A couple of weeks ago, the Sunday Times wrote an article based on my research and book entitled “We are born to believe in God.” It caused quite a stir in the media and I even got a few minutes on BBC’s The One Show where my ideas were dismissed by Anne Robinson who was a guest on the show. She said that she was not born a Catholic but raised as one. Well duh… It’s that kind of simplistic understanding that makes speaking to the media such a dangerous thing to do. Of course, you are not born to be a Catholic, nor a Muslim nor Jew. Of course, that is cultural. But why do we believe? I do not think that it is all indoctrination. My argument was much more subtle and interesting than that.
Still that did not stop other papers regurgitating the same nonsense the following day. The Daily Mail got 178 comments which is always a good sign that there is a cat among the pigeons. I even got a plug on Radio Four’s godspot “Thought for the Day.” I was pretty miffed and contacted the Sunday Times journalist who had interviewed me for the article. What I did not know is that it is the sub editors who dream up the catchy and often misleading headlines and they don’t care too much for detail. Just get them eyeballs on the article.
The Sunday Times apologised and offered to print a correction online which they have now done. I wrote a new article for the paper entitled “Where Do Supernatural Beliefs Come From?” explaining that while all religions have supernatural beliefs, not all supernatural beliefs are religious. More to the point, many of us have our own personal supernatural beliefs so indoctrination cannot be the only way to get your beliefs. I think our own brains are responsible but if you want to know how, well read the book.
So far no one has left a comment on my article for the Sunday Times. It would appear that people prefer to get hot and bothered about what they think I said rather what I really did. Oh well…. guess that’s the nature of people.
Iason Ouabache
5 months, 3 weeks ago
Those headline-writing sub-editors have done a good job of destroying any credibility that science journalists have. Not only are most of their headlines misleading, they often completely contradict what the article says. Yes, I understand that they have to find a hook to draw readers in but there is no need for them to lie about it.