Richard Dawkins?

[Raz]

Personally, my biggest logical argument against a believer trying to convince me that their God is real would be:

"If there truly is a deity, and your deity is the one true deity (or set of deities) who created the world and shephered your culture according to the stories you believe in, then how do you account for the thousands of other deities and stories that other people and cultures believe in? If there were only one true deity, then everyone would believe in the same creation stories and everyone would worship the same god. This is not so. Explain, other than saying that they're all wrong."

J-I-B

The thing is you are already giving credibility to the notion of a 'creator' god. You must strike at the heart of the matter if you want to challenge indoctrinated minds!

Most people believe in a creator based on the assumed improbablility of life, and the way that everything on the earth seems to have been made for us humans. e.g. Our muscles require oxygen, and it just so happens that there is an abundance of oxygen in the atmosphere etc, but these same people do not realise that evolution gives the great illusion of design, as we adapt and evolve to be better suited to the environment we are in. Think of it this way, it's almost like arguing that a stream or river was carved out before the water was added, and that's why it is the right shape and size for it. It's the same logic! Anyway getting back on track, the logic that something as improbable as complex life requires an infinatley more complex creator creates an infinite regress, as an infinatley complex creator would require something infinatley more complex to have created that also.

Aaaanyway....

[Jan Van Quirm]

What I want to know is why does there have to be a creator - so far as I can see you don't get any bloody thanks for it, a load of cheek and people deliberately twisting your edicts the whole rotten time! As for the "sacrifices..." *muttesrmumblesprefertheBBQoptionwithextrawowwowsaucebutalligetisbloodydrivellyprayersthewholesoddingtimemumblesmutters*





*muttersmumblesandwotisitwithvirginsthewholetimeanywaymuttersmumbles*

See! Absolutely no job satisfaction AT ALL! If there are Creators out there the complaints queue would be massive (not to mention eternal) so why bother doing it in the 1st place? None of it makes sense - I wish I was a bloody amoeba - life would be a whole lot simpler!

[raisindot]

Most people believe in a creator based on the assumed improbablility of life, and the way that everything on the earth seems to have been made for us humans.

Well, see you give people a lot more intellectual credit than I would.

Most people don't think a creator exist mainly because of their perceptions of the improbability of life. They think a creator exists because they were brought up to believe that a creator exists or because they attribute to a creator responsibility for things that happen. Only people who are intellectuals and understand something about biology or those who live in perfect commune with nature would make the intelligent designer argument. The rest of the believers just think, "I'm a Christian/Jew/Hindu/animist/whatever, and because of this I believe my god created the world and manages it."




J-I-B
J-I-B

[windle poons]

As someone who has read all of Richard Dawkins books if I was introd ucing any one to his writing The God Delusion is probobly the last book I would reccomend as a starter,a good start woukd be The Devils Chaplain,a collection of short articals and essays or River out of Eden a general introduction to Darwinian evolution. I find the god delusion a bit to tub thumping (and also vering on the fundamentalist ) also it would be worth looking here http://richarddawkins.net/
Bob

[Quatermass]

While I think that sometimes Dawkins is a little rabid, I do agree with many of his views on religion.

Plus, he's a lucky SOB, married to Lalla Ward.

[FirstoftheGangtoDie]

God delusion was my first Dawkins and I loved it. But I am a student of zoology looking to specialize in evolutionary biology so...It's kinda my secondary bible (after the origin of species natch). Currently reading The Selfish gene but was bogged down by all the introductions to the various editions etc etc so I haven't reached the actual book yet

[BaldFriede]

I think Dawkins went a little overboard with his latest books; his attacks on all sorts of religion are plain ridiculous. If I were of Christian faith, which I used to be once, I would have no problem at all to believe in both evolution and God. Why, the first part of "Genesis" even looks as if someone is trying to sum-up evolution! Yes, according to the bible the world was made in seven days, but how long is one of God's days? I am reminded of an old joke; it goes like thsis:
A man prays to God and begs if he may ask him some question, and God grants them to him. So he asks: "God, is it true that for you a millon years are like a minute"? "That is true". "And a million dollars are like one dollar to you"? "That is also true". Then please, God, can you lend me a dollar"? Replies God: "Wait a minute".
I personally believe there is some strong evidence for the existence of God, but you have to follow my definition of it (I don't like to have a gender attached to God). I think physicists are wrong to think of the universe as matter and energy (yes, I know they are equivalent). The universe is a PROCESS, with myriads of sub-processes in it, all of them interfconnected in many ways.
Now I think it can be said that the more complex a process is, the more consciousness it has. A stone is more compley than an atom (though as to the consciousness of either we have to pass), a mammal is more compliex than an amoeba. Consciousness is definitely a process, once that process has stopped in our brains because we are dead there is only one process going on in our brains, which is decay. And the sum of all these processes on nthe world is God.
"Then why do you worship Gaia?", you may ask. Because the deity I justdepicted is much too far above me; I will be to his consciousness no more than an an atom is to a human being.. The ratio is slightly better for Gaia; she is much closer to me. But Jean and I are very well awre that Gaia is just the earthly manifestation of God.

[spideyGirl]

I think the Selfish Gene is a good place to start.

[Werewolf87]

Ugh, Dawkins. I like his books that concentrate on evolution but The God Delusion? What an ugly book. I'm not religious but this book struck me as very hateful and respectless to anyone thinking differently. Dawkins is like an upside down creationist extremist. I see the necessity to stop the creationsts from taking over but why in this way? Also what's with his arguing that Einstein was an atheist? He wasn't to my knowledge. He only didn't believe in organized religion and a personal god.

[poohcarrot]

He only didn't believe in organized religion and a personal god.

So he believed in dis-organised religion and an impersonal god?

[Werewolf87]

He only didn't believe in organized religion and a personal god.

So he believed in dis-organised religion and an impersonal god?

Yes, impersonal god. It's difficult to explain as I do not have the proper English terms for it. You could say it is believing that there is a deeper force that made the universe and the laws of physics, but one that is not watching or passing judgement over single organisms.

[pip]

He only didn't believe in organized religion and a personal god.

So he believed in dis-organised religion and an impersonal god?

Yes, impersonal god. It's difficult to explain as I do not have the proper English terms for it. You could say it is believing that there is a deeper force that made the universe and the laws of physics, but one that is not watching or passing judgement over single organisms.

A creator who buggered of basically . Like Zurvan in Zoroastrianism.

[poohcarrot]

I hope Capt doesn't see this. He doesn't do physics.

BTW Werewolf, I'm an English teacher and had no idea you weren't a native speaker! (although not knowing Monty Python was a bit of a giveaway. )

[pip]

I hope Capt doesn't see this. He doesn't do physics.

BTW Werewolf, I'm an English teacher and had no idea you weren't a native speaker! (although not knowing Monty Python was a bit of a giveaway. )

German , English , same difference

I don't think capt will look in on a Dawkins thread for some reason.

[Werewolf87]

BTW Werewolf, I'm an English teacher and had no idea you weren't a native speaker! (although not knowing Monty Python was a bit of a giveaway. )

Wait till I have a higher post count, I have a talent for unknowingly raping English grammar.
As for Monty Python, I got to say that this was quite a while before my time. I do have faint memories of some of the animations from the show though and I remember they totally creeped me out as a kid.