Is it delusion of “The God delusion”?

[paarsurrey]

Is it delusion of “The God delusion”?
“The God delusion” is a book written by Richard Dawkins as a lay man.
Is it based on Revelation or on Science? Or it consists on the delusion of the author, please.
Does one agree? Please

Regards

 

[Guy Threepwood]

Is it delusion of “The God delusion”?
“The God delusion” is a book written by Richard Dawkins as a lay man.
Is it based on Revelation or on Science? Or it consists on the delusion of the author, please.
Does one agree? Please

Regards

As probably the most prominent evolutionist in the world (after Darwin), this was his best selling book

That certainly tells us something about the driving ideology behind evolution, as opposed to being supported on it's own merits by actual objective scientific evidence

 

[Augustus]

It's just a polemic. An average piece of advocacy.

 

[LuisDantas]

I don't think most theists realize how much of an "inner memo" the God Delusion is.

It does not so much attempt to argue as to remind us who are already atheists of what we think.

 

[Unveiled Artist]

Is it delusion of “The God delusion”?
“The God delusion” is a book written by Richard Dawkins as a lay man.
Is it based on Revelation or on Science? Or it consists on the delusion of the author, please.
Does one agree? Please

Regards

Actually, Why We Believe in God(s) by Dr. Anderson Thompson a better book. It talks about different reasons why believe for example the need for a care taker among others. Its easy to read and good for others who arent into the evolution-stuff. Its more about psycbology of belief not proof to disbelieve.

God isnt a delusion. Hes a superstition. Based on a belief that cant be proven.

 

[IndigoStorm]

I may be wrong, but I believe that earthlings with serious problems often turn to religion.

Many inmates of prisons will at their parole hearing claim that that have found god and are born again.

But once they are released they go right back to their life of crime, only much wiser now cos they were taught new tricks while in prison.

 

[YmirGF]

I liked the book and thought he did a pretty good job overall. That it became a best-seller was just gravy.
It is his own opinion, backed up by his scientific background. Theists would be well served if they actually read it.

 

[Sunstone]

The God Delusion is a largely unoriginal repetition of established facts and well known arguments against -- mainly -- the Abrahamic religions. It's main value seems to me to lie in the fact that it's an easy read that makes the ideas it presents accessible to a wide audience, as evidenced by its best seller status.

The book should not be all that controversial. Miskotte, the Dutch theologian, once said, "Atheists are our natural allies because they ask the right questions". The God Delusion asks many of the right questions, and I think if it's more severe critics were a bit more foresighted than they tend to be, they'd be able to see the advantage to them of that.

 

[Sunstone]

As probably the most prominent evolutionist in the world (after Darwin), this was his best selling book

That certainly tells us something about the driving ideology behind evolution, as opposed to being supported on it's own merits by actual objective scientific evidence

That's right up there with "the US faked the moon landings" and "Reptilian space aliens disguised as world leaders are in control of the planet earth".

 

[lewisnotmiller]

Is it delusion of “The God delusion”?
“The God delusion” is a book written by Richard Dawkins as a lay man.
Is it based on Revelation or on Science? Or it consists on the delusion of the author, please.
Does one agree? Please

Regards

Meh, haven't read it and don't plan to.
I know that adds nothing to the OP, but thought it worth reminding everyone that atheism isn't doctrinal.

 

[paarsurrey]

Meh, haven't read it and don't plan to.
I know that adds nothing to the OP, but thought it worth reminding everyone that atheism isn't doctrinal.

Atheism needs no knowledge necessarily, as it is not a requirement for belonging to Atheism.
Is it so, please?
Regards

 

[LuisDantas]

Atheism needs no knowledge necessarily, as it is not a requirement for being an Atheist.
Regards

Indeed.

 

[paarsurrey]

The God Delusion is a largely unoriginal repetition of established facts and well known arguments against -- mainly -- the Abrahamic religions. It's main value seems to me to lie in the fact that it's an easy read that makes the ideas it presents accessible to a wide audience, as evidenced by its best seller status.

The book should not be all that controversial. Miskotte, the Dutch theologian, once said, "Atheists are our natural allies because they ask the right questions". The God Delusion asks many of the right questions, and I think if it's more severe critics were a bit more intellectually mature than they tend to be, they'd be able to see the advantage to them of that.

Atheism "they ask the right questions"

It is the most easiest thing to be on the side of the asking questions. I does not mean that no-god position/no-position is right?
Dawkins should have provided positive, reasonable and justifiable reasons/arguments.
Regards

 

[paarsurrey]

I liked the book and thought he did a pretty good job overall. That it became a best-seller was just gravy.
It is his own opinion, backed up by his scientific background. Theists would be well served if they actually read it.

"It is his own opinion"

And it remains a wrong opinion. The book is not a book of science. Is it? Please
Regards

 

[paarsurrey]

Actually, Why We Believe in God(s) by Dr. Anderson Thompson a better book. It talks about different reasons why believe for example the need for a care taker among others. Its easy to read and good for others who arent into the evolution-stuff. Its more about psycbology of belief not proof to disbelieve.

God isnt a delusion. Hes a superstition. Based on a belief that cant be proven.

"God isnt a delusion"

Right.
Regards

 

[lewisnotmiller]

Atheism needs no knowledge necessarily, as it is not a requirement for belonging to Atheism.
Is it so, please?
Regards

True enough.

 

[Sunstone]

Dawkins should have provided positive, reasonable and justifiable reasons/arguments.

He does. Dawkins seldom departs from well establish criticisms of the Abrahamic faiths. Almost nothing he says is novel or unusual. Virtually everything he says has been said before, and has withstood the test of time. Some of what he says dates back to Meslier or even back to the ancient Greeks. There's room for honest disagreement with Dawkins, but it is misleading to say that his arguments are not tested, reasonable, and in at least some cases, justifiable.

Personally, I found The God Delusion boring because it's mostly a recanting of old, familiar facts and arguments, but I can see how it would be quite interesting to someone who was not so familiar with those facts and arguments.

 

[Sunstone]

Theists would be well served if they actually read it.

At the very least, reading it might deepen and enrich their theism. The risk, of course, is that they might become atheists.

 

[Debater Slayer]

I don't think Dawkins's arguments against theism are usually based on scientific facts; he seems to have a rather black-and-white view of religion at times, and science itself doesn't say anything about the question of whether a god exists.

Over the years, though, I've followed a lot of Middle Eastern atheist groups, activists, etc., online and talked to a lot of Arab atheists as well, and I have to say that a lot of people—myself included—underestimate or underestimated just how much influence Dawkins and The God Delusion have had in many parts of the world. A lot of the Arab atheists I've had the chance to talk to have cited him as the main reason they started doubting their religious beliefs, so I'd say the book definitely has a reach farther than merely being a bestselling opinion of its author.

 

[paarsurrey]

I don't think Dawkins's arguments against theism are usually based on scientific facts; he seems to have a rather black-and-white view of religion at times, and science itself doesn't say anything about the question of whether a god exists.

Over the years, though, I've followed a lot of Middle Eastern atheist groups, activists, etc., online and talked to a lot of Arab atheists as well, and I have to say that a lot of people—myself included—underestimate or underestimated just how much influence Dawkins and The God Delusion have had in many parts of the world. A lot of the Arab atheists I've had the chance to talk to have cited him as the main reason they started doubting their religious beliefs, so I'd say the book definitely has a reach farther than merely being a bestselling opinion of its author.

"science itself doesn't say anything about the question of whether a god exists."

Sure, "existence of G-d" is not a subject of science. The book has a misleading affect on the common people, but contains no positive justification of "no-god" position/non-position.

Regards