The God Delusion by Richard Dawkins
|
List Price: Our Price: $6.54 You Save: $9.41 (59%) Availability: Usually ships in 1-2 business days Buy Used: from $2.99 (click here) Category: Book See more book details and other editions |
|---|
Book Reviews of The God Delusion
Book Review: The beauty of a maid
Summary: 5 Stars
The God Delusion What will be the beauty of a maid and one might be fancied how to describe it in adequate terms? By using either the more common expression: "By God, what a gracious example of creation" or by the more sophisticated sentence: "By Darwin, what a beautiful specimen of evolution"? One will have to throw a glance at St. Thomas Aquinas to find an answer. With regard to heretics the Church Father recommends that "... they deserve not only to be separated from the Church by excommunication, but also to be severed from the world by death" and - some lines later in his Summa Theologica II-II, 11,3 he suggests that the Church "delivers him (the heretic who remains stubborn at the first and the second admonition, remark) to the secular tribunal to be exterminated thereby from the world by death." What, however, should be more astounding than these very well known fierce announcements seems to be his line of argumentation. The "Pastor Angelicus" (Angelic Tutor), how St. Thomas is charmingly called by his admirers, argues: "For Jerome commenting on Galatians 5:9, `A little leaven,' says: `Cut off the decayed flesh, expel the mangy sheep from the fold, lest the whole house, the whole paste, the whole body, the whole flock, burn, perish, rot, die"([...]). One may feel reminded of the weird parable of the vintage (John 15:1-9) insinuating a similar crude sense of naturalism. So when theists try to explain a merciful God they very often retort to a biological notion of what the word culture may mean. Therefore, it can be suggested, there will be no difference: "By God, what a...." and "By Darwin, what a..." is just the same. Thanks to "God/Allah"and his fervent adherents all over the globe and after having read Richard Dawkins' The God Delusion, however, one will gradually come to appreciate the latter phrase: "By Darwin, what a beautiful specimen of evolution!" Emil Zajic, Klagenfurt.Book Review: Thank God someone finally said what I've been thinking my whole life (irony intended)
Summary: 5 Stars
As a person who came from a crazy background as a child-paternal side no religion (but not atheist) and maternal side-southern Baptist, I can tell you that I couldn't agree more with Dawkins. I tried on various religions as a youth but found them limiting and not logical. I choose to study Zoology in college and minor in religion to try and get a more informed world view of religion. What I have found is that my "goodness" comes from being a caring individual who had traveled, listened, participated and watched as our country has shifted to the right and seems to have lost its "mind". From rewriting history in Texas, to trying to force science teachers to "teach" creationism in Kansas I can't understand how these things are helpful (they are not, they are just part of a selfish agenda of the conservative Christian). And yet I know many Christians that are good intelligent people who DO NOT hate and spew negativity. As a high school biology teacher that isn't what we need to create balanced individuals. In fact I think our whole educational system has lost sight of what we are supposed to be doing-educating the youth to prepare them to be "good citizens". This means that they can think, reason, draw conclusions, seek information, be active in their communities, be tolerate, know and practice healthy lifestyles, and lastly be "good". I also agree that indoctrinating children into religion is abusive but so is stuffing fast food down their throats and plying them with soda 24 hours a day (see above statement about how adults should have knowledge to raise their offspring and this includes knowledge of health and eating-all of these things should be taught in Biology class instead of wasting time memorizing facts and passing the regents exam (I live in New York State enough said). I don't want to force anyone to change their beliefs but I want to encourage all people to expand their knowledge base and at least be more tolerant of other's views and dialogue instead of hate.Book Review: Theists NEED to realize...
Summary: 5 Stars
Theists need to realize that arguing back to a "Big Banger" or 'unmoved mover' (i.e., something that can cause other things to move that itself was unmoved and/or uncaused) does not even begin to be sufficient for proving God's existence. In fact, it is not at all clear that it is even necessary. First, the idea of a "Big Banger" is routed in the Principle of Sufficient reason (i.e., that everything has a cause or reason for being). Humans like to depend on this principle in order to justify a "Big Banger", but the fact of the matter is that the Principle of Sufficient Reason was given up by philosophers over 200 years ago because it has not shown itself to be necessary (or sufficient). It may well be the case that some things have no cause or reason. This is not to say that this IS the case; simply that it MIGHT be the case. Given this, one cannot PROVE the necessity of a "Big Banger".
Let's assume, for the sake of argument, that there is a "Big Banger". Theists (just like Acquinas) falsely believe that this somehow proves God's existence. It does nothing of the sort! It does not prove that the "Big Banger" is omnipotent (only powerful enough to be an 'unmoved mover'); it does not prove that the BB is omnicient (only that it is smart enough to do the aforementioned); and most of all, it does not prove that this being is omnibenevolent (i.e., perfectly good). In fact, this "Big Banger" could just as well be perfectly 'evil'. Creating "everything" does not entail any amount of goodness. Hell, it doesn't even entail immortality.
So all that can be proved (being as generous as possible to the purporters of this argument) is that there is an 'uncreated creator'; but none of the 3 necessary qualities of God have been established (i.e., omniscience, omnipotence, and omnibenevolence) therefore God has NOT BEEN PROVED TO EXIST.
So please, theists, educate yourselves a little more before basing your claims on this useless argument.
Book Review: Candy From A Baby
Summary: 5 Stars
It certainly is not a greatly challenging task to make the argument against the existence of God in the sense of the word promoted by religious institutions and commonly understood by many. There is simply no proof, direct or even indirect. This by itself is not interesting enough to buy and read this book. It has been done before. On the other hand, Dawkins frames the argument in much more modern terms, and covers all aspects of the argument, from purely biological, to physical, logical, anthropological, psychological, archeological and historical perspectives very thoroughly and systematically. Being an expert on the evolutionary biology himself, he is especially qualified to take on the evolution vs creation argument.
Sure, at times he comes across hostile but then again, is there ever a nice way to deny God? The reaction from firm believers is understandable, but the evidence and science trumps belief at the end every time. He does not deny the need for such beliefs, but takes offense at the efforts to describe physical world and universe in terms of such baseless abstractions. As a scientist and modern person, like many of us, he finds the so-called faith-based proofs and bullying by the religious establishments to protect such myths offensive and very dangerous.
It is one thing to argue against a literal existence of God, but another thing to argue the need for religion. That is the only part of this rather thick book where he seems a little less sure-footed. Would humanity have evolved and advanced in the way it did without religion? Would there even be a concept of morality as we understand it now without religious institutions?
This is an old but unfortunately very relevant argument, especially in today's ideology driven environment where the hardcore faithful try to dominate and rule our daily lives. Richard Dawkins deserves credit for presenting his arguments scientifically, clearly and boldly.
Book Review: a life changing book
Summary: 5 Stars
This book really changed my life. Coming from a religious background and having even pursued it adamantly when I was younger, reading this as an alternative turned into a veil being lifted from my eyes. I realized for the first time what a silly, stupid thing religion is and why it should be open to debate like any other subject instead of shied away from. My life has become a lot more free, happy and positive than the one I had in the shadow of a thunderous, angry god that was watching my every move and waiting to roast me till eternity for questioning or even doubting him - and please spare me the defense that god is good and kind and merciful because anyone who reads the holy books can tell you that this is wishful thinking. Mr Dawkins is a genius in my eyes - all the defenses and arguments that are presented as 'proof' of a divine being are demolished by his flawless logic and great intellect. I can only hope that a lot more people will read this and embark on a journey that has the promise of a wiser, happier and more humane life at the end of it.
Some people told me that the book is too aggressive and that it only reflects his own point of view. To that all I can say is - he wrote it to present his own point of view, not as a 'what is religion?' textbook so I see no problem there. And I don't find it aggressive. The arguments posed by fundamentalists are strikingly cliche and similar for almost every religion out there and I was shocked by how many I had never really thought about in depth but taken for granted and undeserved belief before this book shed a different light on it. As the most destructive force in the history of humankind religion deserves to be tackled as harshly as any war criminal guilty of genocide should - if not more. So don't expect a meek 'This is what I think but I respect other ideas, too' approach with this book. Mr Dawkins, I think, has good reason to go in with guns blazing.