Product Description

In his sensational international bestseller, the preeminent scientist and outspoken atheist Richard Dawkins delivers a hard-hitting, impassioned, but humorous rebuttal of religious belief. With rigor and wit, Dawkins eviscerates the arguments for religion and demonstrates the supreme improbability of the existence of a supreme being. He makes a compelling case that faith is not just irrational, but potentially deadly. In a preface written for the paperback edition, Dawkins responds to some of the controversies the book has incited. This brilliantly argued, provocative book challenges all of us to test our beliefs, no matter what beliefs we hold.

Product Details

• Amazon Sales Rank: #250 in Books
• Published on: 2008-01-16
• Original language: English
• Number of items: 1
• Binding: Paperback
• 464 pages

From Publishers Weekly
The antireligion wars started by Daniel Dennett and Sam Harris will heat up even more with this salvo from celebrated Oxford biologist Dawkins. For a scientist who criticizes religion for its intolerance, Dawkins has written a surprisingly intolerant book, full of scorn for religion and those who believe. But Dawkins, who gave us the selfish gene, anticipates this criticism. He says it's the scientist and humanist in him that makes him hostile to religions—fundamentalist Christianity and Islam come in for the most opprobrium—that close people's minds to scientific truth, oppress women and abuse children psychologically with the notion of eternal damnation. While Dawkins can be witty, even confirmed atheists who agree with his advocacy of science and vigorous rationalism may have trouble stomaching some of the rhetoric: the biblical Yahweh is "psychotic," Aquinas's proofs of God's existence are "fatuous" and religion generally is "nonsense." The most effective chapters are those in which Dawkins calms down, for instance, drawing on evolution to disprove the ideas behind intelligent design. In other chapters, he attempts to construct a scientific scaffolding for atheism, such as using evolution again to rebut the notion that without God there can be no morality. He insists that religion is a divisive and oppressive force, but he is less convincing in arguing that the world would be better and more peaceful without it. (Oct. 18)
Copyright © Reed Business Information, a division of Reed Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

From Scientific American
Richard Dawkins, in The God Delusion, tells of his exasperation with colleagues who try to play both sides of the street: looking to science for justification of their religious convictions while evading the most difficult implications—the existence of a prime mover sophisticated enough to create and run the universe, "to say nothing of mind reading millions of humans simultaneously." Such an entity, he argues, would have to be extremely complex, raising the question of how it came into existence, how it communicates —through spiritons!—and where it resides. Dawkins is frequently dismissed as a bully, but he is only putting theological doctrines to the same kind of scrutiny that any scientific theory must withstand. No one who has witnessed the merciless dissection of a new paper in physics would describe the atmosphere as overly polite.

George Johnson is author of Fire in the Mind: Science, Faith, and the Search for Order and six other books. He resides on the Web at talaya.net

From Bookmarks Magazine
Richard Dawkins's latest book raises the question of style over substance. As in his well-known books The Selfish Gene, The Blind Watchmaker, and River Out of Eden, the renowned evolutionary biologist has done his homework, and argues with precision and a fair glaze of wit. But Dawkins can't restrain his vitriol for those that have put their faith in religion, to the point that he comes off as rabid as those believers whose eyes he yearns to open. This fatal flaw knocks his book down a rung or two for critics, many of whom seem inclined to believe in Dawkins, if only he weren't so preachy.

Copyright © 2004 Phillips & Nelson Media, Inc.

Customer Reviews

Flawed and Judgemental
Overall, the book was decent, but a couple huge points that really knock it down. First, the author clearly has an ax to grind with Christianity, Islam, and Judaism. The book could be re-titled "Why I dislike Theistic Religions originating in the Middle East." Second, he dodges a huge philosophical angle. Assume God does not want to be proven. He/She has the power to prevent His/Her creations from 'proving' His/Her existence. The theory is that God wants His/Her creations to worship Him/Her of their own free will. If you could prove God, there wouldn't be a decision to make. Everyone would worship God as their creator. Some would call that belief in God, 'faith.' Therefore, a 'proof' can never happen. Ultimately, Atheism is 'fanatical' because it is based on faith because the central hypothesis cannot be proved.

The GOD Delusion
What a disappointment. I was expecting a serious argument that would challenge belief in God. The book is full of sarcasm, patronizing conjecture, anecdotal reports and straw man agruments. I was expecting more from a man of science. These are the same arguments that he accuses his debunkers of using.

I don't know if Thomas Jefferson was an atheist or not. Why are his beliefs significant to the argument? There may be high churchmen who hold their own faith in contempt, but who are they? Not one name is named. If the book of Judas is not part of the christian cannon, why was is quoted as if it were?

The whole book is full of sloppy arguments. It is not worth purchasing.

Delusion? Really Mr. Dawkins?
I can accept this books implicit dogma if I could accept (with the same breathe) that naturalism was the only correct way of explaining reality. The fact of the matter is simply this- it isn't. In fact, it's in a minority. Granted, this fact gives no bearing on the truth of the matter, but may still dictate offense at Dawkins' title. Whether or not I'm religious doesn't really matter here, what does matter is the strong-arm maneuver being employed, namely, that reality must be understood through the guise of naturalism in order to bear any credence. To quote Dwight Schrute from NBC's The Office, "I know about a billion Asians who would beg to differ."

Let me put this matter straight. What we need to look at is paradigm, or specifically, your interpretation of reality. Each viewpoint must be given far playing ground at the onset, and then assessed based on how reality presents itself. Granted, this is going to weed some paradigms out rather quickly, but it will also help avoid intraparadigmatic assessments of opposing viewpoints. For example, an atheist may claim that a Christian can make God disappear by simply ceasing to believe in Him, but to a Christian, this is utter foolishness, based on the fact that their belief does not dictate His existence. To dismiss God on the basis of strict naturalism is admissible, but ultimately, a very narrow approach. If Dawkins would have taken a more philosophical approach to his work, he may have realized that an investigation into the pros and cons of each worldview (as assessed on the basis of interparadigmatic truth) would have been much more helpful.

I gave this book one star because, based on the above assessment, it proved very bias. Granted, Dawkins makes some well articulated points, but not enough to overshadow intraparadigmatic ignorance.