Richard David Dawkins Analysis
In an excerpt from his book The God Delusion (2006), Richard Dawkins argues that scientific evidence is fundamental to the establishment that a scientific theory, such as the idea of creationism and theory of evolution, can become a scientific fact. Dawkins states that "if all evidence in the universe turned in favor of creationism." As an ethologist and biologist himself, the plethora of evidence regarding a certain theory would allow him to safely conclude that the argument in question is in fact true, in this instance, creationism. However, there is a clear conflict when he proceeds to claim that "as rings stand, however, all available evidence favors evolution.” Dawkins clearly states that the reason why he believes in evolution rather than the idea of Devine
…show more content…
He solely bases his beliefs on the quantity of evidence held by each side, using scientific evidence when regarding evolution and biblical literalism when regarding creationism. Dawkins from his statement concludes that based on his studies, all the evidence points towards evolution, implying that the Bible or any other religious book or testament is not a sufficient amount of data to conclude that the belief that life was created by a divine being is legitimate. Furthermore, Dawkins’ argument is captivating by distinctly claiming that he believes in one side over the other, averting from flaw of the “Integration” model, where science and religion can be basically unified as if they were in the same field of study. Additionally, Dawkins mentions the lack of evidence creationism has which can be compared to a film in which a character had the same problem,
He solely bases his beliefs on the quantity of evidence held by each side, using scientific evidence when regarding evolution and biblical literalism when regarding creationism. Dawkins from his statement concludes that based on his studies, all the evidence points towards evolution, implying that the Bible or any other religious book or testament is not a sufficient amount of data to conclude that the belief that life was created by a divine being is legitimate. Furthermore, Dawkins’ argument is captivating by distinctly claiming that he believes in one side over the other, averting from flaw of the “Integration” model, where science and religion can be basically unified as if they were in the same field of study. Additionally, Dawkins mentions the lack of evidence creationism has which can be compared to a film in which a character had the same problem,