The Dawkins Delusion

by brotherdan 181 Replies latest watchtower bible

• 

  cameo-d

  Brotherdan: I am merely writing how I think Richard Dawkins book contains quite a bit of intellectual dishonesty.

  Lies are usually mixed in with truth as it tends to make the lies stronger. You are probably picking up on those inconsistencies. Trust your intuition in all things. Your conscience is your spirit speaking. Ask questions. Could the guy possibly have an agenda? Is he steering the facts to achieve his point rather than weigh objectively?

  Could it be that the person is simply mistaken and is presenting his opinions in a faulty and incorrect manner through his wording? Or is it a deliberate deception evidenced by repetitive patterns?

  Just question everything.
• 

  TheClarinetist

  No, it's not an opinion when you are defining something. When you say that the DEFINITION OF FAITH IS THIS, that is not the statement of opinion. He does not give any source for that definition. That, to me, is intellectual dishonesty. It presupposes something that is entirely untrue. It says, as I already stated, that faith CANNOT be based on anything substantial or factual.

  I have to admit that I don't quite understand how this is dishonest. He says exactly what he is arguing against and then goes from there. If you take a particular quote, it might look like a straw man, but taking the work as a whole, he admits that there are more liberal/open viewpoints, acknowledges them, and moves on from there. [I think it was Chapter 2 was pretty much devoted to defining everything?]

  @Chalam: What part of Expelled was that? The link didn't show up. EDIT: NVM... It came up.
• 

  PSacramento

  Each of us must read these items and then personally decide if they are compelling.

  PS: If I were God and I had written the Bible, no further books would be necessary. I would speak in a clear, understandable manner.

  So true my friend, on both accounts.

  Of course God's message will never be simple or understandable, God is dealing with US after all, LMAO !

  ;)
• 

  hamsterbait

  SOOO let me get this clear:

  Dawkins has pointed out the various religious ideas of various religions and their followers. He points out that to get good people to do bad things you need religion. Good people do good things no matter which imaginary friend they feel a need to talk to.

  He then concludes that as Shiva, Ganesh, Baal, Wotan, Zeus, Minerva, are mere imaginary friends, then he will go one God further.

  Those arguing in a "god" existing usually only mean THEIR god.

  Why should You believe in the god of the Bible any more than those worshipped by non-christians and non-jews?

  I know that the kitchen god exists. He lives behind my cooker. his existence is obvious as he ensures my dinners are fragrant and tasty, by giving me the skills I need to cook. I know he is offended when he allows my dinner to burn, or taste bland.

  I am not deluded as these things actually happen all the time in my kitchen.

  HB
• 

  leavingwt

  Richard Dawkins explains his involvement in 'Expelled'.

  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AasyrRULHog
• 

  sabastious

  For example, what if there was a doctor that was guilty of killing many of his elderly patients> Could we argue, then, that conventional medicine is dangerous and so should be avoided? The conclusion just doesn't follow from the example...

  Most doctors don't kill their patients on purpose.

  Most religions exploit their members on purpose.

  -Sab
• 

  PSacramento

  When you say that the DEFINITION OF FAITH IS THIS, that is not the statement of opinion. He does not give any source for that definition.

  Of course it is an opinion, if people reading his book wanted a definition of faith, they'd read it in a dictonary or encyclopedia.
• 

  brotherdan

  I don't argue for the existance of MY God. I argue for the existance of THE God. There are no other Gods besides God.

  And NO, you don't need religion to make good people do bad things. That's an over generalized statement that could never be proven. There are good atheists that have done bad things. To say that you MUST have religion to do bad is a silly argument.
• 

  leavingwt

  I argue for the existance of THE God. There are no other Gods besides God.

  If possible, please summarize why you've concluded that there is one god.
• 

  leavingwt

  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5wV_REEdvxo