10.03.2023 Views

richard_dawkins_-_the_god_delusion

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.

TII 1- ' G O O D ' B O O K A N D T H E M O R A L Z E I T G E I S T 257

falls into one's power, one transgresses a negative commandment,

as it is said: Thou shalt save alive nothing that breatheth.'

Unlike Maimonides, the children in Tamarin's experiment were

young enough to be innocent. Presumably the savage views they

expressed were those of their parents, or the cultural group in

which they were brought up. It is, I suppose, not unlikely that

Palestinian children, brought up in the same war-torn country,

would offer equivalent opinions in the opposite direction. These

considerations fill me with despair. They seem to show the immense

power of religion, and especially the religious upbringing of

children, to divide people and foster historic enmities and

hereditary vendettas. I cannot help remarking that two out of

Tamarin's three representative quotations from group A mentioned

the evils of assimilation, while the third one stressed the importance

of killing people in order to stamp out their religion.

Tamarin ran a fascinating control group in his experiment. A

different group of 168 Israeli children were given the same text

from the book of Joshua, but with Joshua's own name replaced by

'General Lin' and 'Israel' replaced by 'a Chinese kingdom 3,000

years ago'. Now the experiment gave opposite results. Only 7 per

cent approved of General Lin's behaviour, and 75 per cent disapproved.

In other words, when their loyalty to Judaism was

removed from the calculation, the majority of the children agreed

with the moral judgements that most modern humans would share.

Joshua's action was a deed of barbaric genocide. But it all looks

different from a religious point of view. And the difference starts

early in life. It was religion that made the difference between

children condemning genocide and condoning it.

In the latter half of Hartung's paper, he moves on to the New

Testament. To give a brief summary of his thesis, Jesus was a

devotee of the same in-group morality - coupled with out-group

hostility - that was taken for granted in the Old Testament. Jesus

was a loyal Jew. It was Paul who invented the idea of taking the

Jewish God to the Gentiles. Hartung puts it more bluntly than I

dare: 'Jesus would have turned over in his grave if he had known

that Paul would be taking his plan to the pigs.'

Hartung has some good fun with the book of Revelation, which

is certainly one of the weirdest books in the Bible. It is supposed to

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!