The ExChristian.Net blog exists for the express purpose of encouraging those who have decided to leave Christianity behind. This area contains articles sent in between January 2001 and February 2010. To view recent posts, click on the "Home" link.
I'm definitely going to have to find a copy of that book.
"...a very uneven collection of scriptural ridicule, amateur philosophy, historical and contemporary horror stories, anthropological speculations and cosmological scientific arguments...Dawkins is operating mostly outside the range of his scientific expertise" (Thomas Nagel, in The New Republic 10/23/2006)
For a more accurate representation of The God Delusion than that offered by Anonymous' snippet of Thomas Nagel's nonsense, please visit RichardDawkins.net. Incidentally, the site managers there put up every review they find including the negative ones. I seem to recall the review 'Nony referenced being posted there, but I can't find it. Unfortunately, the full text at The New Republic is a subscription-only item, but it can be found here. I've sent an email to the RD website to let them know about it just in case I was mistaken.I'm still in the middle of reading Dawkins' book, and while Dawkins may be writing more as a man than a scientist lately, I can honestly say it's rivalled only by Sam Harris' work. Most of the negative reviews miss the point entirely, raise irrelevant issues, or mischaracterize the book (and the man) which should come as no surprise to those who are familiar with the antics of religious writers. There are also a few atheists who criticize his work too, but tend to focus on Dawkins' abrasiveness rather than content.At any rate, thanks for the reminder 'Nony. I don't know what you think you've accomplished, but you have my gratitude.
Christians will try to dispute Richard Dawkins, but it doesnt matter.. the anti-religion anti-dogma movement is ON! science is pissed off and tired of fighting these stupid dogmatic philosophers. Science is going to lead the way to a science savy public, and the public supports and encourages the science movement.Looking forward to the day we can toss Christianity into the heaping pile of trash of gods who have lost their usefulness.Richard, Sam, and Dannel have armed the public with usefull truth.. empowering us with excellent dialog to debate and demoralize the abusive dogmatic religiosity (which is easy to do because religion is morally bankrupt)But, the most important thing these authors did for me was to let me know that my thinking was right all along. Even when i was called insane and part of the lunatic fringe when i denyed that there was/is a personal god who loves me.43 years of that bullshit shoved down my throat.happy happy times for me.
that jeremy paxman is a bit of a sarcastic git eh? I think he probably agrees with dawkins though, he tends to be rather pointed with all his guests, regardless of who they are. funnily enough I saw a program with him discussing Intelligent design being brought into british schools by a company called "truth in science" and he was *marginally* more sarcastic to the ID'er than to the rationalist.
Very poor interview - Paxman used to have a reputation as one of the more abrasive interviewers in the UK, but he's obviously mellowing with age, as here he just sucks up to Dawkins and lets him get away with one personal opinion after another, stated as if it were a fact, e.g. "The universe would be a very different kind of universe with such a being". No question, (e.g. "In what way?") or challenge from Paxman - the only questions he asks nowadays are ones where the answer is printed on a card in front of him, as quizmaster on a show called University Challenge!
True, but Dawkins personal opinions are derived from his scientific knowledge, not really any different than what a religious person does when they start going off about heaven and hell and the rest. It's their person al opinion, based on biblical knowledge. I'll take a level headed scientific opinion over a level headed biblical every time, because even level headed religiosity is nonsensical, nevermind fundamentalist.
Dawkins last comment was interesting to me. "We wern't put here to be comfortable." The phrase "put here" implies a higher being to me.
Dawkins last comment was interesting to me. "We wern't put here to be comfortable." The phrase "put here" implies a higher being to me.That's a good point, Anon 6:27 PM....so maybe Zeus does exist after all?
First my dear sir Dr. Dawkins may I congratulete you for your interesting book, "The God Delusional". I am reading it and I recomended to all non-believers, doubtfuls and believers. Even believers may find something to think about. However the congratulations must end, sir. What you are saying is old enough. Nothing new. Now I agree that:1. Religions tend to be violent.2. Are dogmatic.3. Are bigotted.Now, sir, aren't we lowering ourselves adopting their same attitudes when proposing "atheism"?And believers, Dr. Dawkins, are not monsters or whatever. I have plenty of friends among them. Even Muslims I find them good company. Islamophobic I am not. It is one thing to propose atheism, I don't mind. Is another promoting bigotry against believers. That I am not, Dr. Dawkins. And I fear you are promoting it. A No-No, sir.
Post a Comment