I just finished reading the Dawkins Delusion? Athiest Fundamentalism and the Denial of the Divine. I picked it up at the library after reading Dawkins, "The God Delusion". I promised some here that I would comment on the book, so here is a bit of a summary.
1. No surprise to say he does not agree with Dawkins in many ways, but he does agree that there are things wrong with religion. Not so much Christianity, but more Islam. Makes sense since he is a Christian.
2. One comment he makes is "Could atheism be a delusion about God?
3. "Might the God Delusion actually backfire and end up persuading people that atheism is just as intolerant, doctrinaire and disagreeable as the worst that religion can offer?
4. "The God Delusion seems more designed to reassure atheists whose faith is faltering than to engage fairly or rigourously with religious believers and others seeking for truth. (One wonders if this is because the writer is himself an atheist whose faith is faltering.)"
5. He feels that Dawkins ignores information and studies that say religion is good for people and does not do a good job of proving it is bad for people.
6. He feels that Dawkins may be doing more harm than good when it comes to moderating fanatic fringe religions and giving them even more reason to be fanatic, which the author thinks is a bad thing.
Those are some of the things pointed out in the response to the God Delusion. The author really feels that Dawkins let go of his scientific unbiased position and instead let his hatred of religion color the entire book so that it has rendered the book non-credible.
So that is the jist of it. What do people think?
1. No surprise to say he does not agree with Dawkins in many ways, but he does agree that there are things wrong with religion. Not so much Christianity, but more Islam. Makes sense since he is a Christian.
2. One comment he makes is "Could atheism be a delusion about God?
3. "Might the God Delusion actually backfire and end up persuading people that atheism is just as intolerant, doctrinaire and disagreeable as the worst that religion can offer?
4. "The God Delusion seems more designed to reassure atheists whose faith is faltering than to engage fairly or rigourously with religious believers and others seeking for truth. (One wonders if this is because the writer is himself an atheist whose faith is faltering.)"
5. He feels that Dawkins ignores information and studies that say religion is good for people and does not do a good job of proving it is bad for people.
6. He feels that Dawkins may be doing more harm than good when it comes to moderating fanatic fringe religions and giving them even more reason to be fanatic, which the author thinks is a bad thing.
Those are some of the things pointed out in the response to the God Delusion. The author really feels that Dawkins let go of his scientific unbiased position and instead let his hatred of religion color the entire book so that it has rendered the book non-credible.
So that is the jist of it. What do people think?