Normal text sizeLarger text sizeVery large text size

Richard Dawkins is perched on the edge of his sofa playing his Electronic Wind Instrument (EWI), a kind of digital clarinet. He pushes a button and it imitates the sound of a cello; another button turns it into a saxophone. He plays the theme from Prokofievs Peter and the Wolf and the melody fills the sunlit living room of his Oxford apartment. For a moment, I imagine him as The Pied Piper of Atheism calling the (un)faithful to his side.

He takes the instrument from his lips and shrugs off a compliment. Im trying to get better. Would he like to play with other musicians? I think I would. The novelist Alexander McCall Smith has founded something called The Really Terrible Orchestra. I wouldnt mind joining that.

Richard Dawkins at 81.

His ambivalence in regard to his musical talent contrasts with the certainty he exhibits in his lifes work: the study of evolutionary biology and the forensic debunking of religion. His bestselling books, The Selfish Gene (1976) and The God Delusion (2006), represent a formidable one-two punch. The former puts the gene at the centre of the evolutionary process and argues that organisms you and I, for example are merely vehicles for successful genes, the kind whose coded information remains largely unchanged over tens of millions of years. The latter book a sensation on its release uses science to argue belief in God, any god, is not just wrong, but potentially dangerous.

Dawkins is 81. Dressed in an untucked white shirt and blue Prince of Wales check trousers, he is handsome in a donnish way, but reticent, almost shy. He has been married three times, but spent lockdown with a new partner. His patrician accent and measured speech seem ill-suited to overt displays of emotion, although certain lines of poetry can move him to tears.

Age has not softened his beliefs or rather his lack of belief in a higher power; dont expect a deathbed apostasy. The eulogy he has chosen for his funeral the opening lines of his 1998 book, Unweaving the Rainbow: Science, Delusion and Appetite for Wonder goes to the heart of his secular, science-based world view. We are going to die, and that makes us the lucky ones. Most people are never going to die because they are never going to be born.

What will happen after he draws his last breath? It will be just like being unborn, he says evenly. A great nothing. Or rather as much of a nothing as before we were born. He recites Mark Twains famous line: I do not fear death. I had been dead for billions and billions of years before I was born, and had not suffered the slightest inconvenience from it.

Dawkins supported the first atheist advertising campaign in 2008 in the UK.Credit:Getty

Dawkins is not looking forward to the process of dying because unlike a dog, Im unable to go to the vet and be painlessly put to sleep. He could visit a clinic in Switzerland perhaps? Yes, and I may well do that.

In the meantime, Dawkins has plenty of living to do and books to write. He finished two during lockdown: Flights of Fancy, an exploration of human and animal flight through the prism of evolution, and a collection of essays and journalism called Books Do Furnish a Life. The Dawkins canon will expand further next year with the publication of another title, The Genetic Book of the Dead, and a speaking tour of Australia begins in Melbourne on February 17.

Dawkins had a stroke in 2016 and uses a treadmill to ensure his organism stays healthy. He watches TV while he exercises and has become a fan of Young Sheldon, the sitcom about an American prodigy based on the science geek from The Big Bang Theory.

He looks pained when I ask him if he was a prodigy at Oundle, the private school in England he attended after his family returned from Kenya. Oh no, certainly not. I was right in the middle of school.

A late developer then? I suppose I got enthusiastic in my second year at Oxford [he studied zoology at Balliol College]. In my first year, I still thought I was at school and thought in terms of textbook education. It was only in my second year I realised that a university education is about being a scholar never touching a textbook, but going into the library and reading original research papers and thinking for yourself.

He launches into a story about the water vascular systems of starfish, how the creatures use piped seawater to animate their limbs. He was told to write an essay on the subject and it triggered a Eureka moment. You can imagine that was a heady experience for a 19-year-old. The encouragement provided by the weekly tutorial meant you didnt just read about starfish hydraulics, you eat and slept it. I had seawater pulsing through my dozing brain.

It is clear he is most happy talking about science. Science, he explains, is mostly collegiate; the arguments are passionate, but generally respectful. The same cannot be said for atheism, the subject which has made him both revered and reviled. On several occasions, he has given jocular public readings of his hate mail, much of it written by American evangelicals who accuse him of doing Satans work.

I ask him if the letters and emails ever make him fear for his safety? No, he says firmly.

Dawkins would be aware, surely, that hate mail has changed in recent years. High-profile people who express controversial opinions can be subjected to physical threats as well as insults. I am aware of that, yes. I think of what J.K. Rowling has been subjected to [the author has been accused of transphobia and sent death threats] and I think its horrifying. I have a huge sympathy for her and I admire her bravery and the fact shes willing to speak out.

Dawkins, whose own social media posts in relation to Islam and transgender issues have occasionally landed him in hot water, has admitted he occasionally censors his public statements nowadays. But when I ask him about it, he falls silent. Lets talk about my books, shall we?

The subject is closed, or so I thought. Later, we return to the topic when I ask him how he reacts to criticism. Did it hurt when the American Humanist Association withdrew its humanist of the year award in 2021 because it felt Dawkins had disparaged trans people in a tweet that said: Some men choose to identify as women, and some women choose to identify as men. You will be vilified if you deny that they literally are what they identify as. Discuss.

The short answer: yes. Im what Americans would call a liberal Im of the left politically and I tend to see myself as a feminist humanist. So, criticism from people who I think of as my people hurts me in a way that criticism from religious people doesnt I dont give a damn about that.

Dawkins wearing a T-shirt from his Foundation for Reason and Science.

What about accusations of Islamophobia? Over the past decade his comments and tweets about Islam - suggesting the Muslim call to prayer is aggressive sounding compared to the so much nicer sound of church bells; holding Islamic doctrine responsible for the 2015 Charlie Hebdo shooting; calling Islam the greatest force for evil in the world today - have resulted in widespread criticism.

Dawkins doesnt flinch. I am not Islamophobic. What I am is phobic against throwing gay people off buildings, against cutting off the clitorises of young girls, of forbidding the enjoyment of music and dancing. And Im phobic about making young children memorise the Koran in a language they dont speak. Im not phobic against Muslims because they are the biggest victims of Islam.

There was a time when the New Atheism, championed by big beasts of disbelief such as Dawkins, Christopher Hitchens, Sam Harris and Daniel Dennett, was adopted as a mantra by many on the left when some of his more controversial statements, would pass mostly without comment. But in the woke era, the more inclusive instincts of the left sometimes butt up against the science-based rationalism of the atheists.

Dawkins knows times have changed. But he bridles at the idea of science making an accommodation with each generations shifting sensibilities. I dont really study trends, says the man who coined the term meme. Im not one of those people who talks about generation this or generation that. Science is about more eternal things than that things that have always been true and always will be true.

Loading

Surprisingly, he does not consider himself particularly combative and insists he is not an evangelist for atheism. That may come as a surprise to some of his opponents. I hope Im always polite, he says calmly. If I talk nonsense, I expect someone to tell me so. One of the reasons people think [Im combative] is that weve been brought up over the centuries to give religion a free pass; we dont criticise it. So, when you hear someone using even fairly mild language the sort of language that would be thought mild if it was applied to theatre or a restaurant it sounds very aggressive.

There is some evidence Dawkins view is prevailing. The results of the 2021 Australian census show 43.9 per cent identifying as Christian, down from 52.1 per cent in 2016. Meanwhile, the number of Australians reporting no religion has risen to 38.9 per cent, up from 30.1 per cent in 2016. Similar results have been seen in Europe and even the United States, where belief in God has fallen to a record low of 81 per cent, according to a recent Gallup poll.

At the same time, religion is on the rise in Africa and Asia, a phenomenon Dawkins calls very discouraging. His explanation: Education in Africa is largely in the hands of missionaries both Christian and Muslim and getting to the children is historically what religions have been about.

Would he really like to live in a truly secular, post-religious society? Oh yes, I think the world would be a much happier place. He pauses. Interestingly, Christopher Hitchens said he wouldnt like that because he wouldnt have anyone to argue with.

An Evening with Richard Dawkins, Melbourne Plenary, February 17, and Darling Harbour Theatre Sydney, February 18. Tickets on sale now, http://www.tegdainty.com

View original post here:

Why Richard Dawkins doesnt fear the great nothing that awaits at the end - The Age