The God Delusion

Really well-written, extremely clever and at times bitingly funny and sarcastic. This book has pretty strong arguments and looks at the theistic world view through the practical, the historical and the scripture bases. Well drawn out arguments and rebuttals make this one of the defining statements for atheism. Not in the least because Richard Dawkins, that man knows his shit. It's great to watch him blaze through theist arguments and rip them apart. You know with what? THAT'S RIGHT, WITH SCIENCE. Awwyeah.

i truly have no recollection of a single word in this long essay about why god is trash but I do remember the sarcasm and the lack of holding back on judgement of the religious and as someone who was born into organised religion and forced into it my whole life via school for 16 years of my life, god bless this book;) x

This is a very enjoyable book that makes many arguments and pulls no punches. It systematically discusses most of the arguments for a God's existence, poses arguments against a God's existence, analyzes the reasons monotheistic religions have "evolved" among humans, and...I think this was the book's last argument... explains why it is unethical to thrust religious beliefs on children. This book would easily anger most Christians, as it, among other things, shows that not only should the Bible NOT be used to develop a system of ethics, the Bible ISN'T in fact used, even by Christians, to develop an ethical way of living. In summary: if you aren't angered by the title itself, you'd probably enjoy it.

I'm a fourth-generation nonbeliever, in wishy-washy-secular Britain; really not sure why I got so caught up in New Atheism. Felt dead good to rebel against a weakened enemy with no recourse, I guess. I can't remember much false in this, though these days I'd quibble with his argument against agnosticism ("we can't get conclusive evidence against the existence of gods, but the probability is low enough that in any other domain we'd have warrant for full disbelief; and 'atheism' is just this very-low-probability-assignment"). This is an argument against the word 'agnosticism' and is pointless except in PR terms.

I'd give it 3½ stars. The rational/logical arguments are well put. What put me off early on was the tone that was oozing condescension at the religious, especially in the first half of the book. Without that, I might have rated this higher. The science and analysis were brilliant.

ما من شك ان ريتشارد دوكنز رجل عبقري و له اسهاماته الرائعة في العلم، خصوصا في مجال تخصصه الأحيائي التطوري. لكن ... كأي شخصية كهنوتية (بابا الكنيسة الالحادية) يصر على ان رأيه صحيح و اراء الأخرين تحتوي على سذاجة و سخف و كذب ، للأسف لم يستطع ان يتفادى ما رمى به غير من بعض تحيزات في اراءه أعجبني جدا الجزء الذي رد فيه على اطروحات توما الأكويني الفلسفية على وجود اله لم تعجبني الأجزاء التي حاول استخدام التطور الدارويني لتخيل و تفسير البدايات، و التي هي كما يقولون مربط الفرس بين المؤمنين و الملحدين حول الاعتقاد بوجود او عدم وجود خالق بدء كل شيء يجب ان تقرأ كتاب كهذا لفتح سبل امام عقلك و روحك لمحاولة الاجابة على اسئلة قديم حديثة مستمرة معنا من الميلاد حتى الممات

I've written a long review about this book on my Blog in Portuguese.

Este livro está recheado de informação e é daqueles que podem mudar uma pessoa. O autor pega nos vários argumentos a favor da existência e da crença em Deus e deita-os todos por terra com contra-argumentos devidamente fundamentados. Este livro é uma análise extensiva e objectiva sobre se pode ou não existir Deus, se devemos ou não acreditar, quais as vantagens e desvantagens de tal fé e responde ainda à famosa questão "E se não houvesse religião?". Aconselho este livro a qualquer pessoa que pretenda enriquecer a sua cultura e ter uma visão mais abrangente da religião.

A preamble for Atheism. Loved every bit of it

quite different from what i expected. I've found this book to be mostly against religious superstitions and extremism. I see how they can be absurd, but i can't see how you can conclude that "There is no higher force" from them. i prefer the author's most recent lectures and debates over this book.

When writing a book such as this before you put a word on the page you know you it is going to be over analyzed and critiqued, while at the same time praised by many. I think Dawkins laid it out beautifully knowing what was going to happen when it was released. I read a later released version where he stated he made changes based on reviews. So I don't know if that made a difference in my experience compared to others. Whether you are a believer or not, this is a great read. If you are a believer, reading books like this shouldn't sway your beliefs unless you have doubts in your own beliefs. I don't think he is trying to convert anyone from believing, he is just laying out a string of research and you can choose to believe it or not. As with anything else in life facts are often ignored, or changed to opinion or visa versa to believe in what one wants to be true, this is true with politics, santa, god, etc. Luckily we all have access to the internet and can pursue our own research on any matter necessary. Personally I think he hit the nail on the head, and made his point well explained so even the lowest of reading level could understand what he was trying to say, which made it a slow read at times but overall it was well thought out and put together.

Lol, guess what? No God, woohoo! Americans believe in some crazy, vengeful, ego-maniacal monster. Dawkins' insights make believers look dumb.

Disclaimer: I wholeheartedly disagree with Mr. Dawkins on almost every single one of his assumptions/assertions. This review is of the book itself and its supposed persuasive purpose. This book has an incredible number of problems. First, and most notable, was Dawkin's highly scattered narrative. He did not move from one point to the next in a logical progression so as to build and better support his arguments. He flat out failed to create a solid foundation for his thesis and persuasive arguments supporting that thesis. Second, Dawkins felt comfortable making broad assumptions and declarations with very little (if any) evidence. This also works against he supposed persuasive nature of the book. Third, he clearly has a grudge against anyone who disagrees with him. He may say that he's not a religious fundamentalist but he certainly behaves like one. (I've spend my fair share amongst Christian fundamentalists. I should know.) Fourth, the audiobook uses alternating narrators for a reason never explained. While occasionally useful to designate potions of text as narrative, all other narrator shifts seem to have no beneficial effects. Fifth, Dawkins claims to hate religion. However, his language throughout the entire work is filled with religious terms. He does not bother to explain his rationale for his being able to use this language without being religious. Even if I had been the tiniest bit persuadable, the book would not have been able to budge me in my beliefs.

A strong, well-written book with many arguments against believing in God, though Dawkins goes much further than that – attacking all aspects of religion and intelligent design and showcasing all the negative aspects brought to the world by organized religion. I enjoyed it immensely, both for strong arguments for things I'd not really thought of much before – and for enforcing and deepening feelings I already had about religion. I'll be buying it in hardcover (I read it first as a library e-book on loan). Probably more useful as a reference – to refresh my mind on certain issues – rather than reading through beginning to end.

A good read. You need to take your time in reading this. Highly recommended for both Atheists and Believers. It's practical and every argument for Atheism is cogently conveyed.