after reading the God Delusion

Galvasean

Controversial stance SormWarrior. Would you care to counter one of the arguments as an example?

Dades

StormWarrior wrote: »

I thought this book was rubbish. A 5 year old could have countered his juvenile arguments with ease. And no, I am not a Christian or anything of the sort.

Quit your trolling, unless you're prepared to give an example.

Zombrex

StormWarrior wrote: »

And no, I am not a Christian or anything of the sort.

We will decide that Stormy ... now the way this works is that we throw you in the river, if you drown you are not a Christian (peace be with your non-existence soul). On the other hand if you float you may well be a Christian, so we will have to burn you at the stake. If you burn to death you are definitely not a Christian (peace be with your non-existence soul), but on the other hand if you don't burn you are a Christian and we will have to be head you and drive a stake through your heart.

Canis Lupus

Whilst I don't normally post this kind of stuff but I was reading away there yesterday and just read a passage about death (can't even remember it properly) and I thought that death is going to suck.

I will cease to be. Apart from that tragedy I won't get to see cool things like proper space travel and other stuff like it (assuming good old humans make it that far).

All the things that can and will happen on earth and other planets will miss me by. Although I'd probably have the same complaint if it were so I wish I was born later in time.

I don't particularly want to wink out of existence..... I can see the appeal of religion in this respect.

I've no idea why it played on my mind but it did. The God Delusion makes me a little sad even though I am not religious.

marco_polo

StormWarrior wrote: »

I thought this book was rubbish. A 5 year old could have countered his juvenile arguments with ease. And no, I am not a Christian or anything of the sort.

Since you have failed to provide any examples, may I conclude that you are aged 4 or less?

simonw

I like dawkins, but i thought his more evolution based books were better, there's something about the idea of memes i find very boring. I really like the selfish gene and climbing mount improbable, though they aren't necessarily "athiest" books.

Dave!

I agree simon... I find the memes part to be very boring

robindch

Memes boring? Good heavens, how?

JC 2K3

StormWarrior wrote: »

And no, I am not a Christian or anything of the sort.

Do I not remember you posting a thread thinking that because you had a dream about the 80s, that you believed you had a past life in the 80s or something? Also, I'm pretty sure I've seen you discussing supernatural beliefs in the Spirituality forum before.

You might not be a Christian, but you certainly are "something of the sort" if you hold supernatural beliefs. And having not given any reasons for your statement, I can only conclude that you're just having a jibe, frustrated that what he says isn't consistant with your own beliefs.

aidan24326

DaveMcG wrote: »

I agree simon... I find the memes part to be very boring

Memes are an interesting idea, Susan Blackmore's book 'The Meme Machine' is not a bad read.

Canis Lupus wrote:

I don't particularly want to wink out of existence..... I can see the appeal of religion in this respect.
I've no idea why it played on my mind but it did. The God Delusion makes me a little sad even though I am not religious.

Circumventing the inevitably of death is surely one of the great attractions of it. We're hardwired to be scared of dying, though as a non-believer there's another way to look at it. If there's no afterlife, which seems highly likely, then there's nothing to be scared of. It'll just be the same as it was before you were born. An endless dreamless sleep. (I think) it was Bertrand Russell said 'I was dead for billions of years before I was born and it caused me not the slightest inconvenience'. Or something like that.

JC 2K3 wrote: »

Do I not remember you posting a thread thinking that because you had a dream about the 80s, that you believed you had a past life in the 80s or something? Also, I'm pretty sure I've seen you discussing supernatural beliefs in the Spirituality forum before.

You might not be a Christian, but you certainly are "something of the sort" if you hold supernatural beliefs. And having not given any reasons for your statement, I can only conclude that you're just having a jibe, frustrated that what he says isn't consistant with your own beliefs.

+1 from me

JC 2K3

DaveMcG wrote: »

I agree simon... I find the memes part to be very boring

But, but.... Pedobear!

Galvasean

DaveMcG wrote: »

I agree simon... I find the memes part to be very boring

Me too. Although the concept of memes is an interesting one, I felt the chapter dedicated to them was overly long.

armour87

StormWarrior wrote: »

I thought this book was rubbish. A 5 year old could have countered his juvenile arguments with ease. And no, I am not a Christian or anything of the sort.

Still waiting for your counter argument here, maybe your searching nearby creches...or out "Rocking the Night"

D.S.

It really is a great book. I didn't want to read it for months (prob a little afraid of what I already knew) but really found it a liberating read.

iamahumbleman

branie wrote: »

Did you become an atheist, or did it just reinforce your views on god and religion?

the best answer to this question is 'both'.

steve

skinner2x

D.S. wrote: »

It really is a great book. I didn't want to read it for months (prob a little afraid of what I already knew) but really found it a liberating read.

+ 1
Book confirmed what I always suspected. The catholic guilt was strong, still can't discuss with any 'offline' friends, as all god fearin' folks.

NotMe

Haven't read it yet but it's on my list and I'm looking forward to it. I'm halfway through The Selfish Gene at the moment which is a great book!

jayteecork

I read the first few chapters and thought that the arguments were just rehashes of those that have been around since the 17th century.

I'm not stating my stance on the matter but I thought Dawkins was being very original.

aidan24326

jayteecork wrote: »

I read the first few chapters and thought that the arguments were just rehashes of those that have been around since the 17th century.

I'm not stating my stance on the matter but I thought Dawkins was being very original.

I presume you mean Dawkins wasn't being original? Otherwise your post doesn't make sense.

While some of his arguments may indeed be rehashes, this is the first time that they've been gathered together in a heavily publicised and widely-read book, afaik.

jayteecork

aidan24326 wrote: »

I presume you mean Dawkins wasn't being original? Otherwise your post doesn't make sense.

Yes, obviously.

But yeah, I have a degree in philosophy and all the arguments are standard.

I'd agree with you as well that Dawkins' book is an effort to get all the arguments in one place and hope to be read by the general public.


Again I'll refrain from casting my opinion on the matter, probably here already somewhere.

Charlie3dan

aidan24326 wrote: »

.

While some of his arguments may indeed be rehashes, this is the first time that they've been gathered together in a heavily publicised and widely-read book, afaik.

Exactly and Dawkins presents the information very well not getting bogged down in minute details of every word of the bible etc. Just clear, concise, objective and reasonable.

I'm currently reading a Christpher Hitchens book and I recently read one of Sam Harris' books which are both good reads but in terms of putting their point accross they get bogged down in some pretty insignificant arguements and both have a habit of beating the points to death.

Not so with Dawkins. The book confirmed what I already believed and brought some new perspectives to light which made my beliefs even stronger.

ChocolateSauce

Dawkins is a hero to me, but I was not impressed by his book. While it was an entertaining read, I felt it too acedemic sounding to really reach out to the people who need it (like semi-illiterate evangelicals). Hitchens' God Is Not Great was better, but the best atheist arguments I've ever found are at www.ebonmusings.org.

These arguments are written by a lay person and are in a language most people would have no problem reading. I've met quite a number of people who tried to read the God Delusion but weren't articulate enough to truly grasp the concepts.

iUseVi

theozster wrote: »

Dawkins is a hero to me, but I was not impressed by his book. While it was an entertaining read, I felt it too acedemic sounding to really reach out to the people who need it (like semi-illiterate evangelicals). Hitchens' God Is Not Great was better, but the best atheist arguments I've ever found are at www.ebonmusings.org.

These arguments are written by a lay person and are in a language most people would have no problem reading. I've met quite a number of people who tried to read the God Delusion but weren't articulate enough to truly grasp the concepts.

That is unequivocally my favourite site on the entire internet! I would highly recommend this article, if you haven't already read it:

http://www.ebonmusings.org/atheism/ghost.html

It all but disproves the existence of a soul. Be warned, it's a bit long, but it's well worth the read.

My favourite humorous one is:

http://www.ebonmusings.org/atheism/2000years.html

lee1234

Seems like we're all converted here. Maybe we should go onto the religious threads and cause a rucus. Or maybe wait patiently for a few hundred years till they catch up. Just so frustrating to me how so many people cannot see whats so obvious.

Dave!

You must be new! Welcome!

jayteecork

All atheists are ghey.

PDN

lee1234 wrote: »

Seems like we're all converted here. Maybe we should go onto the religious threads and cause a rucus. Or maybe wait patiently for a few hundred years till they catch up. Just so frustrating to me how so many people cannot see whats so obvious.

Thanks for the heads up. Duly entered on my trollometer's early warning system.

Dave!

That was just a figure of speech :pac:

a bit more subtlety next time lee! don't give them any warning!

Charlie3dan

theozster wrote: »

Dawkins is a hero to me, but I was not impressed by his book. While it was an entertaining read, I felt it too acedemic sounding to really reach out to the people who need it (like semi-illiterate evangelicals). Hitchens' God Is Not Great was better,

I'd have to say I found exactly the reverse of this.

I think Dawkins went out of his way to make it as clear as possible. I don't think he shyed away from eloquent speech but he definitely put it all together much more coherently and understandably than Hitchens and Harris.....at least for me.

One book that I thought was very straight forward was "In God we Doubt" by John Humphries but he describes himself as a failed atheist and is agnostic so it's not anywhere near as hard hitting.

PDN

Got my copy from Amazon this week. Started reading it tonight. I have a long flight on Monday (9 hours of reading time) so I should have got the gist of most of his arguments by the time I reach Houston.

Sorry if I'm dragging the thread off-topic since the thread is "After Reading the God Delusion" and this post is Before Reading the God Delusion.