The God Delusion

Christianity (viz. the Vatican) is not against science, Gallileo's trial was political and not science based (heliocentricity theory being nothing new at the time) and Monsignor Georges Lemaître, a Belgian RC priest, proposed the Big Bang theory.

Just who is deluded? (6/20 people found this helpful)

From the messianic promises of the opening pages to the utopian scientism of the closing pages, this is a fatuously pretentious and philosophically incoherent book which would never have been published if it had been written by anyone less eminent. Dawkins's treatment of morality is particularly amateurish, and sometimes downright laughable. He really should stick to science, since he clearly doesn't understand anything else, and stop bothering the world with his neurotically obsessive atheizing. Read this book, by all means, but read some of the responses too -- my own book would be a good place to start.

Surprisingly interesting (2/6 people found this helpful)

I bought this book a while back out of curiosity, but have put off reading it until due to fears of it being merely a rant against religion or just loads of use of Argument from Outrage. I am glad I have finally read it, however, as I found it to be surprisingly well-written, well-reasoned, informative and interesting.

I am an athiest and have been both a Christian and atheist at different periods in my life (obviosly not at the same time!). I would call myself a reluctant atheist, because I would love nothing more for there to be a God and Christianity to be true (or any religion really), but I just don't see enough evidence in favour of God's existence.

As for Dawkins's book, for me I found Chapters 4, 5 and 6 to be the most interesting, delving into evolution. Darwinism certainly explains a lot things, not just how an animal acts, but also why. I had studied human evolution in archaeology in my first year at university and so I enjoyed Dawkins's obvious expertise in evolutionary biology. When I was a Christian I saw no reason why evolution and religion should be considered incompatible. I still don't think the two are incompatible, unless you are a creationist or literalist.

Some bits of the book I didn't enjoy, hence only 4 stars. Chapter 7 is mainly merely Argument from Outrage, listing bits of scripture showing how horrible the Old Testament is. As for the section on Hitler, he certainly was not a Christian, of any denomination, although his belief in some sort of providence, I believe, does not make him an out-and-out atheist. Chapters 8 and 9 also use Argument from Outrage, which worked for me, as I found myself agreeing with a lot of what Dawkins said - fundamentalism and creationism should be opposed, and children protected from the dark side of religion - such as the threat of hell and visits to those ridiculous Hell Houses run by Pastor Keenan Roberts - truly awful and shocking. On page 300 I found myself disagreeing though. Dawkins writes, concerning a possible New Ten Commandments, that one should not "discriminate or oppress on the basis of sex, race or (as far as possible) species". To that I would add religion and creed as theists deserve as much respect, as fellow human beings, as anyone else.

On the whole though an enjoyable and recommended book.

Inspiring, delicately constructed and brilliant funny (6/9 people found this helpful)

It was suggested to me that I read this book by a friend who had developed a sincere interest in analysing religion and the world around him in a matter-of-fact, understandable and logical way and this book certainly does that.

I would say it's the most provocative book I've read recently and it certainly encourages further discussion about very important points. One only needs to see the amount of internet activity generated by readers of this book arguing their views back and forth on hundreds of sites to realise that.

I find myself referring back to it alot when talking to friends about the arguments it contains. Almost every pro-religious counter-argument is dealt with eruditely and succinctly by Dawkins in his normal annihilating way.

I approached the book as an agnostic leaning on atheism but not-really-that-sure and finished the book much the same way but certainly someone more enlightened and more interested in the world around me.

I would recommend it to anybody who is interested in seeing things through a perhaps different perspective and is not afraid of the ways that other people see the world. Dawkins' view may be one-sided but in his defense, I am certain there are very few religious texts that give as much as a nod to the possibility of atheism. Those who are religious may find it insulting in places so you might have to have your "shields up" for some chapters.. however I think the view Dawkins gives is a very interesting way to see the world and how it works, which is worth at least giving some thought to.

Self Absorbed Tripe (6/23 people found this helpful)

As a confirmed atheist I think Dawkins made one point I hadn't considered previously in the entire first 4 chapters.

It was just a pathetic rant against people he has argued with over the years. I found myself asking "So what?" after every sentence until I was just skimming over page after page of nonsense.

I just couldn't go on, I couldn't imagine this shaking anybody's faith.

Richard Dawkins

Reader Reviews:

Lower Sixth Form Arguments: a Concise Critique. (1/6 people found this helpful)

Just who is deluded? (6/20 people found this helpful)

Surprisingly interesting (2/6 people found this helpful)

Inspiring, delicately constructed and brilliant funny (6/9 people found this helpful)

Self Absorbed Tripe (6/23 people found this helpful)

Similar Products

Categories