The God Delusion in Atheists and Skeptics

Oct 26, 2008 James rated it it was amazing · review of another edition

"I am made of the dust of the stars, and the oceans flow in my veins..." - Neil Peart

Just got back from a weekend away at a cabin in the woods with my wife. Had a great, relaxing time. I feel refreshed!

I finished The God Delusion by Richard Dawkins just before my trip. This was a great book! It ranks up there with The Demon Haunted World by Carl Sagan as one of my all time favorites. I love the straight forward clear logical arguments, and the dry British wit.

I thought about this book while away "I am made of the dust of the stars, and the oceans flow in my veins..." - Neil Peart

Just got back from a weekend away at a cabin in the woods with my wife. Had a great, relaxing time. I feel refreshed!

I finished The God Delusion by Richard Dawkins just before my trip. This was a great book! It ranks up there with The Demon Haunted World by Carl Sagan as one of my all time favorites. I love the straight forward clear logical arguments, and the dry British wit.

I thought about this book while away this weekend, lying on the deck of my cabin out in the country. The night sky was very clear, and I could see a bazillion stars. I'm sure that everyone has had the feeling at times that the universe is overwhelmingly, Mind-Bogglingly huge. (nod to Douglas Adams!) With all of the light pollution and preoccupations that accompany urban life, I just don't notice the stars very often. When I do, I can't see very many of them. It's therefore not often that I consider my place in the universe.

This particular dose of perspective was informed by Dawkins argument that a God is an unlikely source of this universe. Stargazing led me to realize that I'm not just observing the universe, I'm part of it! (Hence the Neil Peart quote) Life is evolving and the sun is burning towards extinction even as I type this. Not only do I take up a puny amount of space, I also take up a puny amount of time.

Some might feel extreme existential angst with such observations and run for the defenses of their belief system. I've felt that angst before, but this time I felt comforted. Since I'm really just a very small and insignificant part of all this, it takes the pressure to be important off. The prospect of a brief and finite existence illuminates how precious life is and how important it is to make the most of it. This is not just a selfish, self absorbed realization. My co-inhabitants on this planet are in the same boat, so I might as well do what I can to make it nice for them also. I don't feel pressure to make the most of it, like some big haired, big toothed motivational speaker might demand. I just see that I need to budget my time and energy towards the things that are important, and away from the things that aren't.

Anyway, in addition to all of these deep thoughts, I had a nice hike in the woods, took a great nap, and spent some good quality time with my wife. That's important.

Life is good!

...more

6 likes · Like · see review

Mar 31, 2011 David S. T. rated it it was ok

Shelves: religion

Dawkins set out to write an atheist book were the reader would read being a theist and walk away being an atheist. This book sort of reminds me of an hell fire preacher who uses the idea of hell as a means of making converts, Dawkins paints a picture of Atheists as the enlightened ones (the brights) and theists as being naive, believing in a myth and even worse by being religious they perform untold atrocities. Same as the effective preacher, from the persuasive rhetoric there might be converts Dawkins set out to write an atheist book were the reader would read being a theist and walk away being an atheist. This book sort of reminds me of an hell fire preacher who uses the idea of hell as a means of making converts, Dawkins paints a picture of Atheists as the enlightened ones (the brights) and theists as being naive, believing in a myth and even worse by being religious they perform untold atrocities. Same as the effective preacher, from the persuasive rhetoric there might be converts but ultimately it doesn't really address the question, is there a God. I don't think you have to look hard to find religious people who are in fact intelligent and see all of the good that also comes from it. (On a side note, I think its pretty apparent from human history that removing religion or God won't stop prejudices, wars, ect., sadly this seems to be part of humanity, does Dawkins not realize he's just as intolerant as the people he's complaining about being intolerant?)

At one point in this book, likely anticipating the backlash his book would cause, Dawkins discusses how he's not an atheist fundamentalist. According to him, to be a fundamentalist you are so stuck in your beliefs that you won't change them regardless of the evidence, this sounds nice but like most of the book its just rhetoric and simply doesn't appear to be true. He uses examples of scientists who change their views in light of new discoveries, but someone calling him a fundamental has nothing do with his views on science but his atheistic fundamentalism, which is very apparent. Often in other negative reviews of this book you'll see complaints of how Dawkins knows nothing about Christian theology or doesn't have any understanding of the bible. Another thing telling is almost all of his sources are atheist writers, now if you're going to claim to not be a fundamentalist and open to change if evidence is present wouldn't you at least read some theist apologists? I'm not saying his viewpoints would be different, but it would be absurd for me as a protestant to go and only read anti-catholic literature to get a perspective on Catholicism, surely Dawkins can understand this? Sadly that's not the case, when his lack of understanding of theology is mentioned Dawkins just replies something about not having to study about leprechauns to prove they don't exist. This might be fine and true but if the vast majority of humanity did in fact believe in leprechauns (and had done so throughout all of known human history) then I do think you might at least try to understand why they believe.

To keep this review from getting too long, I'll just discuss a few parts of the book. The first is the section on NOMA. As a Christian who loves science this part of the book frustrated me, Dawkins is so concerned with his anti religious proselytizing that he doesn't really seem care about getting people to accept things like evolution (he wants them to accept evolution but only at the cost of belief in God). I'm fully on the side of Gould where we should separate science and religion differences. There are many Christians who accept evolution and are doing good work in getting others to accept it also, but Dawkins wants to keep pushing Darwinism as his God and make Christians think its either or, which its not.

The next is his section on the old and new testament, sadly I question if he's actually read any of the bible for himself. The stories he mentions in the old testament seem to be only the same ones used by Julia Sweeny (someone he often mentions), and like most of the rest of the book he doesn't mention the other side of the bible showing once again a lack of knowing anything but the atheist arguments. I'll admit firsthand that some of the stories he mentioned seem horrific now days, but some of these stories weren't meant to be used things to do but moral guides. Take for example the horrible story of Jephthah, who promises to God to sacrifice whatever/whomever meets him first if God gives him victory, the person turns out to be his own daughter and he then sacrifices her. This story is terrible, but its not meant to be taken as what to do, but instead of what not to do (in this case make rash promises to God), elsewhere in scripture human sacrifices are strictly prohibited (and would have been prohibited here). I'm not going to go into most of the other examples but I think any reader of the bible would be advised also to read about hyperbole and its use in the bible.

Dawkins also makes an absurd assertion that "Love Thy Neighbor" was strictly for the Jews as neighbors, but Dawkins clearly forgets later when Jesus is asked but who is my neighbor the extremely popular story of The Good Samaritan. The Jews at the time hated the Samaritans, and the purpose of the parable was to show just how much thy neighbor was all of humanity not just the Jewish ones. He also must have never read Deuteronomy where the Israelites are constantly told to treat foreigners well because they themselves were once foreigners in Egypt.

Dawkins ended the book discussing just how limited our knowledge and perspective is. How we only see and understand a small part of whats actually going on in the world. I think the world and science are amazing things, we should pursue knowledge and understanding. I think we (theists) shouldn't force science to fit into out religious viewpoints (such as a 6000 year old earth), but at the same time there are questions which science can't answer, we're limited by our own evolved mind and religion may or may not answer those questions, but I think its sad that a book like this is far more concerned with proselytizing (biased at that) than actually considering the question of God. ...more

3 likes · Like · see review

May 05, 2009 Judy rated it it was amazing · review of another edition

Shelves: non-fiction, audiobooks, my-2011-books

I loved this book. I've never read anything by the great atheists in history, so this was a new experience. I'm such a confirmed atheist, but reading Dawkins, who is practically militant about it, was breath-takingly refreshing. Unfortunately it resulted in making me feel even less tolerant of religious belief than I already felt. I read this on audiobook on my ipod, which was an excellent way to absorb it.

I don't think this book would have a prayer of changing the mind of a true believer; they ...more

Like · see review

Sep 28, 2009 Dave Winter rated it it was amazing · review of another edition

Dawkins deftly illustrates that humankind is naturally moral without the need for a deity. He also clearly illustrates the order of things in the universe - from the not complex to the complex - and how the idea of a god undermines this order. Lastly, Dawkins shows that living a moral and happy life is more meaningful for those who do not believe, as it engenders genuineness in one's motives. Definitely a worthwhile book. ...more

Like · see review