Science is all about the facts, and in most instances that is all you need to believe in the results that you are being given. With this ease in compatibility with others upon results, naturally friendships are made between scientists. Yet there are just about as many natural arguments between scholars in science as their are friendships. This argument or friendship can skip generations for those in the same study, scientists often being compatible with those who worked before them and brought inspiration. This basic concept is seen in the compatibility and differences between Charles Dawkins and Richard Dawkins. These two scientists both have a long recorded history of progress in terms of evolution, but there are details and specifics in …show more content…
While it is clear that Richard Dawkins and Charles Darwin agree upon science, there is one factor in which neither of them can see completely eye to eye, religion. The theory of evolution brings up multiple questions of whether or not there is any legitimacy to the concept of religion, especially that of a polytheistic view of God such as Christianity.With these theories being popular during Darwin’s time period it is easy to believe that Charles believed in God. In Darwin's Theory of Evolution by Nelson Bridgford this idea is supported by analyzing that “Evolution's biggest rival is creationism. Creationism is a religious belief that a higher being created the world and all that resides within it. This theory completely opposes Darwin's theory, which cites no divine intervention.” Now in more modern times there are more skeptical views giving people an understanding of why Dawkins is a non-believer in God coworking with his scientific views. From Richard Dawkins and God it is states that “Dawkins seems to believe that if people could be persuaded to give up the God Hypothesis on scientific grounds, the world would be a better place -- not just intellectually, but also morally and