Hello fellow of Cyberspace, today I want to talk about this book The God Delusion by Richard Dawkins.
Hope you like.
Title of the
book: The God Delusion
Original title: The
God Delusion
Author's name: Richard
Dawkins
ISBN:
Original
language: English
Genre: Criticism
of religion, atheism
Editorial: Tantor
Audio
Years editions:
2008
Year of Reading:
2008
Additional
Information:
I want to make
it clear that my opinion about this book and its author is not based on my
religious opinion, but on critical thinking, I understand what the writer tries
to do with his criticism, but I can see that at the same time he is trying to leave
the basis for a new organization on an international scale of which he would be
in a very high position in the organization, nothing against, but you can not
criticize the indoctrination of most religions (but he only focuses on the one
that has roots in Christianity, very convenient) but offering a new
indoctrination in atheism, instead of promoting a free thinking society.
As you read his
book you can see his resentment of God, when the biggest problem is that human
beings mask their ambitions in God's words and use religion as a tool for their
end of control.
I guess you
already know that I did not like this book, but it has been interesting to read
it.
Summary of the
book:
Atheists should
be proud and not apologetic, because atheism is proof of a healthy and
independent mind.
chap. 1. A
deeply religious non-believer
Dawkins begins
by noting that some commentators have found his enthusiasm for science almost
religious, but he asks: "Is" religion "a good word for
this?" The overwhelming complexity of nature is what he calls
"Einsteinian religion," referring to Albert Einstein's use of the word
"God" as a metaphor for the nature of the mysteries of the universe.
However, he regrets that many scientists use the word "God" in its
pantheistic and poetic sense because of the confusion this causes.
Instead, he
focuses his critique on the belief of a "supernatural creator who is
appropriate to be worshiped by us". While Dawkins has respect for
Einsteinian religion, he shows no respect for conventional religion. He
maintains that religion has been given a privileged and undeserved immunity
against criticism, citing Douglas Adams to illustrate this view:
Religion [...]
has certain ideas of what we call sacred or holy or whatever. This means that
"here you have an idea or a notion to which you are not allowed to say
anything bad about it; you just CAN NOT. Why not? Why not! If someone votes for
a match you do not agree with, you are free to discuss everything you want.
Everyone has had a discussion once, but nobody feels aggrieved about it. But,
on the other hand, if someone says to you, "I'm not going to press a light
switch one day Saturday," you have to answer: "I respect that."
Dawkins
continues with a list of examples in which religion has a privileged status,
such as the ability to gain the status of conscientious objector; the use of
euphemisms for religious conflicts; several exceptions of the law; and the
controversy of the cartoons of Muhammad.
chap. 2. The
hypothesis of God
Dawkins begins
chapter 2 describing Yahweh, the god of the Old Testament as "possibly the
most unpleasant character in all fiction. Jealous and proud of it, a mean,
unjust and implacable madman out of control, a vengeful ethnic cleaner thirsty
for blood, a misogynist, homophobic, racist, infanticide, genocidal, filicidal,
pest deliveryman, megalomaniac, sadomasochistic, capricious and malevolent
bully »
He goes on to
suggest that the hypothesis of God ("there is a supernatural and
superhuman intelligence, who deliberately designs and creates the universe and
everything in it, including us") is "a scientific hypothesis like any
other," the which should be treated with the same skepticism as any other
hypothesis.
Dawkins believes
that Stephen Jay Gould's concept of non-overlapping magistery
('non-superimposed teachings', that is, the idea that a coexistence between
science and religion is possible, since they deal with different areas), can
not be used to defend the theologians from criticism by scientists.
Unbiased
agnosticism would imply that nothing can be said about the probability of God's
existence, a position that Dawkins suggests is wrong.
Dawkins further
argues, following Bertrand Russell (1872-1970), that although "one can not
refute the existence of God" it is also impossible to disprove the
existence of the Russell Teapot, the unicorns, the Flying Spaghetti Monster and
the Perez Ratoncito. Therefore, the inability to disprove the existence of God
does not provide us with a positive reason to believe. Rather, Dawkins argues
that the duty of proof is above the defense of the existence of God.
chap. 3.
Arguments in favor of the existence of God
In chapter 3,
Dawkins focuses his attention on the main philosophical arguments in favor of
the existence of God. He discusses the "five ways" of St. Thomas
Aquinas, arguing that the first three are all based on infinite regressions and
"it is because it clearly does not mean that God provides a natural
exterminator of regressions."
He suggests that
the fourth way of Thomas Aquinas, the way of the degrees of perfection, is
"fatuous" with the aim of the surcharge objection of a
"preeminent scoundrel without equal".
Reserve the
fifth way, Way of the cosmic order, for a later discussion in the next chapter,
what he considers his definitive refutation.
It also reduces
the ontological argument of Anselm of Canterbury to a "schoolyard
language" and essentially employs the standard objections already used by
Immanuel Kant (1724-1804). He also dismisses the argument of beauty as
"not explained by its defenders."
On the argument
of religious experience, he points out that some of these are illusions due to
the strong complexity of the human mind as a simulator. On the arguments of the
Scriptures, he suggests that "the Gospels are ancient fiction" and
are historically inaccurate. On the argument of "admired religious
scientists", he affirms that they are a minority.
Regarding
Pascal's bet (if one is an atheist, but God does not exist, nothing will
happen, but if one is an atheist and God exists, one will go to hell), Dawkins
questions the assumptions that one simply decides to believe and God He rewards
faith more than virtue or the pursuit of truth, and he wonders if God would not
respect Bertrand Russell for his courageous skepticism much more than he would
respect Blaise Pascal for his evasive cowardice.
Finally it
approaches the arguments based on the Bayesian inference promoted by people
like Stephen Unwin, and sustains that these are cases of «garbage in, garbage
out»
chap. 4. Why it
is almost certain that there is no God
Dawkins states
in chapter 4 that evolution by natural selection can serve to demonstrate that
the design argument is wrong. It suggests that a hypothetical cosmic designer,
would require, even, a greater explanation that the own phenomenon that tries
to explain, and like any theory that explains the existence of the universe
must be a "crane", something equivalent to the natural selection,
before a hook hanging from the sky that merely postpones the problem. Use the
argument of improbability, for which he introduces the term "trick of the
definitive Boeing 747", to suggest that "God almost certainly does
not exist": "However, if what you try to explain through a designer
is statistically improbable, the Designer himself is even more unlikely. God is
the definitive Boeing 747 ».
The reference to
the Boeing 747 refers to an assertion (known as the "Hoyle fallacy")
made by the British astrophysicist Fred Hoyle (1915-2001): "The
probability that life originates on Earth is no greater than the probability
that A hurricane going through a scrapyard gets to assemble a Boeing 747.
"20 Dawkins objects that this argument is made by" someone who does
not understand what natural selection is. " He affirms that living
organisms have not developed in a single step, but through accumulated steps
over millions of years.
A common theme
in Dawkins' books is natural selection, which is responsible for the evolution
of life, and the apparent improbability of the complexity of life does not
imply that it is proof that it is designed by a designer. Here he encourages
this argument by presenting examples of apparent design.
Dawkins
concludes the chapter by arguing that this "trick" is a very serious
argument against the existence of God, and that he is still waiting to hear
"a theologian giving a convincing answer despite the many opportunities
and invitations to do so." Dawkins reports that Daniel Dennett called it
"an irrefutable rebuttal" dating back two centuries.
chap. 5. The
roots of religion
Chapter 5
explores the roots of religion and why religion is so ubiquitous throughout all
human cultures. Dawkins advocates that the "theory that religion is an
accidental by-product, a wrong shot of something useful." and asks if the
theory of memes, and human susceptibility to religious memes in particular, would
work to explain how religion spreads like a virus to the mind through
societies.
chap. 6. The
roots of morality: Why are we good?
In chapter 6,
Dawkins turns his attention to the issue of morality, arguing that we do not
need religion to be good. Instead, he maintains that our morality has a
Darwinian explanation: altruistic genes have been selected through the process
of our evolution and that we have natural empathy.
chap. 7. The
'Good' Book and the changing moral Zeitgeist
The next chapter
continues with the issue of morality, stating that there is a Zeitgeist moral
that continually evolves in society, often in opposition to religious morality,
which Dawkins feels is often perverted and brutalized. He gives examples of
religious morality of the Bible to illustrate what he sees as barbarism.
chap. 8. What
happens to religion? Why be so hostile?
In chapter 8,
Dawkins turns to the question of why he feels so hostile to religion, arguing
with examples in which religion rebels against science, promotes fanaticism,
encourages intolerance against homosexuals and influences society in other
negative ways.
Dawkins states
that preachers from parts of the southern United States used the Bible to
justify slavery, claiming that Africans were descendants of Abraham's sinful
son. During the Crusades, "pagans" and "heretics" who did
not convert to Christianity were murdered, and other similar examples.
chap. 9.
Childhood, abuse and how to escape from religion
One such way is
the indoctrination of children, a theme that Dawkins devotes chapter 9. He
equates the religious indoctrination of children by parents and teachers in
religious schools with a form of mental abuse.
Dawkins wants
people to be ashamed every time someone talks about a "Muslim child"
or a "Catholic child", wondering how a child can be considered
sufficiently developed to have an independent view of the cosmos and the place
of humanity at. In contrast, Dawkins notes that no reasonable person would
speak of a "Marxist child" or a "Republican child."
chap. 10. A much
needed vacuum?
The last chapter
asks that whatever the religion, in spite of the problems alleged above, it
fills "a very necessary gap", giving comfort and inspiration to the
people in need.
According to
Dawkins, these needs are best met by non-religious ways, such as philosophy and
science. He argues that an atheistic world view serves to reaffirm life in a
way that religion, with its unsatisfactory "answers" to the mysteries
of life, can never be.
Appendix
An appendix of
useful organizations and addresses for those who "need support to escape
religion", by countries.
