The God Delusion

Dawkins' perspectives and research and his oral arguments (available on YouTube) provide not the simplest perspective but a fully-vetted perspective on the fallacies of monotheism. Well-worth the read. People like Dawkins should be admired by believer and non-believer, if nothing else, but for his courage. The "Christian" onslaughts that have been aimed at him for having the audacity to challenge their non-thinking, closed-minded, unprovable perspectives are as far from their revered Jesus as could possibly be. Sadly, these attacks narrow the difference-gap between them and those religions Christians would want to paint as dangerous.

Unlike Richard. All that logic yet not a clue about eternity; this life is only a moment in comparison, if even. Research how many, things, had to be precise for human life to exist in our world. You'll be way ahead of Richard and you'll know there had to be a Creator. Spirits do not ever die so again, are you sure? Any way you choose to "believe", the truth remains. Spirits live on whether you choose our heavenly Father and believe in His Son, Jesus, where you will live out eternity being fiercely loved, joyfully laughing as the desires of your heart are continually activated, your wildest dreams far exceeded, our minds cannot even begin to think that big to imagine what He has in store for those who choose Him back, (back because you are His child.). Or, there's one other eternity, it is filled with torment, solitude, thirst, pain, agony, darkness, continual torment, guilt & regret, oh and did I mention torment, the kind that is never-ever-ending, for infinity, eternity. You better be sure! Choose Life! Hope to see you there!

This book is practical, common sense, thoughtful, straightforward, engaging, passionate, compassionate, and really mind blowing. Even the "boring" parts are fascinating and the "complicated" parts written in an easier to understand way. I recommend it to anyone looking to expand their deep thinking and who are not satisfied with religious answers. Similar authors are Sam Harris and Daniel Dennett.

It's beautifully written and enjoyable to read; however, if you are an atheist, it feels like preaching to the choir. I have only heard lectures by Dawkins and am interested in reading about radical atheism. This book seems more suited to individuals who may need a push off of the agnostic fence.

*looks in the mirror after reading this book, smirking knowingly* “Heh, I’m so smart.”

Everyone should read this book--EVERYONE! Perhaps then you will realize what is LOGICAL !

Definitely a must read for atheist. If your skeptical about god or already an atheist this is a good book to read.

There's not been any equally well-written book I've come across in some time by now here that is as well written, nor speaks as definitely equally well of what it all means for those of us who claim the shared spiritual dwelling place that inhabits those of us who have come alive within the dwelling place that lays claim to the defining force that guides ourselves as atheists within this world we now share a reasoning styled lifestyle, all sharing the efforts of seeking to see reason over imagined or unimaginable kinds of forces so prevalent within our world as equally are more than present too. In any event, if you've equally taken notice of how often the guiding hands of reason have also brought your own selves to discover what it all means to be atheistic or even if not willing to take that label as one of your own, at least perhaps anti-dogmatic stance laying a claim to a humanist kind of a view on this world we share habitation within it all here together, know above all this book helps make yourself feel sharing a belief, or unbelief that helps in guiding forces together amongst so many others of us who all know a greater truth than other folk apparently do, or at least Dawkins is unafraid apparently too, to take or make statements that if he and we were all born within the sicteenth centuries, we'd all be burned at that ever-present stake too wherever it be found within our sad world too! Bottom line is whatever else one foes in searching for one's own personal answers of reaching out in a faith-stance research for truth be located in their path or voyage toward that ultimate goal, I could only feel it more than worthwhile to read this book!

If you've ever had questions about your faith. And you want a different perspective. This book is mind opening. Sam Harris "End of Faith" and Daniel C. Dennett "Breaking the Spell.

Dawkin's writing is always passionate, here though is a polemic that screams urgency on nearly every one of its 350 odd pages. Clearly born of a growing dismay at the re-encroachment of religion into not only moral but political discourse, Dawkins has set out his lifelong objections to both the irrationality of religious belief and also to the damaging effects he argues it has on society and above all to children. In a particularly controversial and biting chapter he condemns the religious indoctrination of young people as a form of child abuse greater than that of the catholic priest sex scandals. I find Dawkin's prose electrifying, provocative and at times beautiful, particularly here when describing the compatibility of awe and wonder at the universe with the atheistic position. Dawkins attempts to rebut most of the historical arguments for God's existance, refute the claim that morality is dependent on at least a belief in God (if not his actual existence) and in general the idea that religion serves as some kind of Platonic noble myth keeping society sane, happy, moral and together. He ends the book by arguing that children should not suffer the abuse of being force fed religion, and instead should be raised as rational beings, helping to create a mature society in which scientific method determines questions of fact and philosophical reasoning that of moral value. I'm an aetheist, though I have a much too pessimistic view of human nature to call myself a humanist, but upon finishing the book I was rather swept away for a short time in a kind of hope that reason can indeed one day abolish dogma and superstition to produce both a fairer and a happier society. I'm rather left thinking though, that perhaps that could only be in a society of cloned Richard Dawkins, or at least of an unlikely human society where most people have a level of intellect and courage even approaching his. At one point in the book he refers to a positive correlation between intelligence and atheism without drawing any negative conclusions as to how difficult that leaves turning the mass of not so intelligent citizens into rational moralists. Due to his well known scientific dismissal of group selection theory, and despite a long discussion of 'memes', he doesn't seem to take on board the rather unfortunate but plausible possibility that whilst religion may be a clutch of often nasty Darwinian 'misfirings', selection processes involving memes may mean that those cultural groups who clothe these evolutionary blanks in the memetic robes of religion may in fact inevitably survive over those which don't. This is arguably something we are witnessing in parts of Europe where the increasingly secular populations are simply being replaced by the more fertile muslim populations. The survival of the religious 'go forth and multiply' meme vs the humanist feminist 'woman have the right to careers' meme seems to have one predictable outcome, both for the memes and the cultures

Dawkins is as articulate as ever in his new book, and I am very glad he has finally complied his views on religion in a book that should be easily accessible to most educated, open-minded individuals. I am almost certain that it will change the minds of people who have extremely contemporary views of Christianity. People, who, (like I was) believe simultaneously that hell really is a philosophical proposition and that it is really seperation from 'God'. That every race on earth has their own Messiah. The ones who think marriage is a stupid criteria by which consenting adults should determine their sexual behaviour with... who perhaps believe in Einstien's 'God. But yet are simultaneously being brain washed by countless Sundays at Church, under family obligation, to undergo blatant brain washing that is so easy to absorb because of it's ridiculous simplicity and psuedo science. I was from a church with elders that believed in the Water Vapour theory, the rights of the Jews to the Land of Isreal, that the Jews were persecuted because they have not accepted Christ, but are also some of the most intelligent, successful figures in human history because they are the children of Abraham. And other such nonsense. This church by the way has a congregation of 50 000 people, and it is located in Singapore, which is a country of 4 Million. I wish someone had given me Dawkins's books earlier on. For the confused Christian individual, this would be a good starting point. I never believed in the morality of the bible, but the question for me has always been 1) did an Intelligent Designer exist 2) Does religion work -does Jesus, or Allah, or Vishnu etc. answer prayers 3) is the Ascension a real event (I was indoctrinated from birth) In the first couple of chapters, Dawkins tells you why these beliefs are rubbish. Arguments like Pascal's Matrix and the 747 miracle -that you could throw metal around and it will turn into a Boeing 747, the creationist/I-Dist favourite argument against evolution - are discredited. Funnily, I cannot imagine why these two arguments held such power over me for a long time, but until their fallacy had been eloquently put to words, and coherently explained, it was alot simpler to take them as fact. Reading good literature will always reveal to you something you never thought of before, or only felt but could never realize coherently. Ideas are different when they are written down to be read. And they are almost always better expressed written down than in brief conversation. I feel a slight resentment to all my atheist friends who thought it was charming that I was a 'good christian girl' and never introduced me to literature that would broaden my mind or argued with me about my faith. Most liberal Christians who love a good debate would love to be introduced to this book - and any Christian that's read the Da Vinci Code or any of Umberto Eco's novels and gone, "yeah, that sounds far fetched, but I don't believe that the Bible

I've just finished reading the 141 reviews above mine, and I think they're utterly fascinating--almost as interesting as the book. And the scores--the numbers who find each review helpful--are equally remarkable. Some reviewers, delighted to find their opinions supported by Dawkins, use the opportunity to bask in their superior intellects and display their generous contempt for those who disagree. Other reviewers feel personally attacked by this book, fending it off as best they can so they can retain their illusions, which are obviously valuable and meaningful to them. Actually, you don't even have to read the reviews to see which is which. Just look at the numbers. If you see very few finding the review useful, you'll know the review was written by someone opposing Dawkins' ideas. And if the majority find the review helpful, that means it agrees with Dawkins. This tells me that most of the people who are bothering to read the reviews are already pro-Dawkins--and it bodes ill for his hopes that his book will convert the believers. It won't convert many believers, not because it is wrong--it isn't--and not because it isn't well-written--it is--but because whatever else you can say about faith, it isn't easily extinguished. For those who have it, it is the only life raft on a limitless ocean. Those who don't have learned how to swim, or plan to. The most annoying reviewers, from my point of view, are those whose remarks demonstrate they haven't read the book (such as the fellow who insists Einstein was a believer), or those who feel Dawkins doesn't have the Biblical knowledge to back up his conclusions. He doesn't need any Biblical knowledge. None of us do, when it comes to the question of belief. Memorizing the Bible neither adds nor subtracts from our ability to feel faith. And that's the bottom line for me. I am unable to accept an assertion of any kind supported by nothing more than faith. I need some kind of truth, some kind of evidence. There are or might be moments when I am jealous of those capable of faith. I would love to believe, when a loved one dies, that he or she is going to a better place and that we'll meet again some day. What a lovely, comforting thought. Would that it were true, or that I could believe it. But I don't--and it makes this life and every moment in it more valuable to me. I once asked myself how a person totally unfamiliar with religion, might choose among the world's offerings, might decide to adopt one of the world's thousands of religions. I could find no way. They all claim they're right and all the other religions are wrong. But are any of them right? Now I'm thinking similar thoughts about God. I saw a website recently that compiled the names of all of the gods, worldwide and throughout history. They found 3800 different gods or supernatural beings. If I were inclined to believe, which one would I choose and why? Dawkins points out that we're all atheists. We don't believe in Amon-re, Zeus, Thor

Dawkins hereby debunks nearly all (that I can tell) common arguments for the existence of a god, and lays out the case that all organization among lifeforms and the universe itself can be attributed to natural processes, and that a universe endowed with a meddlesome god would look much different than the one we have now. His arguments are effective and valid, although this is not a work for the layperson, as its language is complex and he goes into much detail, sometimes sapping it of a possible concisive and effective punch that would be more effective for converting the average non-intellectual Christian. But for sophisticated atheists, deists, or theists, this will give you much to think about.

"As a scientist," Richard Dawkins writes, "I am hostile to fundamentalist religion because it actively debauches the scientific enterprise. It teaches us not to change our minds, and not to want to know exciting things that are available to be known. It subverts science and saps the intellect" (p. 284). In other words, the greatest crime of fundamental Christianity is to think without asking scientific questions. For those readers already familiar with Dawkins' work, it will come as no surprise that this book is nothing less than brilliant. Pity those readers, however, who either won't read this book (they should) or who will find nothing positive to say about it, because this is the work of one the greatest thinkers of our time. In THE GOD DELUSION, Dawkins, the celebrated evolutionary biologist, Oxford Professor, and author (The Selfish Gene: 30th Anniversary Edition--with a new Introduction by the Author, The Blind Watchmaker: Why the Evidence of Evolution Reveals a Universe Without Design, A Devil's Chaplain: Reflections on Hope, Lies, Science, and Love, The Ancestor's Tale: A Pilgrimage to the Dawn of Evolution), gives us a carefully-reasoned yet entertaining treatise on atheism that is equally eloquent and provocative. His basic argument is that the collective irrational belief in "The God Hypothesis" is not only wrong ("intellectual high treason"), but pernicious in its resulting intolerance, oppression, bigotry, arrogance, child abuse, homophobia, abortion-clinic bombings, cruelties to women, war, suicide bombers, and educational systems that teach ignorance when it comes to math and science. Sure to provoke his adversaries, Dawkins not only portrays the "psychotic" God of the Old Testament as "arguably the most unpleasant character in all fiction: jealous and proud of it; a petty, unjust, unforgiving control-freak; a vindictive, bloodthirsty ethnic cleanser; a misogynistic, homophobic, racist, infanticidal, genocidal, filicidal, pestilential, megalomaniacal, sadomasochistic, capriciously malevolent bully" (p. 31), but also challenges, quite convincingly, every major argument for God's existence, and shows that the Founding Fathers considered religion to be a threat to democracy. Thomas Jefferson, for instance, claimed "Christianity is the most perverted system that ever shone on man" (p. 43). Benjamin Franklin said "Lighthouses are more useful than churches" (p. 43). A 1796 treaty signed by John Adams declares, "the Government of the United States of America is not, in any sense, founded on the Christian religion" (p. 40). Adams also said, "this would be the best of all possible worlds, if there were no religion in it" (p. 43). Even conservative icon, Barry Goldwater, threatened to fight fundamentalists "every step of the way if they try to dictate their moral convictions to all Americans" (p. 39). While Dawkins is clearly out to change minds here, unfortunately, for most of his readers, he is only preaching to the choir.