March 10, 2009
Biologist Richard Dawkins’ Friday lecture on “the purpose of purpose” filled McCasland Field House nearly to its 5,000-person capacity.
One naïve of Dawkins’ iconic status might wonder why a lecture on something as esoteric as the Darwinian origin of the concept of purpose would draw so great a crowd.
Such a person would probably also be puzzled by the two bills proposed last week by Rep. Todd Thomsen opposing that Dawkins be allowed to speak at OU.
However, as I doubt that anyone bothering to read this is unaware, Dawkins is not popularly recognized for his influential writings on evolutionary biology or even for his bluntly-expressed hostility toward creationism.
The peculiar attention directed toward Richard Dawkins is due to his popular perception as a poster boy for atheism.
Reactions to Dawkins are mixed, within and without the atheist community. I view Dawkins, in the context of his atheism, as analogous to a number of other historical figures who became poster children for their respective minority groups.
When America looked at Harvey Milk, they saw that homosexuals were not sniveling, feeble, and irresolute. When America saw Martin Luther King, Jr., they saw that African Americans were not belligerent, dim-witted simians.
By lending his face to atheism, Richard Dawkins has helped nudge away the myth of atheists as nihilists unable to contribute to society.
During his Friday lecture, Dawkins discussed the Darwinian forces which have driven our development in directions that show no obvious benefit to reproductive fitness. He fielded questions on biology and theology, and even faced down a requisite hellfire-screaming lunatic with good nature and wit.
Graceful and handsome at 67, Dawkins holds a peculiar fascination even for his detractors. Todd Thompsen didn’t draft up a bill when Michael Ruse came to speak.
What filled McCasland hall Friday was not interest in biology, but interest in a man who is the hope of some and the fear of others.
Perhaps Dawkins’ theses on biology have been shoved to the wayside by his celebrity status.
Perhaps, when atheists are viewed as normal humans rather than as dead-eyed, sociopathic caricatures, Richard Dawkins can be remembered for his conceptualization of memes rather than for his lack of belief in a god.
Perhaps one day, Dawkins’ lectures will draw modest crowds of those particularly interested in the odd-ends of evolutionary biology.
Perhaps eventually we’ll be able to purchase books by Richard Dawkins, author of The Selfish Gene, rather than Richard Dawkins, author of The God Delusion.
Until then, Richard Dawkins will remain a suave and unrepentant devil’s chaplain.
Comments
Use the comment form below to begin a discussion about this content.
Sign in to comment
Or login with:
OpenID