The Reading Lounge

[BarberDave]

I just finished reading The God Delusion by Richard Dawkins (no, not the Hogan's Heroes, Family Feud, and Running Man guy) and it took about three weeks for me to get through it. That's a LOT longer than normal for me and it doesn't count the two weeks I was on vacation in Portugal. The writing style is different than what I expected and is more akin to the transcripts of a series of persuasive/argumentative lectures or someone trying to convince you of something at a pub over a few beers Guinness, and that's simply why my time with the book dragged on. I was hoping for a more intellectual writing style and was let down.

Just in case you have not heard of it before, it is an attempt to show how silly, misguided and damaging religion is and how a 100% scientific view of the world is much better .

That said, there are a lot of intellectual arguments being made but I found all too often that his method of proving there is no God is to try to demonstrate that things(e.g. morals) would function the same without religion and therefore, religion is not the cause and therefore, morals cannot be something attributed to God. And as such, if God isn't responsible for morals, what else is he/she not responsible for that we currently credit to a greater power? Of course, I am simplifying his argument, but the same thing keeps popping up.

In a similar note, when crediting science for something, he often goes through points a, b, c and says that there are many more such points showing scientific reasons are more valid than theological ones for such and such an item, but says to trust him that there is no need to lay out further proof.

In effect, the same way he dismisses many religious things, he uses the same "no proof" to ask for agreement in his pro-science arguments. I thought it strange that in his dismantling of religious faith, he asks for belief/faith in many of his argued but unproven points.

In my view, the book will not convert people of faith, may or may not swing some agnostics towards atheism, and will be an echo-chamber for those who already hold atheistic views.

Verdict: Hard to recommend, unless you're already leaning towards atheism.
View attachment 131008

I will have to look into this, although it goes completely against my belief system to me, and MY OPINION ONLY, there is RELIGION and FAITH. Religion is created by man, thus has flaws, and Faith is created by GOD, therefore a belief that is in your heart and soul. Not something learned, but something inherent to your DNA,, HEART and SOUL, or whatever that belief or non-belief is.

IMHO people can believe what they want, and what makes them happy, however the thinking that SCIENCE and FAITH cannot co-mingle is ignorant at best, again IMHO. For example if SCIENCE and FAITH cannot co-exist, or work together, then why does the Catholic Church have countless number of Cardinals and Bishops that are men of Science, such as Doctors, Physicists, Astronomers that give testimony that Science and Faith, can and do work together in many ways. Hence that if there is Faith, and science then they were created by GOD.

For instance, Science says that the Earth is 4 billion years old and, if you believe, the Big Bang, or creation of the Universe is 13.8 Billion year ago as a dense fireball that exploded. Gases and rock came together to form all that we see, and have become. Is that SCIENCE, sure. What has not been answered is whom or what flipped the switch. This is where science and faith diverge, and it should not be that way. To me if you believe that a set of circumstances "scientifically" happened to make this all happen, then fine, don't believe in God. However if you believe that GOD "flipped the Switch to create the Science, the believeis in GOD.

Until this question is answered neither scenarios can be "proven", That being said believe what you want, but to call or Title a book the GOD Delusion is just a way to divide people and sell books.