EOIN NEESON,
Madam, - I read Prof Richard Dawkins's piece in your edition of February 17th with much interest, hoping to find a reasoned analysis of the contemporary relationship between science and religion.
Instead I found a lot of (rather unpleasant) invective and a strong tendency to confuse religion and God. I remained - like Robert Browning - feeling: "All we have gained, then, by our unbelief/ Is a life of doubt diversified by faith,/ For one of faith diversified by doubt".
I take it that, with or without religion, God still Is? And, oh yes, with or without quantum physics too? - Yours, etc.,
EOIN NEESON, Blackcrock, Co Dublin.
... ... * ... * ... * ... ...
Madam, - I read with interest what Richard Dawkins has to say about "The Great Convergence" of science and religion. Prof Dawkins seems aghast that such a convergence just might be possible and simply will not entertain the possibility. I wonder what scares him so much. Why is it that many of the world's respected scientists are so quick to dismiss religion as "mumbo-jumbo"?
It seems to be that many of them are simply uncomfortable with the unprovable elements of our world and are quick to criticise those of us who attribute such elements to some divine source.
It has always been a mystery to me why they should adopt this position. They themselves do not have all the answers to the mysteries of the world, and it is highly unlikely that they ever will be able to explain away everything in our wonderful and mysterious world with inarguable scientific dogma. Why then, do they knock the working theories proposed by religion?
Science is advancing at a considerable rate and the breakthroughs in the Past century alone are astounding. Both science and religion have their place in the world and could do well to take heed of each other with an open mind. Alas, it seems that religion is keener to listen to science than the other way around. - Yours, etc.,
BRID LANE, South Circular Road, Dublin 8.
... ... * ... * ... * ... ...
Madam, - Richard Dawkins (February 17th) evidently dreams that, some day, we will have a planet populated entirely by educated atheists. This may come to pass. In the West, at least, organised religion has outlived its usefulness as an agent of social control. In the developing countries, religion seems to be thriving, but the people of these areas are, Dawkins would say, "unsophisticates".
God knows what will happen if, as has been said, there is a Gorbachev among the cardinals who becomes the next Pope and brings the whole monolithic hierarchial structure crumbling down, as was the case with Communism.
Even if a utopian world full of educated atheists is ever achieved, one thing is certain: human nature will not change. Humankind's proneness to evil, the relentless struggle to climb the pyramid of esteem as evidenced by lust for power and wealth, mimetic desire, abuse of scientific discoveries - these will always be with us, even in a world of educated atheists. - Yours, etc.,
CHRISTOPHER HANAFIN, Newmarket-on-Fergus, Co Clare.
... ... * ... * ... * ... ...
Madam, - There are, as we know, Catholic atheists, Jewish atheists - and Salman Rushdie. But is it not amusing that, while he has clearly lost all faith in the Protestant God of his origins, Prof Richard Dawkins so religiously maintains his atavistic hatred of Rome in perfect working order? - Yours, etc.,
Yours, etc.,
Rev DAVID O'HANLON, Kentstown, Navan, Co Meath.