archives

This is the classic "Dawkins getz 0wned" video.

Dawkins is asked in an interview: "Can you give an example of a genetic mutation or an evolutionary process which is seen to increase the information in the genome?"

First of all, a little bit about this question. It strikes directly at the heart of the contradiction between our understanding of basic physics and the complexity of biology. According to physics "energy flows downhill". This is Newton's 2nd law of thermodynamics. This means that a system will lose energy over time. In layman's terms: " Everything runs down". That's why there are no perpetual motion machines.

This is called entropy. Another aspect of entropy is that disorder increases over time. Information is lost as time progresses. Leave anything, and the force of time will move it from an ordered state to a disordered state. The tendency of matter is to return to the inert, unmanifested state of the pradhan. You can see this happen to the body when the soul leaves - the material elements lose the structured order that they assumed during the manifestation of life and merge back into the environment.

The only way that information increases in a system is if it is input from outside. Your bedroom tends automatically to a disordered, messy, dirty state - even if you just leave it alone. To counteract this effect you have clean it up - you have to input energy and information into the system.

So how can evolution function in a universe like this, without the input of information? How can things go from less complex to more complex? Well, they can't. Theoretically they can't, and empirically there is no evidence for the theoretically impossible. Of course, it has to be possible for a universe without God, but unfortunately for their theory evolutionary biologists can't demonstrate the increase of complexity in systems (organisms) caused by a mundane, impersonal arrangement.

Of course theists are at no such loss to explain the development of complexity. They explain that the intelligence and energy behind this is the Supreme Lord. The Sun, the source of energy output in this region of the universe, which holds back the tendency to darkness, has been recognized as a manifestation of the power of the Supreme by humans for millennia. In the case of the material elements of the body the energizing and organizing principle comes from the individual spirit soul, the microcosmic manifestation of the Supreme Soul that animates and sustains the entire universe.

Dawkins' scientific narrative does not account for this - it does not have an explanation. He is on the back foot with this question. He attempts to wrap the question in a metanarrative, but really there is no answer for this. It is a very real hole in his story.

His comeback is passable, and some people will be satisfied by this - they already believe and they just need reassurance. However, what makes this a stunning blow is the amount of time he takes to formulate this response. This gives the appearance that he is stumped, and drastically reduces the effect of his response for those who are undecided. In an interview with no pause it would be a minor point, but the silence draws attention to it. How it is interpreted will be dependent on the underlying viewpoint of the audience. Supporters will hear a thoughtful pause, detractors will hear a stunned silence, the undecided will most like perceive it according to the interpretation of a commentator.

Consider this video response for example.

What Dawkins should have done, and what you should do in this situation is say: "Give me a moment to think about that one - what's your next question."

Stay on the offensive. If you're not attacking you're defending, and if you're defending - you're losing.

As a preacher of Krishna Consciousness there are some things that will be "holes in the story" - these are the kind of carefully researched and posed questions designed to bring you down. The philosophy of Krishna Consciousness is so powerful that if you understand it you will be able to answer any philosophical question with no hesitation. The kind of questions that will take you down in today's environment are those relating to social issues or historical issues within ISKCON. In other words, not philosophy, but application. These ones will require thought to respond to sensitively and accurately. This thought should take place before you find yourself in this situation.

While I was in Peru I was interviewed on television as a spokesperson for ISKCON. A camera was shoved in my face and I was asked: "What do you think about the war in Iraq?"

It was then that I realized that preachers need to train on these points like martial artists do in their dojo. I would like to see a book "Hare Krishna Frequently Asked Questions" (it probably needs to be a periodical) where senior practitioners of the art of public communication share their insights on the kind of questions that are likely to provoke "thoughtful pauses" in communication.

Key Points:

• Be Prepared. Think about the kinds of questions that someone can corner and kill you with and work out your strategy to talk your way out of them - ahead of time
• Use the deferral tactic - "Give me a moment to think about that one. What's your next question?" This gives you time to think, may dismiss the question altogether, and disrupts your opponent's flow if this question is the first in a multi-punch combo.
• Remember to restate your main points. You may not answer the question, but most people will probably overlook that and remember your point.
• Avoid the uncomfortable silence at all costs.