Just got The God Delusion

[MilesTailsPrower]

Went to the library today and checked out "The God Delusion" I was actually amazed it was in the library at all. Could anybody tell how good the book is? Because I'm doing stuff for my birthday today and I plan on reading it tonight, it's either my AP reading assignment or "The God Delusion".

[reverendjeremiah]

I wasnt impressed by it. Yes, it was a good book, but it was a rehash on moest everything I already knew.

[Justtristo]

Went to the library today and checked out "The God Delusion" I was actually amazed it was in the library at all. Could anybody tell how good the book is? Because I'm doing stuff for my birthday today and I plan on reading it tonight, it's either my AP reading assignment or "The God Delusion".

While it is not a bad book and a lot what Dawkins discusses I would agree with. However Dawkins as brilliant of a biologist he is, is at best a first year philosophy student.

[The Magic Pudding]

I think it is a good book, it's probably a rehash of the thoughts of Grug the caveman, which he artfully depicted on his cave wall, but this doesn't detract from its worth.
Unfortunately Grug was killed before completing his tour to promote his God He Not There cave art. Most sources blame Kong The Prophet of God, but Kongans still maintain the rock was thrown by god. They even claim the blessed can descry god's thumb print on the holy relic Smitos, Smiter of False Bastards.

[DeistPaladin]

I've been meaning to do a video explaining deism to Dr. Dawkins. He seems to be relying on the dictionary too much, the same dictionary that also gets atheism wrong.

[The Grand Nudger]

Good to know I'm not the only one. He seems to make for good soundbytes, again biology is his thing. Not sure I'd rate him as a first rate writer either. Even after all that, still a good book, worth the read.

[Rev. Rye]

Went to the library today and checked out "The God Delusion" I was actually amazed it was in the library at all. Could anybody tell how good the book is? Because I'm doing stuff for my birthday today and I plan on reading it tonight, it's either my AP reading assignment or "The God Delusion".

Well, I suppose that, of the "four horsemen," he's probably one of the least radical, and I respect him for that. I discovered that book shortly after I became an atheist, so I suppose that it's a reason I hold the book in a high regard. That said, don't be too surprised if you end up thinking it doesn't tell you anything you didn't already know.

[theVOID]

I wasnt impressed by it. Yes, it was a good book, but it was a rehash on moest everything I already knew.

At least someone agrees with me, I though the book was rather bad - Dawkins is great when he deals with Evolution and Secularism but on everything else, especially addressing the philosophical arguments for the existence of God, he does terribly.

[Minimalist]

Probably because those "philosophical arguments" are pretty fucking stupid to begin with.

[theVOID]

So the fact that Dakwins gets these 'stupid' arguments so completely backwards must suggest he's a bit of an idiot too, right? I mean if they're so obviously 'stupid' he's really got no excuse for failing to represent them accurately and then making arguments against his own straw men that still don't work... In some of his arguments it's literally like an open invitation to theists to "refute this bullshit" and seeing as how bad his philosophical arguments are even a half-ass apologist can deal with a great number of them with ease.

Far from being 'pretty fucking stupid' a great many of them are complicated, well thought out and are even intellectually impressive - Some of them when tackled honestly do in fact raise the prior probability of a God relative to alternative explanations, lending a degree of credibility to the general idea - None of them manage to establish existence and seeing as there is no strong evidence the prior probability is often all they have to work with, but as far as improving the debate on metaphysical, mental, experiential and conceptual issues many theist philosophers, especially Plantinga and Swinburne in my view, have done a great service to philosophy.

Hell, even William Craig manages to fucking destroy the like of Hitchens and Harris on conceptual and philosophical issues - As evinced by the debates he had with both of them - and Craig with his KCA (which is NOT one of the impressive arguments) isn't even near the quality of Plantinga.