From here:
Belief in God is part of human nature – Oxford study.
Humans are naturally predisposed to believe in gods and life after death, according to a major three-year international study.
Led by two academics at Oxford University, the £1.9 million study found that human thought processes were “rooted” to religious concepts……
“We have gathered a body of evidence that suggests that religion is a common fact of human nature across different societies,” he said.
“This suggests that attempts to suppress religion are likely to be short-lived as human thought seems to be rooted to religious concepts, such as the existence of supernatural agents or gods, and the possibility of an afterlife or pre-life.”
This means that if people like Richard Dawkins are correct and natural selection alone has created human nature, it has created something that is inclined to believe in falsehoods and, therefore, cannot be trusted.
So if Richard Dawkins is correct, his thoughts are a product of something that cannot be trusted.
It follows that, whether he is right or wrong, there isn’t much point in listening to Richard Dawkins.
There is a story about a discussion between an atheist and a Christian.
The Christian said: “If I am wrong, and there is no God, when I die I won’t be any worse off. If you are wrong…”
That’s “Pascal’s Wager”.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pascal's_Wager
Yes if we are wrong our downside is no worse than their upside. However, if we are right their downside is almost beyond our imagination. I find the Richards Dawkins willingness to bet the eternal farm on his being right as proof that the wise will be shown to be a dumb as a post. To see creation and say there is no God will leave you standing before your maker without excuse.
My question to the atheist is rather: Suppose I’m wrong and you’re right, and there is nothing whatever beyond this present life (and therefore no purpose to anything, no ultimate (ie. real) justice, no reality to any “ethics”, no sense, reason or objective in anything), then why bother getting up in the morning? Now, you (the atheist) may be wrong, and me right, but we won’t know about that now, and you still think you’re right – so why bother getting up in the morning? Apparently Peter Singer suggested (half seriously?) that it was better not to have been born at all (having his materialist beliefs); I can respect that, it’s rational and logical. I can’t respect such as Humanism/any Dawkins-like position, which still claims, or tries, to see some point to things. Suicide is the only rational, logical, course for the atheist/materialist.