• Welcome to BookAndReader!

    We LOVE books and hope you'll join us in sharing your favorites and experiences along with your love of reading with our community. Registering for our site is free and easy, just CLICK HERE!

    Already a member and forgot your password? Click here.

Richard Dawkins: The God Delusion

StillILearn

StillILearn

New Member
A friend is urging me to read The God Delusion. Has anybody here read it yet?

The God Delusion
NEWSNIGHT BOOK CLUB

In The God Delusion, the scientist Richard Dawkins sets out to attack God "in all his forms".

He argues that the rise of religious fundamentalism is dividing people around the world, while the dispute between "intelligent design" and Darwinism "is seriously undermining and restricting the teaching of science".
Click to expand...

Dawkins:

There are two ways in which scripture might be a source of morals or rules for living. One is by direct instruction, for example through the Ten Commandments, which are the subject of such bitter contention in the culture wars of America's boondocks. The other is by example: God, or some other biblical character, might serve as - to use the contemporary jargon - a role model. Both scriptural routes, if followed through religiously (the adverb is used in its metaphoric sense but with an eye to its origin), encourage a system of morals which any civilized modern person, whether religious or not, would find - I can put it no more gently - obnoxious.
Click to expand...

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/programmes/newsnight/5372458.stm
 
It's a great book and I would urge you to read it. I would give it four out of five and that's only because certain bits of science I couldn't quite grasp. The bulk of it, however, in which he sets out to disprove God and show that religion is not responsible for morals in society, is a must read sequence that is easily digestible.
 
Okie dokie -- I think I will. If I was willing to spend $10,481.16 on books by and about Vladimir Nabokov, then I guess I can spring for twenty bucks on this one in order to get my consciouness raised, lowered or possibly even straightened out. :D
 
Ran across this in my search:

Richard Dawkins was recently voted one of the world's top three intellectuals (alongside Umberto Eco and Noam Chomsky) by Prospect magazine. As the author of many classic works on science and philosophy, he has always asserted the irrationality of belief in God and the grievous harm it has inflicted on society. He now focuses his fierce intellect exclusively on this subject, denouncing its faulty logic and the suffering it causes.
While Europe is becoming increasingly secularized, the rise of religious fundamentalism, whether in the Middle East or Middle America, is dramatically and dangerously dividing opinion around the world. In America and elsewhere, a vigorous dispute between "intelligent design" and Darwinism is seriously undermining and restricting the teaching of science. In many countries religious dogma from medieval times still serves to abuse basic human rights, such as those of women and gay people – and all from a belief in a God whose existence lacks evidence of any kind.

Dawkins attacks God in all his forms, from the sex-obsessed, cruel tyrant of the Old Testament to the more benign, but still illogical, Celestial Watchmaker favoured by some Enlightenment thinkers. He eviscerates the major arguments for religion and demonstrates the ultimate improbability of a supreme being. He shows how religion fuels war, foments bigotry and abuses children. In The God Delusion, Dawkins presents a hard-hitting, impassioned rebuttal of religion of all types and does so in the lucid, witty and powerful language for which he is renowned. It is a brilliantly argued, fascinating polemic that will be required listening for anyone interested in this most emotional and important subject.
Click to expand...

(Random House Audio -- I think -- I lost my link. And I'm solely responsible for the bold type in the above quote.)
 
I've just started this one and I have to say that it is quite thought provoking. Interestingly enough, Dawkins distinguishes between which "God" he believes is delusional. A lot of people have overlooked that as a god of pantheism(or "sexed up atheism" as he puts it) gets a pass from him. Deism also is mentioned somewhat favorably so far. It's those who believe in a super-natural god who interferes in human matters daily and who is busy catering to human interests and wants vigorously that he has a problem with.

I do agree that agnostics, atheists, and the generally disinterested are expected to defer to those who are religious. I've done this a number of times so as to not offend others. If you are entertaining a religious couple, you might not mention your beliefs to them, though unfortunately, the other side doesn't feel the same need or desire to not offend. I don't feel the compulsion to go knock on doors and to spread my non-beliefs, though I get people of the other persuasion who feel the need to do so, especially on my door on saturday mornings. I also see his assertion in that religion is put on a pedestal in contemporary society. I love his example of drug use. If cannabis is scientifically proven to cause weight gain and delay the deaths of AIDS patients, well, the supreme court will rule against it and threaten federal intervention. If religious people claim it's for their worship service, then that's quite another thing.

The first chapter is interesting in that Dawkins mentions how the super natural crowd mentions any and all scientists and other prominent thinkers who write about "God." While that God was impersonal and uninvolved, many feel that the three letter word meant that such people believed in the supernatural God that in their own time, was wide knowledge that they didn't. Jefferson is a great example of this. A man whose books were banned in more than one library during his lifetime as he was smeared an "atheist" is now considered to be one of the faithful.:rolleyes: I'm really enjoying the book thus far, I hope to have the next two chapters read over the weekend.
 
This is definitely on my TBR list, as I feel that it will describe the feelings that I have toward religion in an articulate and eloquent way that I can't quite manage.

If this topic interests people, there was a documentary series made by John Safran a few years ago called John Safran vs. God. May have been discussed elsewhere on this forum, but it is a brilliant and thought provoking watch that may not end quite how you expect it to.
 
I really enjoyed the section of the book dealing with morality and the contention that only religion is the source of it. I've never considered it before, but what constitutes morality does shift with time. The banishing of slavery, the enfranchisement of women, not to mention other cultural attitudes in no way are found in the Bible. Even religious leaders who were prominent in these movements, held considerably non-Christian attitudes. Martin Luther King Jr. being a prime example.

Dawkins then launches into an examination of Old Testament theology where the absurd takes center stage. Lot is a *moral* man who prevents the sodomizing of his guests on the part of a nameless mob, though you can't deduce his morality when he offers up his daughters for the taking. It also strains all bounds of credibility when we later learn that this guy gets hammered and then proceeds to bed both of them. In reading the story of the potential sodomizing, it is almost laughable that such a story, and indeed such a character, could be seen to be the ethical example of how we should conduct things in society. Most specifically, how and why homosexuality should not be accepted in our culture. If the story of Lot is an allegory, then we enter the realm of "picking and choosing" and those who believe in *literalism* are soundly hung, drawn, and quartered in argument.
 
Some interesting gems from youtube.

TGD documentary #1

TGD documentary #2

TGD documentary #3

TGD documentary #4

TGD documentary # 5


Dawkins vs. Liberty University professors and students at a Q/A
 
i think dawkins is an ass. i read about an argument he had with some religious guy. he said to him, "it's obvious you know nothing about science and evolution," even though the guy was being respectful to him. he also compared the guy's church to a nuremberg rally before they even started arguing. he's just a dick about everything.
 
whats a book? said:
i think dawkins is an ass. i read about an argument he had with some religious guy. he said to him, "it's obvious you know nothing about science and evolution," even though the guy was being respectful to him. he also compared the guy's church to a nuremberg rally before they even started arguing. he's just a dick about everything.
Click to expand...

Is Eyezonme posting under a different name? Thems against the rules, bucko. :p

Back to your point (which is brilliantly vague, I must say) I don't see how partaking in intelligent debate with 'some religious guy' makes Dawkins an ass. And of course 'some religious guy' was feigning respect. He was talking to the man who may in some small way be responsible for bringing down religion.:)
 
whats a book? said:
i think dawkins is an ass. i read about an argument he had with some religious guy. he said to him, "it's obvious you know nothing about science and evolution," even though the guy was being respectful to him. he also compared the guy's church to a nuremberg rally before they even started arguing. he's just a dick about everything.
Click to expand...


Interesting, I would be interested in reading of that exchange if you could provide a URL or a name of the magazine.

Having read his book and watched a ton of clips of him, he is more than respectful to those whom he disagrees with. Then again, if completely smashing the opinions of others with scientific date and historical events constitues being "mean," then I guess he is guilty as charged.
 
I'm assuming whats a book refers to this conversation between Dawkins and the (now former) pastor Ted Haggard, who does prove fairly conclusively that he doesn't know anything about science and evolution. Feel free to watch it before you go by what other people write about it.

(On the other hand, Dawkins CAN occasionally come across as a bit of a dick. That, though, has nothing to do with him being right or wrong.)

EDIT: Here's a somewhat clearer version of the Dawkins-Haggard debate. :D
 
Oh that's nothing, Dawkins asked about science and Haggard retreated into the whole arrogance thing, a popular and convenient tool when you don't have any ammo regarding what is being discussed. If anything, Haggard was being accusatorial.


Speaking of Haggard.....LOL.......:rolleyes:
 
Peronel said:
Is Eyezonme posting under a different name? Thems against the rules, bucko. :p
Click to expand...
not funny or clever at all, you're grasping.

Back to your point (which is brilliantly vague, I must say) I don't see how partaking in intelligent debate with 'some religious guy' makes Dawkins an ass. And of course 'some religious guy' was feigning respect. He was talking to the man who may in some small way be responsible for bringing down religion.:)
Click to expand...
why don't you read my post again if you didn't understand it the first time, it's pretty self-explanatory.
 
beer good said:
I'm assuming whats a book refers to this conversation between Dawkins and the (now former) pastor Ted Haggard, who does prove fairly conclusively that he doesn't know anything about science and evolution. Feel free to watch it before you go by what other people write about it.

(On the other hand, Dawkins CAN occasionally come across as a bit of a dick. That, though, has nothing to do with him being right or wrong.)

EDIT: Here's a somewhat clearer version of the Dawkins-Haggard debate. :D
Click to expand...
it's possible to be right without condescendingly talking about religiousity as deception.
 
SFG75 said:
Oh that's nothing, Dawkins asked about science and Haggard retreated into the whole arrogance thing, a popular and convenient tool when you don't have any ammo regarding what is being discussed. If anything, Haggard was being accusatorial.


Speaking of Haggard.....LOL.......:rolleyes:
Click to expand...
this is not an argument. thanks
 
whats a book? said:
this is not an argument. thanks
Click to expand...

Oh, I think your first post here is quite debatable.

think dawkins is an ass. i read about an argument he had with some religious guy. he said to him, "it's obvious you know nothing about science and evolution," even though the guy was being respectful to him. he also compared the guy's church to a nuremberg rally before they even started arguing. he's just a dick about everything.
Click to expand...

Do you care to post a URL or videoclip of the exchange that you state happened?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top