(November 9, 2013 at 10:53 pm)Optimistic Mysanthrope Wrote: The infamous book by Dawkins has been brought up recently in other threads and I didn't want to derail them by asking this, but here goes.
Now obviously our resident theists will probably take issue with the book, but are there any other atheists who found it to be somewhat disappointing?
As I've said elsewhere, I've been an atheist for as long as I can remember - I literally have no recollection of ever believing in god. I did the whole anti-theist thing as a teenager and I grew out of it quite a while before I hit 20 - bar a few drunken quasi-intellectual discussions/debates with a very good friend who also happens to be a lifelong atheist (in which we'd generally alternate in playing devil's advocate, so to speak). We didn't have the advantage of youtube in those days (old git alert), neither did we have forums like this where we could ask questions and share ideas. All we had was our shared thoughts and experiences. Well, that and our mutual inability to concede an argument.
When the god delusion was published, it rekindled my interest in the subject somewhat and so I bought it. I just expected so much more from someone with Dawkin's reputation. Instead, I found the same, tired arguments that I'd grown bored of before I turned 16. It just struck me as being a puerile, unsophisticated waste of ink. The only part of the book I found remotely insightful was the section on morality, and even that contains nothing you couldn't find in a bargain basement section of a second-rate bookshop.
I found it almost inconceivable that this apparent 'champion of atheism' failed to raise a single point that I hadn't considered before my somewhat intellectually inferior self had left school.
This isn't merely an excuse to whinge about the book, I genuinely want to know if anyone else feels the same way about it I as do. I feel let down by Dawkins, embarrassed really.
He does have one saving grace though - he's not Sam Harris.
I personally think the trouble with this book is that Dawkins has an excellent reputation as a evolutionary biologist and for some reason this makes some people think he is an authority on atheism.
His popular science works are really excellent, The Selfish Gene is a splendid book, but as a philosopher Dawkins is woefully lacking in finesse.
MM
"The greatest deception men suffer is from their own opinions" - Leonardo da Vinci
"I think I use the term “radical” rather loosely, just for emphasis. If you describe yourself as “atheist,” some people will say, “Don’t you mean ‘agnostic’?” I have to reply that I really do mean atheist, I really do not believe that there is a god; in fact, I am convinced that there is not a god (a subtle difference). I see not a shred of evidence to suggest that there is one ... etc., etc. It’s easier to say that I am a radical atheist, just to signal that I really mean it, have thought about it a great deal, and that it’s an opinion I hold seriously." - Douglas Adams (and I echo the sentiment)
"I think I use the term “radical” rather loosely, just for emphasis. If you describe yourself as “atheist,” some people will say, “Don’t you mean ‘agnostic’?” I have to reply that I really do mean atheist, I really do not believe that there is a god; in fact, I am convinced that there is not a god (a subtle difference). I see not a shred of evidence to suggest that there is one ... etc., etc. It’s easier to say that I am a radical atheist, just to signal that I really mean it, have thought about it a great deal, and that it’s an opinion I hold seriously." - Douglas Adams (and I echo the sentiment)
