Customer Reviews
Lower Sixth Form Arguments: a Concise Critique. - By: Laurence, 20 Nov 2008 
Christianity (viz. the Vatican) is not against science, Gallileo's trial was political & not science based (heliocentricity theory being nothing new at the time) & Monsignor Georges Lemaître, a Belgian RC priest, proposed the Big Bang theory.
Just who is deluded? - By: Dr. Roger J. Fallon, 05 Nov 2008 
From the messianic promises of the opening pages to the utopian scientism of the closing pages, this is a fatuously pretentious & philosophically incoherent book which would never have been published if it had been written by anyone less eminent. Dawkins's treatment of morality is particularly amateurish, & sometimes downright laughable. He really should stick to science, since he clearly doesn't understand anything else, & stop bothering the world with his neurotically obsessive atheizing. Read this book, by all means, but read some of the responses too -- my own book would be a good place to start.
Surprisingly interesting - By: Matthew Turner, 01 Nov 2008 
I bought this book a while back out of curiosity, but have put off reading it until due to fears of it being merely a rant against religion or just loads of use of Argument from Outrage. I am glad I have finally read it, however, as I found it to be surprisingly well-written, well-reasoned, informative & interesting.
I am an athiest & have been both a Christian & atheist at different periodsin my life (obviosly not at the same time!). I would call myself a reluctant atheist, because I would love nothing more for there to be a God & Christianity to be true (or any religion really), but I just don't see enough evidencein favour of God's existence.
As for Dawkins's book, for me I found Chapters 4, 5 & 6 to be the most interesting, delving into evolution. Darwinism certainly explains a lot things, not just how an animal acts, but also why. I had studied human evolutionin archaeologyin my first year at university & so I enjoyed Dawkins's obvious expertisein evolutionary biology. When I was a Christian I saw no reason why evolution & religion should be considered incompatible. I still don't think the two are incompatible, unless you are a creationist or literalist.
Some bits of the book I didn't enjoy, hence only 4 stars. Chapter 7 is mainly merely Argument from Outrage, listing bits of scripture showing how horrible the Old Testament is. As for the section on Hitler, he certainly was not a Christian, of any denomination, although his beliefin some sort of providence, I believe, does not make him an out-and-out atheist. Chapters 8 & 9 also use Argument from Outrage, which worked for me, as I found myself agreeing with a lot of what Dawkins said - fundamentalism & creationism should be opposed, & children protected from the dark side of religion - such as the threat of hell & visits to those ridiculous Hell Houses run by Pastor Keenan Roberts - truly awful & shocking. On page 300 I found myself disagreeing though. Dawkins writes, concerning a possible New Ten Commandments, that one should not "discriminate or oppress on the basis of sex, race or (as far as possible) species". To that I would add religion & creed as theists deserve as much respect, as fellow human beings, as anyone else.
On the whole though an enjoyable & recommended book.
Inspiring, delicately constructed and brilliant funny - By: A. Johnson, 30 Oct 2008 
It was suggested to me that I read this book by a friend who had developed a sincere interestin analysing religion & the world around himin a matter-of-fact, understandable & logical way & this book certainly does that.
I would say it's the most provocative book I've read recently & it certainly encourages further discussion about very important points. One only needs to see the amount of internet activity generated by readers of this book arguing their views back & forth on hundreds of sites to realise that.
I find myself referring back to it alot when talking to friends about the arguments it contains. Almost every pro-religious counter-argument is dealt with eruditely & succinctly by Dawkinsin his normal annihilating way.
I approached the book as an agnostic leaning on atheism but not-really-that-sure & finished the book much the same way but certainly someone more enlightened & more interestedin the world around me.
I would recommend it to anybody who is interestedin seeing things through a perhaps different perspective & is not afraid of the ways that other people see the world. Dawkins' view may be one-sided butin his defense, I am certain there are very few religious texts that give as much as a nod to the possibility of atheism. Those who are religious may find it insultingin places so you might have to have your "shields up" for some chapters.. however I think the view Dawkins gives is a very interesting way to see the world & how it works, which is worth at least giving some thought to.
Self Absorbed Tripe - By: Fergal, 29 Oct 2008 As a confirmed atheist I think Dawkins made one point I hadn't considered previouslyin the entire first 4 chapters.
It was just a pathetic rant against people he has argued with over the years. I found myself asking "So what?" after every sentence until I was just skimming over page after page of nonsense.
I just couldn't go on, I couldn't imagine this shaking anybody's faith.
