Exclusive - Richard Dawkins Extended Interview Pt. 2

  • Aired:  09/24/13
  •  | Views: 144,467

In this exclusive, unedited interview, Richard Dawkins articulates the differences between culture and faith. (7:03)

[ APPLAUSE ]>> Jon: WE'RE BACK WITH

RICHARD DAWKINS AN APPETITE FORWONDER IS ON THE SHELVES NOW.

HOW DO WE DO THAT?

HOW DO WE TRY TO PUT THE BRAKESON OUR OWN ABILITY TO ACHIEVE?

OR OUR CURIOSITY?

>> I DON'T THINK YOU CAN EVERREALLY STOP THE MARCH OF SCIENCE

IN THE SENSE OF SAYING YOU'REFORBIDDEN TO EXERCISE YOUR

NATURAL CURIOSITY.

YOU CAN CERTAINLY PUT THE BRAKESON CERTAIN APPLICATIONS.

YOU CAN CERTAINLY STOPMANUFACTURING CERTAIN WEAPONS.

YOU COULD YOU HAVE ANYINTERNATIONALHAVE AN

AGREEMENT, DIFFICULT TO ACHIEVEBUT IT'S BEEN DONE TO SOME

EXTENT, INTERNATIONALAGREEMENTS NOT TO MANUFACTURE

WEAPONS AND DESTROY THE STOCK.

>> Jon: WE DO HAVE CERTAINTHINGS LIKE THAT IN PLACE AT

THIS POINT.

>> YES.

>> Jon: DO YOU THINK IT'SDIFFICULT FOR PEOPLE TO BRIDGE

THE GAP BETWEEN WHAT THEY NEEDFROM RELIGION -- AND I THINK

THERE MUST BE -- IF YOU ARESOMEONE THAT BELIEVES THAT WE

ARE INDIVIDUAL GENES THAT AREALL FIGHTING FOR THEIR OWN

SURVIVAL.

I THINK THAT'S THE THEORY OFYOUR SECOND BOOK?

>> WELL, I WOULDN'T PUT IT QUITELIKE THAT.

>> Jon: NO BECAUSE I'M STUPID.

YOU'RE LIKE A GENIUS GUY.

HOW WOULD YOU PUT IT?

>> NATURAL SELECTION WORKING ATTHE LEVEL OF GENES HAS PUT OUR

BODIES HERE AND OUR BRAINS HERE,BUT OUR BRAINS ARE CAPABLE OF

TAKING OFF AND DEPARTING FROM,CUTTING OURSELVES ADRIFT FROM

THE DARK SIDE OF OUR DARWINIANHERITAGE.

IT CAN BE DARK.

YOU DON'T HAVE TO BE PESSIMISTICAND SAY WE'RE ONLY A MACHINE FOR

OUR GENES.

WE RISE ABOVE THAT WE'VE GOT BIGBRAINS, CULTURE, ART, MUSIC,

POETRY. WE'VE GOT SCIENCE.

WE'VE LEFT BEHIND THE WILD WORLDIN WHICH OUR GENES WERE

NATURALLY SELECTED.

>> Jon: DO YOU BELIEVE THATRELIGION GOES IN THE SAME

CATEGORY AS SOME OF THOSE ORFAITH, LET'S SAY, GOES IN THE

CATEGORY OF SOME OF THOSE -- YOUCLEARLY PLACE A POSITIVE VALUE

ON POETRY, ON ART, ON MUSIC.

COULDN'T FAITH BUT IN THATCATEGORY?

>> IT BELONGS IN THAT CATEGORYIN THE SENSE THAT IT'S A PRODUCT

OF HUMAN BRAINS, YES.

I'M NOT SURE IT BELONGS THERE INTHE POSITIVE SENSE.

I DON'T THINK FAITH IS POSITIVE.

BECAUSE FAITH MEANS BELIEFWITHOUT EVIDENCE.

YOU SHOULDN'T BELIEVE ANYTHINGWITHOUT EVIDENCE.

[CHEERS AND APPLAUSE]AND IT'S ALL TOO COMMON.

PEOPLE WHO ARE BROUGHT UP TOSAY, I BELIEVE IT BECAUSE I

BELIEVE IT.

IT'S JUST MY FAITH.

I'M NOT ALLOWED TO CHALLENGE IT.

THEN A MINORITY OF THOSE PEOPLEARE SEDUCED TO DOING TERRIBLE

THINGS BECAUSE YOU CAN'T ARGUEWITH THEM.

YOU CAN'T ARGUE WITH FAITH.

>> Jon: THEN MY POINT IS THERE'SAN EVOLUTIONARY DEFECT IN

OUR BRAINS THATALLOWS US TO BE

MANIPULATED.

IF THAT IS THE PATHOLOGICAL VERSION OF RELIGION, WOULDN'T

THAT BE THE PATHOLOGICAL VERSIONOF STATISM OR

PATRIOTISM -- OR BEING A FAN OFA BASEBALL TEAM -- I'VE SEEN

PEOPLE DO THINGS AT A FOOTBALLSTADIUM.

IT'S LIKE BLAMING TELEVISION FORBEING CRAPPY.

IT'S JUST A BOX.

>> THAT'S A GOOD POINT.

>> Jon: SORRY, COULD YOU SAYTHAT'S A GOOD POINT AGAIN FOR

THE CAMERAS?

>> THAT'S A GOOD POINT.

[ APPLAUSE ]>> Jon: HASN'T IT BROUGHT --

IS FAITH -- IF ITBRINGS COMFORT TO PEOPLE

AND CAUSES THEM TO BEHAVEMORALLY AND ENGAGE INCHARITABLE CAUSES,

I DON'T KNOW THOSE SEEMLIKE POSITIVE OUTCOMES.

IT SEEMS LIKE A LOT OF RELIGIONIS CENTERED AROUND THAT.

LET'S TAKE THOSE ONE BY ONE.

>> IT BRINGS COMFORT.

IT MAY BRING COMFORT.

IF YOU ARE AFRAID OF DYING ITMAY WELL BRING COMFORT. IT IT

DOESN'T MAKE IT TRUE.

>> Jon: BUT THAT'S NOT ANINSANE THING TO BE AFRAID OF.

>> INDEED NOT.

>> Jon: I'VE SEEN COWS BOY YOUKNOCK ONE OUT AND THE OTHER

WALKS UP TO YOU LIKE, HEY WHATWAS THAT? I WASN'T SAYING IT WAS

INSANE AT ALL. THAT'S THE POINT.

>> IT GIVES YOU COMFORT BUTIT'S ILLOGICAL TO SAY BECAUSE IT

GIVES YOU COMFORTTHEREFORE IT'S TRUE.

>> Jon: WHERE DO WE GO WHENWE DIE?

>> WELL, BERTRAND RUSSELL>> Jon: YOU DON'T KNOW?

>> WE GET BURIED OR CREMATED ORGIVE OUR BODIES TO SCIENCE.

>> Jon: ISN'T THAT -- YOUACTUALLY DON'T KNOW WHAT HAPPENS

TO US.

>> I DON'T KNOW WHAT HAPPENS TOUS BUT I KNOW THAT OUR

CONSCIOUSNESS IS WRAPPED UP INOUR BRAINS AND OUR BRAINS ROT.

THERE DOESN'T SEEM TO BE ANYT.

REASON BUT WISHFUL THINKING.

>> Jon: BUT THERE'S APOSSIBILITY?

>> WELL, THERE'S A POSSIBILITYFOR ALL SORTS OF THINGS.

>> Jon: BUT ISN'T THAT --ISN'T THE JOB OF A SCIENTIST IN

SOME WAYS TO HAVE FAITH THATTHERE'S SOMETHING OUT THERE

THAT WE DON'T UNDERSTAND YET.

>> YES.

>> Jon: AND MAYBE EVOLUTIONARYDYNAMICS, THE LOSS OF FAITH

WOULDN'T THAT STEAL SOMETHINGESSENTIALLY HUMAN FROM

SCIENTIFIC -->> I THINK YOU MIGHT BE

CONFUSING TWO SORTS OF FAITHS.

>> Jon: I AM SURE I AM.

[LAUGHTER]>> YOU CAN HAVE FAITH THAT, AS

YOU SAID, THERE'S SOMETHING MOREFOR US TO UNDERSTAND.

I WOULDN'T CALL THAT FAITH.

I THINK IT'S QUITE CLEAR THATTHERE'S A LOT MORE WE HAVE TO

UNDERSTAND.

YOU COULD HAVE FAITH IN THESCIENTIFIC METHOD.

YOU CAN HAVE FAITH IN YOUR WIFEOR YOUR HUSBAND, ALL SORTS OF

THINGS LIKE THAT.

BUT THOSE ARE BASED ONEVIDENCE, WHEREAS, FAITH PER SE

IS NOT.

FAITH IN RELIGION IS FAITH ISFAITH IS FAITH.

IT'S NOT BASED ON EVIDENCE.

THAT'S WHY IT'S CALLED FAITH.

>> Jon: RIGHT.

WHEN YOU SAY THERE'S EVIDENCETHAT THERE'S SOMETHING MORE OUT

THERE JUST BECAUSE THERE AREUNKNOWN THINGS WE'RE

DISCOVERING.

>> PHYSICS IS INCOMPLETE.

>> IT DOESN'T KNOW HOW -- ITDOESN'T

KNOW HOW THE UNIVERSE WORKS.

THERE'S STILL A LONG WAY TO GO.

>> Jon: WHAT ABOUT THE -- ITHINK I'M SORT OF FASCINATED BY

THE IDEA THAT FAITH AND SCIENCEARE

INCOMPATIBLE AND YOU ARE RIGHTIT'S PROBABLY A SEMANTIC BECAUSE

I BELIEVE IN THE SCIENTIFICMETHOD BUT I KNOW THAT FAITH AND

SCIENCE ARE BOTH CONTROLLED BYTHE SAME FLAWED MECHANISM WHICH

IS US.

>> WHEN YOU SAY YOU BELIEVE INTHE SCIENTIFIC METHOD BECAUSE IT

WORKS AND IT WORKS OVER AND OVERAGAIN.

>> Jon: YES BUT I GUESS WHATI'M SAYING IS I DON'T

NECESSARILY BELIEVE IN THEPEOPLE WHO OPERATE THE

SCIENTIFIC METHOD.

YOU SAY IT WORKS BUT IT'S BEENWRONG.

>> OH, IT'S BEEN WRONG ANDTHAT'S ONE OF THE GLORIES OF IT.

THIT LEARNS FROM ITS MISTAKES.T.

SCIENCE PROGRESSES BY REJECTINGHYPOTHESES THAT HAVE FAILED.

Loading...