When an Atheist Becomes a Believer: Dawkins' Dialogue with Ayaan Hirsi Ali

 It is always painful to watch one of your intellectual heroes getting older. While I and, I am sure thousands of atheists across the globe, want immortality for Richard Dawkins, he does not seem to be becoming any healthier.  But I guess, the fragility of human life is yet another reason to move away from a religious intelligent-design argument. If we were created by god, why would our existence be so fragile? Why would a creator want its creation to be susceptible to so many diseases and the sufferings that come along with old age?

But this essay is not about Richard Dawkins getting old. Rather it is about the dialogue he had with ex-Muslim and ex atheist Ayaan Hirsi Ali. Ayaan Hirsi Ali who was the bastion of atheism (the fifth horsewoman) and a feminist, became a Christian a few months ago. While this came as a shock to many, what was sad was seeing Richard Dawkins stupefied at the reasons Ali gave for her conversion. Dawkins in the initial phase of the discussion says that he was prepared to convince Ali that she was not a Christian in the true sense of the word. But as the discussion progressed, it became more and more evident, that when Ali calls herself a Christian, she really means Christian. Not a political or cultural Christian.

The reasons Ali was giving for her conversion and belief in Christianity was not any different from regular Christians. She held on to “subjectivity”, “personal choice” and “utility” of Christianity for her new found belief. While Richard Dawkins did not dispute these claims, he was arguing from a different angle. He was more bothered about the truth. Consider this example- when a child is taught to ride a cycle, parents hold the cycle from behind. After a point, the parent leaves their grip and lets the child ride on its own. Often, the child believes that the parent is still holding the cycle from behind. This belief of the child, does indeed help it to gain the necessary confidence to go on their own. But at some point the child needs to realize that it’s on its own and become confident enough to cycle without believing that there is someone protecting them from falling. Ali seems to be someone who learnt to cycle (I am not sure how successfully) but has gone back to believing that someone is holding on to the cycle, even though there is none. She argues on the utility of such a belief. At least now, she is able to cycle.

But Dawkins is not interested in the utility as much as he cares for the truth. And he makes a very important point in the discussion. He says that religious belief is much bigger than its utility or the comfort it brings. He says that these beliefs have immense consequences that ebb over to every aspect of one’s day to day life. If one is truly honest to their beliefs, a believing Christian scientist has to believe that the world was created in six days. Undermining the entire scientific enterprise. This goes for other religions too. Muslims believe Mohammed to be the ideal man. If so, everything he did must be moral across time and space. A Hindu who believes that Bhagwat Gita is the word of God has to believe that caste system is an off-shoot of religious doctrines. Varna is based on ‘guna’ and ‘karma’. If Karma is human action, guna is separate from human action. They are qualities of a human being, hence biological. In other words, varna is based on birth. Similarly, if one literally believes that Ram was helped by monkey-soldiers, then it is contrary to every biological fact we know. It is undermining hundreds of years of scientific effort that makes rockets fly to the moon and your internet work.

Image: Dissident Dialogues

What matters is the truth. The question one must ask themselves is- Do we want to create a society where people believe in something which might be useful, but is absolute nonsense? This is the meaning of delusion. Unfortunately, many are not even aware that they can question these so-called religious truths. Thunder was once considered to be a supernatural event. Hunger for truth and curiosity pushed us to understand what it truly is. Religion kills curiosity.

Either there is God or there is not. A personal god is by its very meaning is a personal creation. Believing in god is bigger than what comforts an individual. And it is absolutely okay to hang on to a non-existing idea for courage. At an individual level, it might even seem harmless. But the question is, is that how we want to build a civilization?

Dawkins is right in expressing remorse, even if not explicitly, over the conversion of a rational secular humanist into a believing Christian who believes that (or chooses to believe, her words) Jesus rose from the dead or that the world was created in six days. Her conversion only shows the extent of impact religion can have on human beings, especially those who are emotionally vulnerable or are going through a tough time. Maybe this is where atheism fails (‘fails’ for the lack of a better term. Because ‘fails’ assumes the responsibility of atheism to provide a solution to the situation. Atheism does not make any claim of that sort). This why being an atheist requires a lot of moral courage. It is not just giving up on the idea of god, but also realizing that you are on your own, no matter how tough the situation is.

It is even more fascinating that Dawkins does not hesitate to call out Ali’s delusional belief in god, even though Ali and Dawkins once used to be on the same side in their pursuit of rationality. Intellectual consistency has always been Dawkins’ strong suit. He criticizes an idea he thinks is wrong, irrespective of the person making that claim. This is scientific temper at its best. It is the insatiable appetite for truth. As Carl Sagan once said- “I don’t want to believe. I want to know.”