Richard Dawkins, despite whatever you believe to be the supposed harmony between Islamic precepts and science, could not on principle convert to Islam because he denies one of its fundamental tenets, the most definitive pillar in fact which states “There is no God but Allah and Muhammad is his prophet”.
He believes that - and this is using his own words - God is at best a “superfluous proposition” and is at worst not a “parsimonious one”. The degree to which Dawkins subscribes to evolutionary theory, and the manner in which he explains it, signifies that there is simply no room in his mind for a God to be seminal or even necessary for the creation of the universe, the earth, or life on earth.
The only place were I can see a concurrence between Dawkins worldview and Islam is that both have a degree of determinism inherent in their explanations for why we are here in that evolutionary theory provides a constraint based solely on what is most advantageous to our survival and reproduction, while Islam, in its most traditional sense adheres to a form of predestination, which is ordained by Allah himself. Both evolutionary theory and the theistic explanation of the universe provided by monotheistic faiths like Islam emphasize that our outcome is contingent solely on our origins and on our environment.
Yet that flimsy and superficial similarity between Dawkin’s belief in evolutionary theory and Islam is a far cry from stating that Dawkins can easily be converted to Islam, or that Dawkins outlook would allow him to readily accept Islam. On a very fundamental level Dawkins is absolutely opposed to Islam because he is an atheist, and believes that God, while impossible to disprove for logical reasons, is so improbable and unnecessary that one would be well within reason not to believe in him.
Despite whatever parallels one can draw between Dawkins ideas of life, and Islam, the denial of the axiomatic belief of Islam, that there is a God, makes Dawkins an unlikely candidate for conversion to the Muslim faith. It’s wishful thinking to believe otherwise.
2007-02-05 08:18:56
·
answer #1
·
answered by Lawrence Louis 7
·
2⤊
0⤋
Richard Dawkins Islam
2016-10-01 05:57:31
·
answer #2
·
answered by cinthia 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
The truth is frightening, isn't it, especially when it proves all your sacred beliefs are dust. Rational Islam? Huh? Rational religion is an oxymoron. Richard IS a very respected scientist who know more about how the real world works than any religious person ever has or ever will. Islam, Christianity, and all religions are not based on rationality, but on mindless superstition and hate. Richard's mind is more open and free and has more power than a million religious believers put together. More power to the mighty truth of Dawkins!
2016-05-24 17:53:48
·
answer #3
·
answered by Heather 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
You haven't read much of Dawkins's work have you? Most of it is not concerned with religion at all. When he does discuss religion, as he does in his latest book, he does not concentrate his arguments against Christianity but against all religions including Islam. You should read his book The God Delusion, it is an excellent and thought provoking work.
2007-02-05 01:34:12
·
answer #4
·
answered by tentofield 7
·
3⤊
0⤋
They are basically the same God, imaginary evil spawn born of Abraham.
It would mean that Dawkins had gone insane, or at the least suffered some mental deterioration.
2007-02-05 01:18:14
·
answer #5
·
answered by Anonymous
·
3⤊
1⤋
Jerry Falwell becoming an atheist is more likely than that.
2007-02-05 01:15:40
·
answer #6
·
answered by . 7
·
2⤊
0⤋
yeah Islam is so rational just behead those who are infidels.
Dawkins is trying to better his western culture by making it more open, more logical and more inclined to scientific thought and less to superstition.
2007-02-05 01:17:36
·
answer #7
·
answered by Anonymous
·
3⤊
2⤋
That's a good one!
2007-02-05 01:15:19
·
answer #8
·
answered by NONAME 7
·
0⤊
0⤋
If you get it figured out will you quit asking? Who is this dawkins bird anyway?
2007-02-05 01:15:52
·
answer #9
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
4⤋