Richard Dawkins - The God Delusion

[Mercifull]

Now i'm not really much of a fiction reader, I dont really read much full stop to be honest but I do like controversial subjects especially on religion and ESPECIALLY by the great and amazing Richard Dawkins.

Richard is probably most famous for The Selfish Gene but his latest book entitled The God Delusion delves more into the psycological reasons why people belive such things rather than in The Selfish Gene he describes why biologically and genetically God does not need to exist. In the book Dawkins argues that religion is a "delusion", which he defines as "a persistent false belief held in the face of strong contradictory evidence".

It is a very athistic book but rightly so and is intriguing reading for both atheist/agnostics and theists alike but also very good reading for someone perhaps questioning their own faith. Thumbs up from me (even if i am a tad bias ^_^)

[hudd]

Well, kinda off topic but, it is my firm belief that people will not realize it really doesn't matter if God exists or not. Unless aliens land right into Times Square and say "What the f*ck are you doing?" (Eddie Izzard voice would be better)

Surely its ironic that I can see "Godless" and "the God Delusion" in our school Bookstore's bestseller list..

[Spencerian]

Apply a simple Kantian logic.


If I adhere to God's commandments AND God exists
...Then I will receive an expected boon.
If I adhere to God's commandments BUT God does not exist
...then I will have treated others fairly despite no long-term benefit.
If I don't adhere to God's commandments AND God exists
...then you are in serious trouble. :)


Dawkin's logic fails because faith is not definable nor provable through science. Both can find Truth, but go about that in different means. Sociology shows that even isolated tribes of people have an inherent need to search for its creators. Religion isn't so much taught initially but is programmed in the human psyche. Perhaps that's the proof he's looking for.

[Mercifull]

Ahh Pascal's Wager... Of course I would argue that the "better to believe than not" ideas is flawed because there can be only one correct choice out of the hundreds of religions and gods. Which one do you choose to believe in? Not believing has got just as much chance as picking the right one. If you follow Islam and you are wrong then that's just as bad as not believing in anything at all. Then there's the problem in only following a belief in order to not go to "hell". Perhaps God looks badly on people unless they have true faith.

There are lots of ways to counter pascals wager so I wont go into details here because its going a bit off topic but here's a Wikipedia link which explains it better than me http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pascal%27s_Wager

[Spencerian]

Always thought this was Kant, but I'm now more informed. Thanks.

I like the atheist's wager on it, which, by its logic, performs the same objective as Pascal's wager--to do good in life.

One argument I like to throw out to the existence of God. Has a human made anything that lasts indefinitely? The universe is filled with such things. :)

[Serenity]

The universe has existed for a finite time and there is no proof that things in it last forever. Planets, stars, star systems, whole galaxies. They can be - and are - destroyed. No star can last forever, because one day they will go nova. All that just happens on timescale that's nearly incomprehensible to us.

[BklynBruzer]

For me, when it comes to god, the burden of proof is on the church.

On the other hand, I hate Richard Dawkins.

[Mercifull]

Boo hiss, I love him, he's a legend. Twice I missed meeting him by less than 24 hours :( Once at a book signing which I didnt know about and went the day after to the bookstore. The second time I was at Glastonbury where he had been the day before filming for his new TV documentary to be shown soon.

[BklynBruzer]

He gives the rest of us atheists a bad name.

[Mercifull]

I don't think he does. Why exactly dont you like him?

[BklynBruzer]

I don't think he does. Why exactly dont you like him?

I don't like him because he's the Atheist equivalent of an Evangelical Christian.

I'm an atheist, but people pushing Atheism on other people is just as bad as Christians pushing Christianity on others.

[Spencerian]

Zealotry is never a good thing.

It's Christianity's edict to find others to join. But many Christians do give Christanity a bad name because of their pushiness and intolerance to others who either have another faith or no faith at all. To paraphrase, Jesus's instructions to his disciples were to visit, inquire and to teach if appropriate, but to leave without comment if there was resistance, not to continue trying to debate or argue to those who don't want to hear.

Here in the States, a Christian sect (I call them this because of their intolerance to others as well as how far off they have branched from the common principles found in most Christian denominations) are the Jehovah's Witnesses. In particular, they evangelize by soliciting at homes, a practice that annoys me, although I am now "armed" now with one message when I receive a visit: "Peace be with you. I am a member of the Catholic Church." I don't try to piss them off, but I let them know they are wasting their time. I have a similar feeling to the LDS Church, but that's another story.

As a (new) Catholic, the past three years have been very enriching, but my journey is a personal one that very few may understand, and I acknowledge that. While I don't see the logic of atheism (given some points of science that note things that shouldn't exist but do), I have more faith that atheists who keep to the side of good will discover an interpretation of Truth in whatever form hits them in the fullness of time.

But people like Dawkins and fundamentalist Christians who curse and belittle others because they don't precisely believe what they espouse through their commercialism or zeal or philosophy are just trying to piss people off for the sake of profit--a lot of people. These people will get what they asked for.

In my opinion, anyone that understands the significance of this Shakespearean quote from Hamlet will acknowledge that faith (or lack of it) has a place in the world, even if they don't grasp it.

"There is more to heaven and earth (...) that is dreamt of in your philosophy."