Re: Richard Dawkins Question

Kevin Aylward <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote or quoted:
> John Edser wrote:

>> Amazingly, Dawkins cannot see that
>> religion is THE critical group binding
>> and group identifying human belief
>> system, that was selected for at
>> the organism (and not the group) level.
> 
> The fact that religion evolved due to Darwinian axioms, does not make it
> a true belief. http://www.anasoft.co.uk/replicators/religion.html [...]

Whather religion is a critical group binding mechanism for humans has
little to do with whether the views it can sometimes lead to are accurate.

>> It is of immense importance to evolutionary theory.
> 
> Not really. The 10 commandants are derivable. There is no reason to
> attribute "morals" to any religion.
> http://www.anasoft.co.uk/replicators/religion.html

Religion does seem to have a substantial impact on human behaviour -
and thus seems likely to leave a mark on our evolution.

When Mark Ridley sought a metaphor for our descendants - in
"Mendel's Demons" - he called them "angels" - humans with wings.

It may seem like a strange image - but it is perhaps an appropriate one.

If mankind is dreaming of angels, then maybe those dreams will come true.
-- 
__________
 |im |yler  http://timtyler.org/  [EMAIL PROTECTED]  Remove lock to reply.