The other night, Jon Stewart interviewed Richard
Dawkins on the Daily Show. Dawkins is
famous for being an unapologetic evolutionist and believer in science. Richard Dawkins often pushes back against
religious dogma and teachings that clash with scientific views. At one point the conversation turned to the
possibility that, one way or another, man is capable of self-annihilation. Jon Stewart asked Dawkins which he believed
might be more likely to bring forth the end of civilization: advancements in
our science or advancements in religious strife.
Dawkins suggested that the bad fruits of scientific
advance are clearly a danger as are religious radicals who are willing to
sacrifice all as martyrs on their way to paradise beyond. “The answer,” he finally said, “is probably
both.” Dawkins went on to say that there
is an increasing possibility that a religious radical will end up with some
form of new destructive device and ultimately use it thinking that is what God
desires.
This kind of thinking is pessimistic and disturbing
all at once, but such discussions always trigger my own cascade of related
thinking. Sometimes I start my thinking
at the events of nine-eleven and drop from that point.
What if this?
What if that?
On the scientific side, I often think about some of
the researchers working on the early atomic bomb tests during the 1940s. A few of the scientists were concerned that
the first test might set fire to the atmosphere surrounding the earth and bring
an end to all life as we know it.
Funny thing…they pressed the button anyway.
--Mitchell
Hegman
And that is why "emissaries" have been sent to our world to stop us from annihilating ourselves!
ReplyDelete