The God Delusion Review: My Takeaway Thoughts
It’s tough to write a book that challenges God’s existence without inviting scorn, accusations of bigotry and a flash mob of fundamentalist believers. It’s for that reason that I admire Richard Dawkins, first of all, for even having the courage to send The God Delusion to print.
Released in 2006 to bestselling acclaim – and by that effect, religious alarm – The God Delusion is a merciless attack on religion as a system of faith, moral principle and twisted ill-reason.
You can tell that the book has found its mark simply by counting the number of responses from theologists. Dawkins is highly renowned as one of the leading voices of atheism, not to mention his work promoting evolution theory. This will surely read as his most abrasive book, and will not please the apologists.
Whether you enjoy The God Delusion, or come to rip out the pages in disgust, will greatly depend on your existing beliefs. I have long considered myself an agnostic. I can’t remember a time where I’ve entertained the idea of believing in a God, but I’ve always taken the lazy path. If I can’t prove it, where’s the harm in sitting on the fence?
To a degree, reading Dawkins’ excellently crafted rhetoric has shifted me closer to fully fledged atheism, whatever such a title means. He makes a point that what we call ‘agnosticism’ is flawed by our very own selective bias. How can we justify sitting on the fence over the existence of God, when we have no problem removing all doubt if the question is rephrased to “Do you believe in tooth fairies and the Flying Spaghetti Monster?”
With no evidence to suggest a definitive answer, should our beliefs not be shaped towards the probability of each instance instead? Dawkins then suggests that the probability that God does or doesn’t exist, crucially, is not equal.
It’s here where I find it difficult to argue with the points he sets forward.
Many people consider themselves to be agnostic because they address the issue using a probability scale of 50/50. Either God exists, or he doesn’t. While it’s not possible to present absolutist evidence one way or the other in 2012, should we also remain agnostic towards Flying Spaghetti Monsters and tooth fairies? Most of us, using perfectly reasonable logic, would discount such ideas as teetering on the canyon of insanity.
Perhaps the most cutting passage in all of The God Delusion begs the question that atheists love to ask: if a faithful Muslim lives according to the Quran, and a faithful Christian abides by the Bible, how can they both be assured of a place in Heaven? In order for one religion to be right, all others must be wrong.
This is the single greatest stumbling block of religion. For all the “My faith is better than yours” rhetoric that we’re told to ignore in the name of political correctness, the extremists are right. Clearly, one religion has to be better, and has to be built on sounder logic, with the correct morals and principles in tact. Dawkins slices through this moral dilemma and places a cherry on top with an unanswerable passage:
“The fact that orbiting teapots and tooth fairies are undisprovable is not felt, by any reasonable person, to be the kind of fact that settles any interesting argument. None of us feels an obligation to disprove any of the millions of far-fetched things that a fertile or facetious imagination might dream up. I have found it an amusing strategy, when asked whether I am an atheist, to point out that the questioner is also an atheist when considering Zeus, Apollo, Amon Ra, Mithras, Baal, Thor, Wotan, the Golden Calf and the Flying Spaghetti Monster. I just go one god further.”
Richard Dawkins, The God Delusion.
The God Delusion is littered with enough logical fallacies to have agnostics rushing to update their religious preferences on Facebook, while believers spit with rage at the blasphemy of it all. To say that some might find the issues touched upon a little divisive is to put it breathtakingly lightly. Dawkins is positively sneering as he tears in to quotes from creationism’s most revered figures. You can sense the relish as he puts a minor truckload of contradictions and religious fallacies to the sword.
He is particular scathing in his attack on religious scripture. The Bible, to Dawkins, is a terrible book to derive our morals from. And so he also denounces that a world without religion would be a great step forward. One look at the current conflicts in the world and I would be inclined to agree.
He demands an answer to the question: is The Bible symbolic, or is it to be taken literally? The end game is that it doesn’t really matter. He savages both interpretations with equal venom. By this point, I found myself sympathizing with the author’s every thought – particularly on the subjects of ‘Moderate Islam’ and infant indoctrination. Dawkins believes forcibly raising a child to inherit his parents’ religion is wrong and paramount to child abuse.
It would be easy to flick through The God Delusion and judge the sentiment as that of relentless anti-religion spite. No doubt, many theologists have chosen to attack it as such. Personally, I see it as less of an attack on God (how can you attack what you don’t believe to exist?) and more of an eye-opener to the sheer wonder of evolution and natural improbability. For all of Dawkins’ ill feeling towards religion, he details the majestic engine behind Darwinism with equal passion in the opposite direction.
We are all miracles, for no other reason than that we are here. Extreme improbability is evident in every single one of us. We could have been born in to any given generation, or not born at all. The fact that we’re alive in an era where science is breaking down the barriers to explain our origin – that’s pretty incredible. It doesn’t take a religious diploma to be blown away by the sheer power of Now.
Unfortunately, it’s a sign of the times that negative criticism of The God Delusion will hinge on the beliefs that have been offended, and not the logic being put forward. I wish I could say that reading this book will shed some light on how we came to be, but you can only lead a horse to water. Dawkins has put forward some of the clearest rhetoric yet for his beliefs, and I highly recommend you grab the book, regardless of your religious disposition.
Liked This Post?
- Thanks for reading Filthy Rich Mind. We’d love to hear your thoughts, and have you back again. Please feel free to subscribe to the Filthy Rich Mind RSS feed for lifestyling tips and tricks. You can also follow us on Twitter or like the brand new Facebook page!
Thanks for going back and forth about almost, well, nothing… You confirmed your beliefs with a book that you already agreed with before you picked it up. Cool.
The author and his views: I find it tough to believe somebody trying to force/convince me to believe anything.
The subject matter: all “God” principles are the same no matter what book you read. Believe in the principles, not the figures.
The book altered my beliefs from mild agnosticism to atheism. How is that the same as confirming them?
I find it interesting that you don’t like being forced or convinced to take on beliefs. Do you blanket reject anything that doesn’t fit alongside your current thought patterns? That’s precisely the kind of logic that the book attacks.
The principles that you mention are anything but the same. Their interpretation seems to vary from region to region. A Muslim and a Christian can’t possibly line-up their belief systems and hope to reach the conclusion that both are right.
In response to your question: Do you blanket reject anything that doesn’t fit alongside your current thought patterns?
No, but again – if you try to sell me a view that I have no interest in… I’m likely not buying. Which is why this book would not interest me in the first place.
My comments were based on your post, nothing more. I have no interest in the book, or the author.
Do unto others as you would want done to you. God or not, we can’t control what we know nothing about. Do your best, and treat others well, if you can. If not, steer clear and spend your valuable time with more productive endeavors.
That’s fine if the book is not suitable for you, Brian. But one look at the comments on Amazon shows that while it has attracted criticism from religious followers, it has also been a persuasive success with many agnostics.
There are many people who have picked up TGD without strong convictions, or strong beliefs, and it has opened their eyes to a very profound meaning in life that has nothing to do with religion or spirituality. For those people, I recommend it as a must-read.