The God delusion

<!--[if gte mso 9]><xml> <w:WordDocument> <w:View>Normal</w:View> <w:Zoom>0</w:Zoom> <w:Compatibility> <w:BreakWrappedTables /> <w:SnapToGridInCell /> <w:WrapTextWithPunct /> <w:UseAsianBreakRules /> </w:Compatibility> <w:BrowserLevel>MicrosoftInternetExplorer4</w:BrowserLevel> </w:WordDocument> </xml><![endif]--> <!-- /* Style Definitions */ p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal {mso-style-parent:""; margin:0in; margin-bottom:.0001pt; mso-pagination:widow-orphan; font-size:12.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman"; mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman";} @page Section1 {size:8.5in 11.0in; margin:1.0in 1.25in 1.0in 1.25in; mso-header-margin:.5in; mso-footer-margin:.5in; mso-paper-source:0;} div.Section1 {page:Section1;} --> <!--[if gte mso 10]> <style> /* Style Definitions */ table.MsoNormalTable {mso-style-name:"Table Normal"; mso-tstyle-rowband-size:0; mso-tstyle-colband-size:0; mso-style-noshow:yes; mso-style-parent:""; mso-padding-alt:0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt; mso-para-margin:0in; mso-para-margin-bottom:.0001pt; mso-pagination:widow-orphan; font-size:10.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman";} </style> <![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml> <o:shapedefaults v:ext="edit" spidmax="1026" /> </xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml> <o:shapelayout v:ext="edit"> <o:idmap v:ext="edit" data="1" /> </o:shapelayout></xml><![endif]-->

As an open-minded Christian, I make a point to listen to opposing views.  It was disappointing to find that such an eminent scientist resorts to childish name-calling and condescending sneering to make his points. By the time I got to middle school I new that making nasty broad generalizations about people one doesn’t know is logically invalid and morally unsupportable. Bitching about religious  people is not scholarship. The irony in the fact that he thinks religious people are stupid and delusional while making the same mistakes he attributes to us seems to go right over his head. Dr. Dawkins opening theses are that since there are some great scientists who are atheists and since religious people do bad things and can be evil, there must not be a God, or some such. He glories in trotting out great scientists who did not believe.  Of course, one could make a list of who's-who of the greatest scientists and philosophers in history who did believe.  The most laughable point he makes is that since believers have done bad things, religion is dangerous (no logical correlation, logic 101 stuff.)  He loves to insist that evolution and creation are undeniably at odds.  As an evolutionary biologist Dr. Dawkins thinks that natural selection and evolution somehow make God illogical. He is in the minority of scientists within his own discipline!  Polls consistently show that solid majorities of scientists, even biologists, believe in God. He also sticks to the tired “who created the creator?” whine.  Perhaps he should be helped to understand the idea that ‘supernatural’ means ‘beyond nature’ and not within it.  He does use the word quite often.  He actually continually suggests that theist are inherently ignorant.  Another middle school generalization that is central to his entire thesis, and fatal to his credibility. I would be delighted to disprove this simply by presenting myself at his office.

If this is the brightest offering the atheist offer, faith is quite safe. There is nothing new here that hasn’t been dismissed by apologists centuries ago.  Dr. Dawkins lacks sufficient depth of philosophy competently to refute the most basic philosophical and scientific arguments for the existence of God.  It is probably futile to argue with a man who denies his own soul, but it is fun.

This book is one of several recent works critical of religion and the role it plays in modern life.  I really can't find too much fault with Dawkins' arguments although, Lord knows, there are plenty of others who have.  Mostly, it seems, they accuse Dawkins of not being sufficently versed in theology to comment knowledgably about modern religion (by which they almost always mean modern Christianity).  One wonders if they have actually read the book.  Dawkins makes it perfectly clear he thinks theology is mostly junk - just makin' stuff up - and there is no reason for a sane man to spend much time on the subject.