Richard Dawkins The God Delusion: A Theist Response
-
-
2.2 • 130 Ratings
-
Publisher Description
In this interesting piece; the author argues that Richard Dawkins has failed in his attempts to put a good rational argument for atheism.
The professor uses the rather feeble approach of setting up straw men only to dismantle them with great relish. These repeated mischaracterizations of faith do the atheist camp no favours. All it does is betray a vitriolic personal agenda.
It is argued that The God delusion has helped to perpetuate two major modern myths. First that religion and science contradict each other and second that Theists are unthinking drones. If Aristotle, Augustine, Plotinus, Aquinas, Descartes, Kant, Einstein, Collins and thousands of other genius's are unthinking drones -this would make Richard Dawkins intelligence amoeba like.
A rational case for Theism is proposed.
Customer Reviews
Was hoping for more
The author made valid points about Dawkins' militant ideas, but appeared reluctant to offer much of a detailed defense. Multiple times he claims in one form or another that Dawkins doesn't "understand"...well feel free to enlighten us before jumping to your next point!
Heard this a million times
You know those people who use the bible to "prove" other things in the bible? It's like trying to explain the definition of the word 'significant' why saying it's the opposite of insignificant. If you want to prove a point, you have to do it like you would in a scientific experiment. All other points being accepted, pointing towards yours, proving it to be true. Have you ever seen that Allstate commercial where the lady says everything on the internet is true because that's what they heard on the internet? This whole "response" might as well be considered null and void.
Short and pointless
To put this quite bluntly this book is 9 pages long, and it feels like any good that came from it was less than one of the pages.
The author professes to be a magician and mentalist. His job is to mentally manipulate people for money. Sounds like a typical church mentality. He claims to knock down Dawkins arguments, but from what I can see in reading it, he pulls in a lot of conjecture and very little fact. To a rational argument, this reads as an emotional response.
I feel, after reading through this that the author is trying to coat tail his title onto Dawkins name and book, to the point where his book has almost the same title. Also I don't think 9 pages constitutes a book, at least not one with any substantial information, that is for sure.
I would just avoid it if you want, or read it, it won't take long. There is just nothing really convincing in here, unless you are of a faith, then I'm sure you could promote this as the next chapter of whatever religious fiction you call home.