Have you read Dawkin's the "God Delusion"?

Question

I think I am in the appropriate position to respond to his book, mainly because I am agnostic (I don't favor either side). I read SOME of the book, and Dawkins sounds too extreme about his beliefs. He makes it seem as though there is absolutely no possiblity in the world that a God may exist. Furthermore, when he attacks religions he does not take into consideration the answers that some of them have. For instance, evolution does not contradict Judaism because Jewish people believe that evolution had occured, that God placed the material to form life - and evolution took over.

But Dawkins does not take things like that into consideration. I could find way better arguments against God's existence than the ones he proposed...

Answer 1

you may wish to try "letter to a christian nation" by sam harris.
it's a simple quick read. and a good introduction to the basics of atheism and religions impact on the world.

Answer 2

I haven't read it, but I'm sure I will at some point. But I have to disagree with you anyway -- who says "Jewish people believe that evolution had occurred" -- what authority? The entire 'creation story' comes from the torah, it is a Jewish story that was co-opted by Christianity. That 'theory' you cited is called intelligent design, and it comes from the Christians -- many sects of Christianity do not literally believe in creationism.

Don't confuse arguments against creationism with arguments against god's existence -- two very different things. Creationism could be disproved, god's existence (or lack thereof) could not. Personally I think arguing about either is pointless, but trying to 'disprove' god is a little bit more pointless.

Answer 3

I had not read Dawkin's "God Delusion", but I think I am appropriate to respond to your question.

a. You said you are an agnostic, it already means you had the idea everything has some form of god inside. Check out the definition for it : http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/agnostic

b. Dawkin may sound too extreme, but you had already put in the idea "There is a god" and you think based on your assumption "god is real" while Dawkin based on the assumption "god is not real".

c. Evolution does contradict Judaism, A basic example will be Adam and Eve and the "look" of god. If Evolution is true, then god will look like an ape.

d. Basic question, does god evolve? If he does then he is not the omnipotent character, if he does not then he is not abidding his own rules. If creation is required for everything, then god has to be created, but by whom? Defying own laws does not make things right.

Perhaps you could state down what are your argument against god's existence.

Answer 4

I'm in the process of reading it.

You didn't read very far, since he does give a scale of belief to disbelieve, and does say that it's irrational to be completely certain there's no god.

Evolution is a distinct question from the existence of god.

The case for evolution through natural selection is overwhelming.

Most believers don't deny evolution (that's a more common mistake in America -- to equate the two, and claim that the Bible is science; most believers don't consider the Bible to be literally, scientifically accurate in every detail).

His argument that god is extremely unlikely is a somewhat different argument.

Since you didn't read the whole thing, you're not in a position to come to conclusions about what he fails to address.

He DOES address those who believe in god, and accept evolution.

If you intend to give a SOUND response to his book, you first need to READ his book, not just a little bit of it.

I'm still in the process of wrapping my mind around his basic anti-god argument, based on the improbability of a god.

On the face of it, I have to say he has quite a case. (Of course, he was preaching to the choir in my case -- so to speak.)

So, what would those superior arguments be?

I'm reading Darwin's Dangerous Idea, too; proving to be a very interesting book. But I'm not far enough along to get the whole argument.

Answer 5

I haven't read it and don't really need to because it is quite clear there are no gods (if there were, they'd be complete jackasses). I have read some of his other atheist-related stuff and it does come off a bit extreme, mostly because as you said, he does not take all views into consideration. However, remember his attack is upon the traditional Christian view of God in American culture.

PS- What makes a spiritual fence-sitter any more qualified to respond to his book than anyone else?

Answer 6

Sam Harris is an author worth exploring. His book,"End of Faith: Religion, Terrorism, and the Future of Reason" may be a good choice for you. I personally like Dawkins' work and consider him to be, "an answer to the times".

Answer 7

i haven't read it, i have a feeling i don't need persuading on any of the points he brings up, but it's my understanding that dawkins is responding to popular concepts of god, which do frequently contradict the understanding of the world that science has developed. that's just the nature of the book, it can't be all things to all people.

Answer 8

From a glance in a bookstore, it seems to be mainly an attack on Fundie Christianty, which is understandable given the sustained and dirty attacks he would have endured from Fundies for decades as he tried to go about his work as a science communicator.

Answer 9

Rather than prove any of his reasoning Dawkins promotes an absolute distaste for any religions with unconnective logic.
If he were a true scientist, he would give the "other" side a benefit until proven otherwise.
He promotes controversy just to do it. Sorry, but he is just not credible for any views.

Get A Grip

Answer 10

The best book on atheism is "Atheism: The Case Against God" by George H. Smith.