top of their game, but as is often the case church leaders are chosen for their well-known standing in the church. Inevitably they are conservative people who are in their position for their administrative expertise rather than their sophistication in theology. They promote one line of their knowledge that is easily debunked, if not ridiculed. This approach set the scene for this conversation.

The conversation then turned to their expertise in their topic of choice. The discussion about the most sophisticated knowledge of the state of the universe. Aided by sophisticated formula the discussion turned to the mystery of creation out of nothing. While it was acknowledged this concept might be difficult to grasp, creation from nothing was now proven without doubt as was the story of evolution. Reason had put this beyond doubt. The discovery of life across the cosmos was dependent on what could be proven. This is a narrow-minded conclusion for there are other options speculated upon as follows

1. In the light of the speculated notion of multi-universes the universe may have started from a previous universe engulfed by a black hole and ejected via the opposite side in the renewed form to start the journey again. This would ensure that the ingredients necessary for a repeat result were available.

2. The second option is the theory that the universe began via the evolution of consciousness as speculated upon by Bedogne. Bedogne foresees the beginning emerging out of the notion of consciousness in its simplest form which he calls emptiness. The process proceeds from the innate need of consciousness to fulfill itself. The process constantly repeats itself passing through the inflationary period (big bang), with the journey passing through the formation of matter, then life, eventually producing the human form as we know it now.

Dawkins is adamant that he is right in claiming that the universe began from nothing for it is to maintain the credibility of the science venture. It is a pity that he is so adamant when there are other feasible explanations.

Dawkins still argues that while we do not know what consciousness is other than it probably comes from the function of the brain, this falls far short of a comprehensive evaluation. Wilber begins the discussion by simply stating that we have four states of consciousness, waking, dreaming, deep sleep, and the divine. Developmental Psychology then proceeds to build a fuller picture of progressive consciousness that may transpire through the life cycles. It has been explored from many angles. Wilber has charted in his book Integral Psychology, approximately one hundred different models of different states of consciousness. They approximately resemble one another but with variations. What is particularly noticeable from his charts is that the records of the Asian world are far more advanced than that displayed in the western world. The pinnacle of the charts indicated in the western world is usually the universal category whereas the Asian world continues with further stages ascending to eventually speak of the divine. In relation to the significant research done on near-death experiences, all evidence points to the truth that consciousness transcends the physical domain.

This forms a contrast to the narrow-minded picture of Dawkins where all is regarded as emanating from the scientific world. The modern world of integral perception regards that there are many ways to perceive truth. Dawkins is a typical scholar molded by the mental rational perception of life. He regards that life is shaped by reason and that all other perceptions are false. Ken Wilber speaks of this being a flatland mentality. The wholistic view that humanity is now entering is integral where all perceptions, the archaic, magic, the mythic, and the mental rational are combined to form the integral in a non-dual awareness of reality. Science is a valuable contributor but it is one contributor of the many sides of life. It is the higher realms of the mythic that are more inclined to allude to the reality of the higher domains of consciousness. This is a testament to integral perception. All forms of language can contribute to the multi-faceted realms of reality.

There is no doubt that Richard Dawkins is well-equipped with the knowledge of evolution. He is one of the elite minds in this field. However, he is very adamant that the field of science is superior to all other domains. He is adamant that reason is the only means that can hold the truth. This is the area of concern. The world is moving on from this single-minded approach. Over the past century, the world of knowledge has expanded to equally consider all domains as contributing to their contribution.

(The work of Fr Robert Spitzer SJ. PhD. is an excellent speaker on this subject. His work is found on u-tube and the website www.magiscenter.com )