This topic contains 12 replies, has 10 voices, and was last updated by 
-
Posts
-
Hello. I just picked up The God Delusion by Richard Dawkins. I’ve heard a lot about him and I’ve been curious on his views. I’m wondering if anyone else has read this or his other work and what are your thoughts?
-
This topic was modified 2 years, 1 month ago by
David Hayward.
-
This topic was modified 1 year, 11 months ago by David Hayward.
I’ve read it. I find him to be very dogmatic about his beliefs.. which is kinda funny actually. I’ll be curious to hear your thoughts as you read it.
I’ve read it. The problem I have with Mr Dawkins is that he always picks the extreme end of fundamentalism as the Christianity to rail against. Although he says he acknowledges that there are other types of Christians, he doesn’t take them seriously.
It’s like he’s a fundamentalist atheist, which to me is the same coin.
AnonymousRichard Dawkins is an avid atheist, therefore taken to extreme, he is an avid non creation, pro chaotic evolvement, and devoid of moral conscience based on biblical relevence based on Biblical reasoning at least, though I am sure he has a moral code. I have read through his thoughts, and chose a few years ago to realize he is a product of ‘the freedom to choose.’ His standing on science as absolute authority over faith in creation is his absolute and anyone, even creation science leaders, that would get in his way, particularly as to how our kids are educated and on what level those who disagree would stand, is it is their way or the hiway. Therefore, best place to understand him is probably Wikipedia, past that, this book might just confuse your faith. For that I would offer up any number of alternate books. Darwin’s Black Box by Michael Behee, comes to mind, although it is very heady stuff. Others might be The Case for a Creator by Lee Strobel, and the Myths of Evolution by Eldredge and Tattersall. The key is don’t get bogged down with scientists professing atheism, as their are plenty that profess creation, and in particular, Christian emphasis. They just aren’t as loud.
-
This reply was modified 2 years, 1 month ago by
.
Dawkins is considered to be one of the “Four Horsemen of Atheism.” I’m an atheist, yet I don’t particularly like some of what Dawkins has to say. I used to run an atheist blog and what I learned through interactions with my followers, especially the younger ones, is that they came to a place of disbelief by reading Harris, Dawkins, and Hitchens. We’re all influenced by what we learn – the thinks we read, watch, hear, or somehow come into contact with. However I’m big on having a foundation based on something you’ve come to understand on your own. I came to my lack of faith without having read any specific atheist author. I enrolled in a seminary, and set out to get better understanding of my faith. Two semesters in I knew I no longer believed but it was after I was firmly on the other side of religion before I picked up The God Delusion. While not as Islamophobic as Hitchens or earlier Harris works, the God Delusion seems to offer the reader what they expect. Had I read it as a Christian, I would have been seeking ways to discredit his findings. Having read it as an atheists, I didn’t find it to be all that amazing, however I appear to be in the minority on that in the atheist world. My lack of belief does not lend itself to extremes. I don’t really do well with fundamentalist from either camp. However, I am a math and science person, but I prefer to read Lawrence Krauss to Dawkins.
I know this probably wasn’t very helpful, but it’s one of those things you have to read for yourself and form your own opinions because EVERYONE else has an opinion about it. LOL
I believe in evolution but also appreciate the Beautiful Mystery that seems to be permeate it. I’m not a traditional creationist, but i’m not strictly bought into rational science either.
I’ve read lots of the latest atheists’ books. I agree with Chris Hedges who says in his book, “I Don’t Believe in Atheists”, the problem isn’t religion, but the fundamentalist mindset.
Actually, Richard Dawkins colorful hardcover book, The Greatest Show on Earth: The Evidence for Evolution, is quite beautiful. Worth having.
With them, as with anybody, eat the meat and spit out the bones!
AnonymousI think Richard Dawkins’ strength is in communicating the wonder of science and the universe. When he writes about this, I find him majestic and could listen to him for hours.
I think his critique of religion is not as great.
I agree Guru. Totally. He is poetic as a scientist. I find him strident as a spokesperson for atheism.
AnonymousServantgirl – LOVED your statement, “I’m big on having a foundation based on something you’ve come to understand on your own.” I love hearing all the diverse opinions on these forums, but I was feeling like a kid in a candy store – enthralled with everything to the point of pressuring myself to choose which spiritual disciplines/theological beliefs, etc. to adopt.
I had sort of subconsciously come to the conclusion that I needed to trust my gut instincts and embrace the things that really resonate with me and let the rest go. But thanks for the confirmation!
AnonymousI thought Daniel Dennett was one of the four horsemen too, but that would make five. Now I’m confused !
“The God Delusion” is not one of Dawkins’ best. My first encounter with his writing was quite a few years ago, and most of what I’ve read since is in his field of expertise, evolutionary biology, not religion and philosophy. He’s an excellent author and teacher, but this last book was a disappointment – shallow and superficial was my impression.
My take on Richard Dawkins’ style and personality is that he’s just a pussycat – I really do get a bit puzzled as to why people take such offense to him. I suppose it’s relative – yes he is outspoken and opinionated, and does tend to paint with a bit of a broad brush when it comes to religion but he’s mild compared to so very many folks I’ve known on the other end of the spectrum (lived with, am related to, went to church with, was/am acquainted with). He’s not everyone’s cup of tea, but on the whole I’ve enjoyed his writing – and certainly learned quite a bit about how nature works. You might want to try “River Out of Eden” – that was the first of his books I read.
I’m not a fan of the book. I skimmed parts of it — to be honest, I found it too annoying to actually read. What puts me off is his cloying, self-congratulatory sense of superiority (but how do you REALLY feel, Shira, lol?) He knows nothing about any religions other than Christianity and Islam — which granted, are the two largest and most contentious — and his knowledge of those religions is limited to the fringes. He takes the easy shots at fundagelical nonsense, and turns around and scoffs at academic theologians as well. But he never seems to look around him at the millions of Christians and Muslims who live good or even excellent lives, and whose actions are informed by their religious understanding.
FWIW, I feel pretty much the same way about Hitchens, except that Hitchens writes better than Dawkins.
The other two “Horsemen” (and my version of the list makes these Sam Harris and Daniel Dennett) are considerably more thoughtful people in general (though as others have mentioned, Dawkins’ writings on evolution are worth reading.) Sam Harris is, of course, Jewish, so maybe that’s one reason I relate to him — I speak his dialect, as it were. I feel as if, though he is frequently pointlessly pedantic, his motivation is always compassion. And his neuroscience work is interesting.
Daniel Dennett, however, is one of my intellectual heroes. For one thing, his method of doing philosophy involves taking scientific observations (instead of ad hoc propositions) as a starting point. That alone would win my admiration, since philosophy tends to get hung up precisely because its propositions are too subjective. However, he has also done astonishingly enlightening work on the implications of evolutionary theory, and that is a substantial contribution to our understanding of the world. (Freedom Evolves is an absolutely stunning book in which he discusses free will and determinism in the light of evolutionary theory. I highly recommend it.)
He is (maybe) less doctrinaire about religion than the other three, though really, his stance of detached, tolerant amusement isn’t a lot kinder than Dawkins’ nasty smugness. Dennett’s easiest book, and in my view his least worthwhile, is Breaking the Spell: Religion as a Natural Phenomenon.
To my mind, the book by an atheist that really “gets” religion is Pascal Boyer’s Religion Explained. Boyer is an anthropologist, so his view of religion is incredibly broad. He turns on its head all of the assumptions most of us carry about what “religion” means, what counts as a religion, what religions do in society, etc. — simply by introducing us to religions that are fundamentally different from the Biblical religions. He discusses things that never seem to become part of religions, and talks about the way the brain limits what kind of ideas (including religious ideas) we can entertain. He doesn’t actually explain religion, I’m sorry to say (though by reading him, I did come up with an explanation that satisfies myself, anyway.) Still, of all the books about religion by atheists, this is the one I’d recommend most highly.
-
This topic was modified 2 years, 1 month ago by
You must be logged in to reply to this topic.