Don't you just love a great story well told?
They don't call Dawkins "Darwin's Rottweiler" for nothing, he truly destroys "Design Theory". His tone is fervent nearly the point of hostility. Agnostics don't start religious wars, so why the call them "Namby Pamby Fence Sitters?" The good: The voice and timing of the narrators are excellent. He notes how we "pick and choose" selected passages(cited chapter & verse) and ignore the evil ones (allowing you to kill your children for talking back). His argument that our morals have developed independent of The Bible is powerful. He has a point that inculcating children into abstract religion is nonsensical. The bad: He never acknowledges the simple truth, pointed out by others: 'You can't prove a negative'. His 'meme' theory was a tad confusing. Oddly this scholar resorts to quoting a comedian's book to help make two of his points. Finally, I would like to hear far more Bible absurdities than the four or so that both Sweeny and Dawkins chose as the most egregious examples of evil documented and apparently condoned by The Bible. (Such as the avid consent of Lot for his daughters to be raped.)Surely there must be many more, in such a long book, to quote to the radically religious that it is NOT quite the "Good Book" they claim. If you don't want to delve so technically in non-belief get Julia Sweeny's "Letting Go of God" instead. It is probably more persuasive in its brevity and humor and covers nearly all the main topics than 100 pages of Dawkins undoing the logic of those who have "proven God's existence". Lastly, he fails to address the issue that IF there IS a God he/she/it would NEVER let us PROVE God's existence because that knowledge would destroy our free will. A certain threat of a Hell held over our head would change anyone's behavior. If humans create good everywhere with no threat we achieve God's aim, Heaven on Earth.
There are plenty of reviews detailing this book. Due to so many who will be disturbed by it, I'd like to focus my review more on cautioning the reader in certain respects.
This book represents an ideology; meaning that it seeks to explain everything in the world in light of a stringent set of dogma - the main one being Natural Selection. To make a somewhat crude analogy, Natural Selection is "God" for Dawkins and Charles Darwin is its prophet.
Ideologies have always been rigorously defended, almost as if the ideology was the lifeblood of the defender. The person is a "Christian" an "Atheist" an "Agnostic" and so on. And this is what gets people into trouble. The identification with the ideology, by default, blinds the person to anything else that might truly serve him. It stops him from asking true questions instead of questions that are merely restatements of what he already believes.
Like all ideologies that catch on and have a lasting effect, Darwinism, too, will eventually fade and pass away. In the interim however, it will certainly have a profound effect upon society and the world in general. Some of those effects will be beneficial and some, I have little doubt, will bring unimagined horrors to mankind in the same way Christianity has.
If anything is consistent in this world, it is the mind. It operates in a congruent fashion. Actions spring from beliefs and are inspired in no other way. Yet the believer, the ideologue and defender of those beliefs, seldom evaluates the darker side because he is too preoccupied with making himself "right" and "good" while at the same time, trying to make everyone who doesn't agree with him as "wrong" and "evil."
Like a true ideologue, Dawkins has in no way presented the darker side of Darwinism. He's convinced it's a "consciousness raiser."
This could have been a amusing book. Mr. Dawkins locks himself in the box of a purely scientific perspective and then attempts to deal with a subject almost entirely outside of his particular box. He is then forced to create psuedo scientific methods to attempt to make his point.
Any humor soon is lost due to Dawkins' manifest hatred for anything and anyone spiritual or religous. This anger is so powerful that it wrecks any chance that he would have to make logical arguments.
It is very difficult to write about a subject when you can't deal with it honestly.
He should have said god can't be measured, therefore god doesn't exist.
A purpose..... this is crap as an atheist this was awful! did not prove anything and almost.... made me want to go to church. I said almost
Even though Dawkins denies it, this is a fundamentalist advocacy of atheism and "religion" of Darwinism (natural selection) as to a worldview. Although this is observable within species it breaks down transitionally as well as to the creation of the cosmos. Dawkins denies any possibility of the supernatural to explain the unexplainable but yet relies on it to allow natural selection as the first cause of creation...
Additionally this includes a "gross" misreading of the Bible, taking scripture out of context, not acknowledging the redemption of Jesus Christ and abrogation of the old testament theocracy laws - which demonstrate the fallen, sinful nature of man and the gift of grace - forgiveness of sin (no condemnation/unmerited favor) and the imparting of righteousness through accepting Jesus Christ as Lord and Savior.
To balance these assertions I would recommend reading "Has God Spoken? Proof of God's Divine Inspiration" by Hank Hanegraaf, and other resources online
False religions have long been around and have been warned about throughout the Bible. The solution is not "religion" but "relationship" and knowledge of the Bible and Jesus Christ. This age of scientific enlightenment continues to support the inspired word of God.
Indie filmmaker who loves listening to books on audio
Richard is far and away one of the smartest people on the planet
No, in fact, it's turned me on to more Richard Dawkins books.
The material is so deep and thick, I don't know if I would have been able to read it as a book. Hearing them speak the words and place emphasis where it needed to be and pause when it needed it was invaluable.
Intelligence over fantasy
I have been married to the same wonderful wife for over 27 years and have two adult children, out of the house, that are married, working, and doing well.
This book was all I need to listen to from Richard Dawkins.
I might listen to more of Richard Dawkins' books.
Yes, I would be willing to listen to more of Richard Dawhins and Lalla Ward's readings, they did a nice job.
The God Delusion did not have characters.
I would focus on what to believe in and not so much what not to believe in.
Richard Dawkins attempts to systematically dispel any and all rationalizations for believing in a supreme being. I believe it is a valiant attempt, but the pure act of trying to convince others that there is no god is, to me, part of a religion in and of itself.
I do not believe in a god for two main reasons: 1) It makes me feel better than believing that there is a god, and 2) The idea allows people to avoid thinking on their own and simply assign anything they do not understand to something no one can explain. But if I tried to convince others they should bend to my way of "thinking" (believing), I feel that is the same as any other commonly accepted religion in existence.
The story itself was good, although not compelling.
The performance itself was very good....however, just illustrated my point further.
Yes - I enjoy hearing arguments for unprovable assumptions.
For me yes, I have a busy schedule and a long commute. Audio books allow me much more time to read(listen).
I found Mr. Dawkins does what very few people do. He gives you information from both sides of the arguments and allows the information to make the argument not the other way around. (Michael Shermers Baloney Detection kit)
Ms. Ward does a fabulous job, I love her tones and sarcasms. She adds great dimension and personality to the reading. It is very much like having a conversation with 2 people over a coffee.
Over and over Mr. Dawkins opened my eyes to how I had been spoon fed only the tastiest bits of the bible and religion. I have never been a person of great faith and now I understand why.
I think it would be quite something to meet Mr. Dawkins. I intend to seek out more of his work. I will also be trying to see or hear any of his interviews that are available. What an inspiring mentor.