The God Delusion - Richard Dawkins

pH

The God Delusion (Hardcover) by Richard Dawkins
(Published 25th September 2006)

Synopsis
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, now famous, 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 turns 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 women's and gay rights. 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 supreme 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 reading for anyone interested in this most emotional and important subject.

5uspect

I preordered a copy from amazon last week (£10 hard back). Looking forward to reading it. I guess it will be an elaboration of the "Root of all Evil". Hopefully it will deal with many of the shortcomings of it too.

Zombrex

You would kinda wonder who this book is for?

Is he attempting to convert moderate theist, pointing out the illogical nature of their beliefs? Is it for confused atheists, who don't believe in God but are not quite sure how to formulate that rejection into a justification to society.

I look forward to reading it and I shouldn't form a view without, but I feel that, like someone like Michael Moore, Dawkins work is increasingly preaching to the choir.

The_Scary_Man

Channel 4 did a couple of docs with Dawkins on this subject and they were pretty good. I do find his conclusions tend to be a bit mechanistic and clinical for me.

His views on organised religion I do agree with, there is a great piece in the documentary where he debates evolution/creationism with an American preacher and you can see his frustration build as the preacher refuses to acknowledge even the possibility of us evolving from simpler organisms.

As far as God is concerned thats a different matter. Does God exist as an entity outside of human consciousness? I think not but if people believe in any system or entity strongly enough then it becomes real in the sense that it holds power over its adherents.

My own view is that God is human consciousness and the sooner we realise that we have more power over God than he has over us the better off we'll be.

robindch

> My own view is that God is human consciousness and the sooner we realise
> that we have more power over God than he has over us the better off we'll be.

Well said! Though I'd change it slightly to say that "God is created by human consciousness"

I'd expect that Dawkins will be a bit more straightforward than Dennett's book from earlier on this year -- the right ideas, but surrounded by what feels like thousands of pages of verbal padding.

pH

Candidate for the first book in A&A's "book of the month club" perhaps?

I look forward to reading it and I shouldn't form a view without, but I feel that, like someone like Michael Moore, Dawkins work is increasingly preaching to the choir.

Yes, but it's good that they're not burnt at stakes for these views any more.

Ideas like to spread (good ones that resonate with people). The God delusion is a catchy title - even though it implies that believers are deluded!

I hope that the book generates some debate. The real thing that I believe may convince people is clerics defending their point of view. If someone has to stand up against a reasoned argument to try to show that God exists (and is not a delusion) then they can make a fool of themselves real quickly. You may want to check out the 'proof of God' thread at this point

Zombrex

pH wrote:

If someone has to stand up against a reasoned argument to try to show that God exists (and is not a delusion) then they can make a fool of themselves real quickly. You may want to check out the 'proof of God' thread at this point

Religious Person - I can prove to you God exists

Atheist/Humanist/Sceptic - I seriously doubt you can

RP - Yes I can

A/H/S - No, seriously, you can't

RP - I assure you I can.

A/H/S - Lots of cleverer people than you have tried and failed. You can't

RP - I can and will.

A/H/S - Groan. Ok then, what is your proof

RP - Ok, welll everything has to be created, so the universe must have been created. The only thing that could create the universe is a god. Therefore, since the universe was created, there must be a god. Praise God/Allah!

A/H/S - Groan (again). That is baseless assumption. That is not proof

RP - Yes it is.

A/H/S - No, it isn't

RP - Yes it is

A/H/S - No, seriously, it isn't

RP - Yes it is

A/H/S - Are you even listening to me

RP - Yes it is

A/H/S - Oh ffs, I'm out of here

RP - Yes it is

pH

RP - Yes it is

A/H/S - Oh ffs, I'm out of here

Well now we have another option:
A/H/S - "YOU'RE DELUSIONAL!"
(or possibly the more polite - Richard Dawkins says "you're delusional")

English usage experts - what's the difference (if any) between being deluded and delusional? Does the word deluded imply being tricked by others?

Zombrex

pH wrote:

Well now we have another option:
A/H/S - "YOU'RE DELUSIONAL!"
(or possibly the more polite - Richard Dawkins says "you're delusional")

English usage experts - what's the difference (if any) between being deluded and delusional? Does the word deluded imply being tricked by others?

They mean the same thing. Being delusional is being in a state of being deluded. You are deluded by someone, and while they are doing it to you you are in a state of delusion while you accept it. When you realise then you are no longer delusional, though you have been deluded.

"The God Delusion" title would imply those who have been deluded by religion and who are still being deluded, ie they are delusional in that they are in the current state of being deluded.

Dades

LOL @ Wicknights thread synopsis

No doubt there will be a big thread on this book that keeps getting rebumped as other people get into it. I won't be winning any race to finish it, though I'll get to it at some stage if only to sound knowledgeable in the aforementioned thread.

I prefer Carl Sagan's stuff to Dawkin's when I need my lack of faith reaffirmed.

UU

Ooh, I like Richard Dawkins. I really enjoyed his documentary "The Root Of All Evil?". It was very interesting and I even found myself agreeing with most of what he said in it. I might take a good read at this his new book. In a way though, he has to stoop to the level of all the religious nutcases he interviews to make his point across as being to soft doesn't do any justice.

Maybe hardcore atheism comes with a personality, eh?

pH

Starting to see reviews.

"Mr Dawkins is an atheist, an evolutionary biologist and an eloquent communicator about science, three passions that have allowed him to construct a particularly comprehensive case against religion. Everyone should read it. Atheists will love Mr Dawkins's incisive logic and rapier wit and theists will find few better tests of the robustness of their faith. Even agnostics, who claim to have no opinion on God, may be persuaded that their position is an untenable waffle."

If nothing else, his book should help bring the atheists out of the closet.

http://www.economist.com/books/displaystory.cfm?story_id=7939629

Also he was on Newsnight tonight, but I missed it.

Dave!

oooh, I'm gonna have to get this baby

I'm in agreeance with whoever said that they hope it generates some debate. If it gets enough publicity then maybe more people will start to discuss this sort of stuff, and realise once and for all that religion = poo-poo! >.<

I really think that this should be our next evolutionary step (as a society) -- total secularism.

I really don't understand how people can't see the pattern in history of gods and deities. It's upsetting.

We atheists need to unite! But seriously, some time in the near future secular groups need to get together and organise mass demonstrations, debates, documentaries, articles, etc., to reawaken the whole religion debate. Surely logic will prevail!

I'm gonna start a new thread on this
Anyways, gonna get the book

pH

No 1 on the Amazon.co.uk Hot 100 as of 00:57 23 Sept 2006

Dave!

Cool! Is that based on how many are ordering it, or is it just a recommendation from Amazon?

5uspect

You can get an extract from the book here. I havent read it myself (waiting to read the book in full). There's some interesting comments posted there too.
Newsnight usually allow you to download the previous shows too, I'll have a look for this one.

Beruthiel

I'm looking forward to reading this!

pH

"If this book doesn't change the world -- we're all screwed."
-Penn (Penn & Teller)
http://richarddawkins.net/mainPage.php?bodyPage=godDelusion.php



Edited to add:
Newsnight Bookclub interview (Youtube)

Schuhart

Good, sober interview IMHO just calmly putting the case. I had a browse of the book in Easons, but tbh felt it would only convince people already well on the road out of organised religion.

Still, the process has to start somewhere. Even creating some kind of common consciousness among athiests is a valuable counterbalance. Maybe I'm just speaking for myself, but I think this far 'disbelief' just hasn't been enough of a mobilising factor to make you think you are part of any kind of social movement.

UU

Actually I bought this book yesterday from Hodges & Figges on Dawson St. for around €16. I've started reading it and it is really good. Hip-hip horray for Richard Dawkins!

Dave!

Great interview!

Gonna buy the book this week Is it in Eason's yet?

Schuhart

DaveMcG wrote:

Is it in Eason's yet?

I saw a big pile in Easons in Liffey Valley - around €15.

MeditationMom

by Atheist- I prefer Carl Sagan's stuff to Dawkin's when I need my lack of faith reaffirmed.

LOL
or just read the newspaper, but Carl Sagan is definitely more fun!

I've been thinking about this this weekend - since I am both an atheist and.... I know God. (Don't tell anyone I said that. I say this as a whispered secret.)

"God" is beyond belief. God is Love, and God is Peace. Do we believe in Love, and Peace, or do we know Love, and Peace? Creation is a by-product of Love, and Peace- in all its highest and lowest forms, but not created by it the way a builder builds a house. (This Love, and Peace is not the hippie kind we are all so familiar with but that infinite love and infinite peace some people recognise as God)

If we were to personify this "Love and Peace", it would neiter look like a powerful old man in the sky, nor a tortured corpse hanging exhausted and dead from a cross, but much more like a serene buddha figure, for example, or just be a feeling of Love, Peace, Serenity, Order in our heart.
What image or expressioin would one give that?


When a scientist/atheist looks at the Universe he may just stay cold, get obsessed with finding the facts, come hell or high water - if he has to torture a monkey, fine- or, he may be filled with wonder and peace.

When a scientist/atheist looks at a sprout fighting its way out of the dirt and up towards the light, or a beautiful flower dancing in the wind, would he get a sense of the sacredness of life - or would he be fine to just study the molecules or cut and press the flower?

Would a believer just use the beauty of a flower to point to it and shout "this is proof of God - and you better believe it or go to hell!"

To me the question is not about whether someone is a believer or non-believer, only whether he/she is aware or unaware of a Love so deep, and a Peace so infinite, it turns us into nothing but the very same.

What is good in the world and in creation is so fragile, so suble, so easily trampled over - who cares whether people believe in God or not, they both seem to be wrong, missing the whole thing entirely.

To be clear, an atheist whose heart is filled with love and wonder, peace and a sense for the preciousness, or sacredness of life, a gratitude and sense of the eternal - he knows God, but doesn't know he does.

A believer who does not have those things in his heart, especially at the sight of an atheist better keep believing until he/she also can know God. Then we can all love each other and be at peace!

So, in order not to get off subject, where does this Richard Dawkin fit in? I'll have to read the book, but my impression is that he is as self righteuous as any such priest, yet highly intelligent and convincing. Right about the harm religion brings to millions -and propably pretty blind to the love and peace religion brings to millions. So is religion any different from say, money or duct tape?

"One of the greatest intellectuals of our times" - that is often as much trouble as religion. The last big "Intellectual Religion" was Communism.

In the end it is not going to be as simple as that. We're not going to get around having to learn to be kind and understanding of our fellow man, no matter what he does or doesn't believes in, religiously or intellectually. Just as we are doing here on Boards!

lostexpectation

MeditationMom wrote:

I've been thinking about this this weekend - since I am both an atheist and.... I know God. (Don't tell anyone I said that. I say this as a whispered secret.)

When a scientist/atheist looks at the Universe he may just stay cold, get obsessed with finding the facts, come hell or high water - if he has to torture a monkey, fine- or, he may be filled with wonder and peace.

terrible *shakes head*

einstinian wonder he said...

To be clear, an atheist whose heart is filled with love and wonder, peace and a sense for the preciousness, or sacredness of life, a gratitude and sense of the eternal - he knows God, but doesn't know he does.

still nahhh

A believer who does not have those things in his heart, especially at the sight of an atheist better keep believing until he/she also can know God. Then we can all love each other and be at peace!

nobody knows these things pretending you know them or saying you are trying to get to know them is falseness associated with the religious.

So, in order not to get off subject, where does this Richard Dawkin fit in? I'll have to read the book, but my impression is that he is as self righteuous as any such priest, yet highly intelligent and convincing. Right about the harm religion brings to millions -and propably pretty blind to the love and peace religion brings to millions. So is religion any different from say, money or duct tape?

"One of the greatest intellectuals of our times" - that is often as much trouble as religion. The last big "Intellectual Religion" was Communism.

you're american right?:rolleyes:

In the end it is not going to be as simple as that. We're not going to get around having to learn to be kind and understanding of our fellow man, no matter what he does or doesn't believes in, religiously or intellectually. Just as we are doing here on Boards! [/QUOTE]

but if religion is bad and we don't encourage badness, and we show love by disincentifying badness then we must actively counter act this bad.


pssst athiest don't talk like you do. so there's a clue

Dades

MeditationMom wrote:

"God" is beyond belief. God is Love, and God is Peace. Do we believe in Love, and Peace, or do we know Love, and Peace? Creation is a by-product of Love, and Peace- in all its highest and lowest forms, but not created by it the way a builder builds a house. (This Love, and Peace is not the hippie kind we are all so familiar with but that infinite love and infinite peace some people recognise as God)

Why do you insist on stretching the "god" concept to fit something you are comfortable with? It certainly doesn't make you sound like an atheist (which is cool) but more like a pantheist, or maybe a New Ager.

I'm off to buy Dawkins today.

rainbow kirby

Just finished this book this morning, comes highly recommended

5uspect

I suggest MeditationMom read the Devils Chaplin for an insight into what Dawkins thinks about the world.

Dades

DaveMcG wrote:

Is it in Eason's yet?

Not in feckin' O'Connell Street Easons anyway. :mad:

It's in the system but appears to be sold out.

rainbow kirby

Try Eason's in Dundrum, that's where I got mine.

Dades

rainbow kirby wrote:

Try Eason's in Dundrum, that's where I got mine.

It'd be quicker if you just typed it out and mailed it to me.

5uspect

Amazon just delivered my copy, looking forward to a good ole read...