Take your pick, science or religion: My review of Nerdstock – 9 lessons and carols for godless people

The word is out: if you’re religious you cannot possibly appreciate genetics in all its glory, a glory that is inseparable from the Darwinian theory of evolution. I was watching Nerdstock, a Christmas programme for non-religious people on BBC4 last night with at first some curiosity, later with quiet amazement at the burgeoning audacity of the atheist movement, and at last with a scratchy head. The latter reaction may be due to dandruff, but I feel it was more from the unresolved knotted thoughts on the irreconcilability of religion and science. Nerdstock was a love-in for self-proclaimed nerds of the scientific endeavour, who were falling over themselves praising some hazified concepts of evolutionary genetics.

It occurred to me that the atheist movement in Britain wants us to know that in lieu of religion, there is science; Darwinian science and physics to be exact. Science – for the enlightened – is now the antithesis of religion, or some may argue a neo-religion for intellectuals and those who fancy adopting the image. The device for last night’s programme was comedy, taking off the sting and heat of the controversy raised by the atheist bus campaign and the “Please don’t label me” campaign against faith cattle-branding on children. The device, I have to admit, was effective (I was at times amused) but purposefully deployed in smug contrast against humour-less religious folk. Comedienne Shappi Khorsandi gave the best stand-up, though her material was funniest when it was about the groundlessness of the term “mixed-race”. Yes, the beauty of genetics is that it can prove racists and political constructionists wrong.

But genetics is not something simply to be gushed at, something host Robin Ince felt he needed to demonstrate in his quasi-hallelujah moment about him and his son (“Whenever I look at my son, I see genetics. Genetics made him so special!, etc. etc.”). Being in ecstatic awe of the world in pseudo-scientific terms veers spookily into the realm of religious fanaticism, except with science in place of God as the figure to worship, I think. So okay, genetics is amazing, but so are social-conditioning and environmental impingement on the development of people. Biological determinism is not amazing and not 100% valid, and therefore genetics is not all that.

Where does this leave the religiously-disaffected with no interest in Darwinian theory let alone science, and those like me, who does not feel challenged by the idea of being connected to other lifeforms (genetics has made that an undeniable fact) and praises the Almighty for making the genius of nature possible? Well, not in this small exclusive club for both the scientific and scientistically-inclined it seems, which leaves much of the rest of the world to us. Yes, the rest of us live in an irrational mess with a disinterest in how we came to be; the corporeal beings at the mercy of the switchboard of genes. Nerdstock is an amusing interrogation of the non-existence of God, in which the godless install nature as the surrogate transcendental being greater than humankind, an entity we struggle to fathom completely. Sounds familiar?

5 thoughts on “Take your pick, science or religion: My review of Nerdstock – 9 lessons and carols for godless people

    • Too simple? I think many on Nerdstock put in a lot of time and thought into calling themselves atheists. I don’t have one word to lump all atheists in a box, but “simple” is NOT the right word.

  1. The thing that primarily bugs me about what nuAtheism is that their unspoken assumption that you can only accept scientific materialism or religious belief; as if there’s only one question: what the universe is, and you either answer it using science or some delusional mental model.

    And I’m like, yes, of course. It’s like literature. Literature fulfills only one purpose — you can only like literary fiction or pulp fiction. Or art. You can only like high art or commercial art, not both.

    • What is also at work here is some kind of divide between the smart and the dumb. Dumb people presumably prefer the taken-for-granted mystery of the universe, not wanting to explain “how it all” happened from a biological nitty-gritty point of view. While smart people have the empirical answer to the mystery of life, DNA and all that jazz. But within the smart set there are those who take on a kind of religiosity about their science, genetics, and physics, which I suppose can be normal.

      The New Atheists battle cry sounds scary:

      Tolerance of pervasive myth and superstition in modern society is not a virtue.

      Religious fundamentalism has gone main stream and its toll on education, science, and social progress is disheartening.

      Wake up people!! We are smart enough now to kill our invisible gods and oppressive beliefs.

      It is the responsibility of the educated to educate the uneducated, lest we fall prey to the tyranny of ignorance.

      Their mini manifesto is a complete reduction of religious beliefs into one universal strain of oppressive fundamentalism and faith as a kind of mental disorder. Who is being totally unreasonable now?

      • What is also at work here is some kind of divide between the smart and the dumb.

        Which is a dangerous thing to believe, because you then make the assumption that Smart People Think Like You.

        Which then leads you to dehumanizing your ideological opponents, and, on a tactical level, under-estimating them.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s