|
The God Delusion | 
 enlarge | Author: Richard Dawkins
Publisher: Bantam Press
Category: Book
Buy Used: $9.49
Used (4) from $9.49
Avg. Customer Rating:  1270 reviews
Sales Rank: 2472127
Format: Import
Media: Paperback
Edition: 1st Export
Pages: 406
Shipping Weight (lbs): 1.2
Dimensions (in): 9.1 x 6 x 1.3
ISBN: 0593058259
EAN: 9780593058251
ASIN: 0593058259
Publication Date: December 1, 2006
Availability: Usually ships in 1-2 business days
Condition: light edge and corner weat - Creases on front and back covers ,wich I think that's the way the cover it's suppose to look. If un happy with the book, I will refund your money
|
| Also Available In:
|
| Similar Items:
|
| Customer Reviews: Read 1265 more reviews...
The God Delusion October 14, 2008
2 out of 7 found this review helpful
I don't believe in god, but I refuse to call myself an athiest because, in my experience, avowed athiests tend to be arrogant, strident and condescending. This audiobook has not shown me otherwise. Although it is very well researched and packed full of information, much of it is read in a snotty, superior tone that ridicules other belief systems, and adds nothing to the arguments. (Although, in all honesty, the uppity-sounding English accents add to the perception.) I think I would have preferred to read this rather than hear it read by these two.
One take home message October 14, 2008
0 out of 4 found this review helpful
For me, there was one take home message from the book that made it worth four stars: that religion is not above questioning, nor should it be. This is a powerful message that for me, does not strengthen the idea that there is no God, but rather that there is a God and that God is much bigger, smarter and clever than we have given him/her/it credit for in the past. The more I learn about science, the more I'm impressed. Like a good movie or novel that just keeps getting better and better with every turn of the page, so is life. For me, this book allowed me to look at religion, as a whole, and question it. Debate is a crucial part of learning. Reason and logic are divine gifts.
I disagree with the books conclusion that eventually we will go away from religion, or even replace religion with science, but I do think the book presents a lot of good ideas on how both the religious and non-religious can better understand the world we live in and appreciate the complexities of the universe. To appreciate the world is probably another way to say that religion is not above questioning, nor should it be.
 Dawkin's "science" delusion October 12, 2008
0 out of 7 found this review helpful
This book is nothing but a diatribe against that which Dawkins himself obviously knows to be true, but refuses to admit. His straw man arguments had already been more than adequately refuted long before this book was written, and he knows it.
Not surprisingly, there is nothing original in these pages. But denying reality is Dawkins' means of making a living, so he releases this pile of regurgitated falsehoods. There is no truth here, only agenda. The only delusion evident in these pages is the idea that Dawkins and his book of foolish tirades are somehow scientific. Funny, but that seems to be the underlying theme of all his writing.
Dawkins clearly seeks to persuade people from intelligently investigating both sides of the issues and, in the process, drag them down with them. But anyone who takes the time to investigate the actual responses to his challenges (as opposed to the untrue statements he fabricates and then attributes to opponents) will discover that Dawkins is a deceiver with none of the integrity or expertise that he wants his readers to believe he has.
The good news is that the only people who will fail to see through Dawkins' lies are the ones who already agreed with him before feeding their minds with this particular volume of garbage.
Zero stars.
 An intelligently designed argument against theism. October 12, 2008
5 out of 9 found this review helpful
Dawkins is one of the most important critical thinkers of our times. His contributions to the field of biology alone secure him among the ranks of great thinkers.
In the God Delusion, Dawkins argues forcefully and effectively for a naturistic worldview. His most interesting and new argument is a response to the belief that somehow, the universe and life are so complex that they require an explanation in the form of an intelligent designer/creator. He challenges this with the obvious point that anything able to design and create something the universe must itself be far greater than the universe, and therefore, would itself require a much greater explanation. Yet, theists assert that God merely is self existent. If this is an acceptable answer, then, of course, the answer that the universe is self existent is also acceptable. Dawkins fleshes this out wonderfully, and this is just one of the many treats inside this book.
Mike Tenenbaum, Author - Blessed Assurance? A Demonstration that Christian Fundamentalism is Simply False. Expanded - Limited Edition.
 Rehash. October 11, 2008
1 out of 1 found this review helpful
Dawkins is at his best when using the tools that he has mastered over his lifetime of academia: biology and bio-chemistry, evolutionary biology. Anyone who has read his "The Ancestor's Tale" can have little doubt about this.
However, as an Atheist myself, I find myself unconvinced by his forays into religious talk. Sure he can destroy arguments against Creationism/Intelligent Design, this is where he shines.
However, he brings nothing new to the table of discourse, no new arguments for the Athiestic position are raised, no new ways of thinking about the problem(s) are presented - 1 star. I will add another simply because Dawkins can write, and write rather well, in my own opinion. Thus 2 stars.
I do think that Dawkins does a serious disservice to Atheists and Atheism in that he advocates it as a "belief that god does not exist"... [this taken right from the little flash video right here on the book's site at Amazon]. Immediately, my thinking antennae starts to twitch. Why haven't men such as Dawkins and Hitchins addressed this fundamental point? I can only assume that they haven't thought the notion of a 'belief that god(s) do not exist' all the way through. With Dawkins advocating such a 'belief' it does nothing in addressing the true nature of Atheism, precisely 'no god-belief' or to put it more directly, to lack god knowledge. In this we Atheists are not alone as no person on earth has any god knowledge or knowledge of god - they may say they do but in the court of reason and thought, god knowledge evaporates (scriptural authority and personal experience lack the qualifications of reasoned knowledge, but as a review it would take a bundle of lines to detail. Besides, it is not the rationale behind this review) - Atheists are the most vocal group who admit to such lack of god knowledge and proclaim it as part of their system of conclusions that there is no good reason to have a belief in god; there may be 'reasons' (not to be confused with rational thought, thinking, agnosticism) to believe in god(s) but there are no 'good reasons' to believe in god and perhaps 'good reasons' NOT to believe in god.
I do sincerely hope that Dawkins and the like of conversion-minded Atheists who have sprung up recently, at some point, address this inconsistancy in their mis-represented (misunderstood?) definition and thus outlook of Atheism but I suspect that until someone can show them the flaw in their statements that directly pertain to a 'belief that there is no god(s)', this will only add to the inflammatory subject of Atheism vs. Theism(s). It has been rightly pointed out many times that a belief that something doesn't exist takes almost as much or just as much time, energy,and thought as a belief that something does exist. To lack belief removes the Atheist from the equation of 'belief' all together and can properly set the debate on its thoughtful course: the rational from the non-rational to the irrational, to the true from the false to the neither true nor false, to the reasoned and unreasoned, to the claims of religion and religious 'belief' and their truthfulness and falsity/falsifiability.
I'm sure that my comments will be unconvincing to many and may even appear as symmantical, but having thought through the problem, nature, language and its offhanded and mis-use in language (i.e. "I 'believe' that it will be sunny tomorrow') of 'belief', I hope that Atheists can move to a more complete Atheistic understanding and perhaps move the argument into the necessary arena of persuasion and convincing debate that so far has not taken hold because the ideas espoused by the likes of Dawkins are rarely persuasive to the believer. Once we can move effectively into that necessary human and psychological domain of persuasion through right/correct argument then we might see some practically understood applications of how we can use and constrain religion instead of being used and constrained by religion (i.e. the entire political process and views drip with religious bias and need to be thought out in the absence of religion, as should science).
|
|
|
Powered by Associate-O-Matic
| |
