Richard Dawkins - The God Delusion (2006)

[stonesean]

I often think the self identification with religion is almost totally cultural in many peoples minds rather than an actual belief in the supernatural.

Abso-fraggin-lutely, and there's nothing wrong with that!

One of my favorite movie quotes:

"Just because I stopped believing in God doesn't mean I'm going to stop being a good Cathoilic!"

Anyone?

Though I happen to personally think that calling yourself religious without belief is a bit ridiculous.  My wife would never claim to be a deist/agnostic (even though she's told me that she doesn't actually believe in any kind of interventionist God) and would NEVER go so far as to call herself atheist.  (even though she probably is) Mostly I suspect because her family would be mad, which is funny, becuase she generally yells at her Mom and sister at least 2-3 times a week....though they quickly make up....

I happily tell anyone who asks that I am 99.9% sure that God doesn't exist, and 100% sure that all religion is made up fake stuff....though I usually tone it down around the in-laws, for my wifes sake.

That quote sure sounds like "Dogma".

[Kwisatz Haderach]

I often think the self identification with religion is almost totally cultural in many peoples minds rather than an actual belief in the supernatural.

Abso-fraggin-lutely, and there's nothing wrong with that!

One of my favorite movie quotes:

"Just because I stopped believing in God doesn't mean I'm going to stop being a good Cathoilic!"

Anyone?

Though I happen to personally think that calling yourself religious without belief is a bit ridiculous.  She would never claim to be a deist/agnostic (even though she doesn't actually believe in any kind of interventionist God) and would NEVER go so far as to call herself atheist.  Mostly I suspect because her family would be mad.

I happily tell anyone who asks that I am 99.9% sure that God doesn't exist, and 100% sure that all religion is made up fake stuff....though I usually tone it down around the in-laws, for my wifes sake.

That quote sure sounds like "Dogma".

I think that I was like your wife until I actually went to Seminary, and learned that all of the great modern Christians theologians are pretty much atheists.  (I dropped out of Seminary because of the bullshit condescending attitude that we can let the "simple people in the pews" know that).

I am currently a big proponent of Christians coming out as Atheists.  Let your wife know that it's ok, atheism is the future of Christianity!

The quote is not from Dogma.

[Grimner]

Well written and argued. I read it as much for language as for the contents.

I don't think it is a book to give to real believers - it's a bit like handing a handgrenade to a toodler; either nothing will happen or there will be a mess.

As a tool for landing the doubters on the right side of the fence, yes, that's more like it.


The audiobook is abridged by... Richard Dawkins.
The audiobook runs at... about 7 hours.
The audiobook is read by... Lala Ward and Richard Dawkins.

OK, I hate "abridging" too, but here it is done in a rather nice way, don't you think?

[Jim]

I only recently realised that Richard Dawkins married one of Doctor Who's assistants, now I find his arguements Even more compelling :-)

[plob218]

I read it a few months ago. True, he doesn't bring a whole lot of new stuff to the table, but it's a damn good compilation of every argument I've heard him make against religion. And a pretty entertaining read, too!

[Geo]

I just finished this book, but I'm not a convert. I was already an Atheist when I started.

I think the most important contribution Dawkins makes, and the most controversial, is the idea that we shouldn't be complacent any longer about peoples' supernatural beliefs. In his NOMA argument on pg. 54, he says that science has always taken a laissez faire approach to people's religious beliefs. That such beliefs lie beyond science and the two don't overlap. This is where Dawkins converts me. We give religion a free pass, but why should we?

He makes the point somewhere that these are our doctors, lawyers, congressmen. They are running our world. And they still believe in the Easter Bunny.

I, for one, think our electorate should be held to high intellectual standards. In the U.S. there's this idea taking root that we are a Christian nation. This is absolute b**crap! Our founding fathers were, for the most, deists, which is an agnostic sort of belief, a lot closer to atheism than Christianity, I dare say.

The other really important thing Dawkins has to say is that those who are taught that unquestioned faith is a virtue are truly missing out on the beauty and wonder of the universe and the world around them. An understanding of evolution opens up the narrow window that we see through. Unfortunately, this message will be lost on true believers because they want to believe and that's that.

[Sabbie]

Wow I finally finished it. Opinion hasn't changed, among the best books I have ever read. Well, non-fiction books.

[pareidoliac]

I thought for the most part that this book is solid but I disagreed a bit with Dawkins.  When he was talking about that girl who was molested by her priest and thought that that was less traumatizing than being told people she knew would go to hell.  I'm great at run on sentences.  But that seems a bit of a weak anecdotal argument.  I rather enjoyed the last chapter, it was basically an extended version of his TED lecture.  From people who tell me they've read both The God Delusion and The Selfish Gene, most say they liked The Selfish Gene more.  I have yet to read The Selfish Gene.

[MisterMarc]

When he was talking about that girl who was molested by her priest and thought that that was less traumatizing than being told people she knew would go to hell.  I'm great at run on sentences.

Actually, I think that was a sentence fragment that happened to be long rather than a run-on sentence.

As for the book, I just picked it up yesterday. Should be a good read, as I generally find Dawkins to be pretty entertaining.

[ourpasture]

a book on my reads for the year.  but Dawkins typically comes off as condescending... and well... an asshole.  I mean really, the guy comes off as a blowhard ass in alot of his commentaries, very coloquial.  the real message gets lost in his delivery. 

but it is pretty entertaining. 

[Sabbie]

I hear that a lot but I actually do not experience this "he's such an asshole" feeling when read this book

[Kwisatz Haderach]

I stopped reading it again.  I just can't get into it. 

I don't really disagree with much of what he says, but disagree with the way he says it.  I do not think that he is ontologically an asshole (like Chistopher Hitchens and Penn Jillette), but I don't think he's improving the "Public Understanding of Science" with his rhetoric, which is supposed to be his job.

I suspect I'm a Gouldian.  I started reading Gould after Asimov died; It seems that reading the combination of Gould, Spong, and Sagan during the formative years of my late teens/early twenties convinced me that Science and Religion are compatible and important parts of the human endeavor.

Dawkins makes very good arguments against certain beliefs and specific sects and inappropriately associates these arguments with all religion.  Of course, he ignores the fact that some of the most active opponents of the beliefs and sects he's condemning are other religious folk.  It's not at all dissimilar from the ridiculous associations EXPELLED tries to from between Evolution and Hitler.

[Zookster]

I am currently a big proponent of Christians coming out as Atheists.  Let your wife know that it's ok, atheism is the future of Christianity!

Hi Febo,

I am sure you have covered this before, but I am new here.  What is an atheist christian, and, further, how are they different from an atheist muslim?

I would also take issue with your claim that the majority of the religious are classed as believing in a supernatutral deity although they really don't.  Where are you from?  I am from the UK, BTW, where religion is barely even mentioned, but western europe is really the exception worldwide in my opinion.

[Kwisatz Haderach]

I am currently a big proponent of Christians coming out as Atheists.  Let your wife know that it's ok, atheism is the future of Christianity!

Hi Febo,

I am sure you have covered this before, but I am new here.  What is an atheist christian, and, further, how are they different from an atheist muslim?

I would also take issue with your claim that the majority of the religious are classed as believing in a supernatutral deity although they really don't.  Where are you from?  I am from the UK, BTW, where religion is barely even mentioned, but western europe is really the exception worldwide in my opinion.

In the United States, most Jews (at least those of the reformed and conservative traditions) observe some of the traditions (the ones that don't get in the way of contemporary life), and celebrate some of the Holidays, and enjoy the stories from scripture, but no one, not even their Rabbi, demands that they believe anything in particular to be considered a "Jew".  The supernatural bits are seen as curious parts of the cultural tradition, but not the foundation of the Faith; the foundation of the Faith is a loving community that shares a common history and mythology and supports its people.

I see Christianity, and all religions, the same way.

Obviously, no one tradition has any exclusive claim on "a loving community that shares a common history and mythology and supports its people," so the way I see it, the only difference between the various religion is the particulars of their shared history, customs, and mythologies.

See Also.

[Zookster]

I am currently a big proponent of Christians coming out as Atheists.  Let your wife know that it's ok, atheism is the future of Christianity!

Hi Febo,

I am sure you have covered this before, but I am new here.  What is an atheist christian, and, further, how are they different from an atheist muslim?

I would also take issue with your claim that the majority of the religious are classed as believing in a supernatutral deity although they really don't.  Where are you from?  I am from the UK, BTW, where religion is barely even mentioned, but western europe is really the exception worldwide in my opinion.

In the United States, most Jews (at least those of the reformed and conservative traditions) observe some of the traditions (the ones that don't get in the way of contemporary life), and celebrate some of the Holidays, and enjoy the stories from scripture, but no one, not even their Rabbi, demands that they believe anything in particular to be considered a "Jew".  The supernatural bits are seen as curious parts of the cultural tradition, but not the foundation of the Faith; the foundation of the Faith is a loving community that shares a common history and mythology and supports its people.

I see Christianity, and all religions, the same way.

Obviously, no one tradition has any exclusive claim on "a loving community that shares a common history and mythology and supports its people," so the way I see it, the only difference between the various religion is the particulars of their shared history, customs, and mythologies.

See Also.

I wouldn't disagree with your view of Judaism in the US, although my experience is not great, but I would love to see your evidence that mainstream christianity is the same 'happy-go-lucky' group hug that views this 'god' character as an amusing quirk.