Transcript for the Piece Audio version of Richard Dawkins Interview

*** RICHARD DAWKINS INTERVIEW ***

ERIC WHITNEY: This week, a court in Pennsylvania is hearing a case about whether a local school district can require the teaching of intelligent design in a science class. America’s debate over evolution is drawing attention from around the world, including from a British television network, who sent one of the leading evolutionary scientists of modern times, Richard Dawkins, to Colorado Springs. Dawkins will try to explain American ideas about religion and science to British television viewers. Western Skies’ Stephen Raher had a chance to talk with Dawkins about his observations.

STEPHEN RAHER: What brings you to Colorado Springs?

RICHARD DAWKINS: I’m here to make a film for Channel Four, which is one of the British television stations, about religion. And Colorado Springs has a bit of reputation as being a kind of “hot bed” of evangelical Christianity. And so we decided, the television company decided, to concentrate on Colorado Springs as a good place to go to get a view on the state of fundamentalist religion in America.

RAHER: How are the fundamentalist religions, as you call them, in the U.S. different from conservative religions in Britain?

DAWKINS: The main difference is that in the U.S. they have political power. In Britain, we have similar people but they don’t have any influence. I’m an evolutionary scientist, and so what I know about is evolution. And so I’m frequently being called upon to defend evolution against ignorant assault from religious fundamentalists. In the United States it’s a very, very important issue because they are seizing control of local school boards and textbook publishers and things like that.

RAHER: What is it about science that they’re attacking? Is it specific theories like evolution, or is it more attacking the scientific method itself?

DAWKINS: I don’t they explicitly attack the scientific method, they couldn’t really get away with that. Although, implicitly that’s what they are doing. I think they are attacking anything that conflicts with what is written in the Bible, literally interpreted. And so, evolution has become a kind of test case for them. There’s a second aspect to that, which is that they see evolution, which allies us genetically to chimpanzees and to actually all animals and all plants, is somehow demeaning to humanity. And so you hear them say things like “Well, if you tell our children that they’re nothing but animals, then no wonder they do terrible things. The only way to get morals, the only way to get people to behave decently is to tell them that humans are quite separate.”

RAHER: It’s interesting that you mention children. I’ve seen people who have differing religious views peacefully coexist and respect each other’s differences; and then all of a sudden, when it gets to the issue of educating children, things just devolve into a very divisive debate. Do you have any insights on why educating children is such a hot button issue?

DAWKINS: It’s very clear that from religion’s point of view, getting at the children early is the way that the religion perpetuates itself. Science isn’t really like that, because what science wants to do is to teach children to think for themselves, to look at evidence, to evaluate evidence, to be critical. But if you are a Christian of a particular denomination, you know the only way your religion is going to be perpetuated is if the ideas get perpetuated literally and so there is obviously enormous concern that the children must be protected from the contaminating influence of either the wrong religion, or secularism, or scientific open-mindedness.

RAHER: I think a lot of people in this country are confused by the debate over intelligent design, because I think some people assume that intelligent design means a belief that evolution and belief in god can coexist. But it seems like it’s a little bit more than that.

DAWKINS: As well they might be confused. Politically speaking, what’s going on is that creationism, per se, Biblical creationism, won’t fly easily in this country because of the Constitutional separation of church and state. So intelligent design, is a political ploy to re-brand creationism under another name, to make it sound like science. So that it can weasel its way into science classes. But actually what it is, it’s the same spectrum of views. I say a spectrum because creationism isn’t a monolithic view. And the people who call themselves intelligent design theorists are not quite so lunatic as the ones who think that the world was created in literally six days, who are of course completely beyond the pale scientifically. And the intelligent design people have enough sense not to ally themselves with those total wingnuts. There’s a whole spectrum of views, not one of which has a tiny shred of evidence going for it.

RAHER: Sometimes people who are promoting creationism or intelligent design will cite the works of scientists who have questioned or modified Darwin’s theories. I’m wondering if you’ve ever been cited in that way.

DAWKINS: Most certainly. I’ve been cited out of context. For example, I often say that the beauties of nature, the elegance of the productions of natural selection are so elegant, that it looks as though they’ve been designed. And then of course, I go on to explain the sense in which they’re not designed. But they always cut the quotation off there, and so they say “Evolutionary biologist Richard Dawkins says that living things look as though they’ve been designed.” And then they stop there and then say “Of course, if things look as though they’ve been designed, why shouldn’t they have been designed?” It’s a systematic use of quotations out of context and truncated, so as to give a false impression and that’s very, very common. I might add to that, if religion was secure, they wouldn’t need to tell lies about what scientists say.

RAHER: So what will you tell people when you go home and they ask you “How was Colorado Springs?”

DAWKINS: I think I would say that Colorado Springs, like other parts of America, is divided between two different Americas. There’s the intelligent, educated, open-minded America, which is prepared to listen to evidence, prepared to listen to argument, prepared to change its mind. And there are close-minded, fundamentalist people who don’t want to know, don’t want to learn, don’t want to listen. They know what’s true, it’s in the holy book. They’ve been told what’s true, they feel passionately that they know what’s true, and no argument, no argument whatsoever can ever sway them. And therefore, when they hear an argument that does sway them, they simply shut their eyes, shut their ears. And it’s almost as though there’s a kind of partition in America between the educated thoughtful half of the country, and the closed-minded thoughtless part of the country.

RAHER: Thank you.

DAWKINS: Thank you very much.

OUTRO: Richard Dawkins is a biology professor at Oxford. He’s the author of several books, including The Ancestor’s Tale, which was just released in paperback.