Thinking of buying The God Delusion

The Mad Hatter

I'm thinking of picking up TGD as an audiobook but just wondering if it's worth my while?

Is it really mainly for people who are religious? Will it just tell me stuff I already know?

Prenderb

It depends on what you already know!

I read it a year or so ago. It's an evolutionary biologist's strongly expressed scientific views, well written. It gives you his science behind atheism. Not sure if it would work as an audiobook though.

Zombrex

The Mad Hatter wrote: »

Is it really mainly for people who are religious? Will it just tell me stuff I already know?

No, Yes

Despite a general misconception TGD is not a book for converting religious people to atheism. It is a book, according to the book itself, for what Dawkins terms closet atheists, people who are atheists but who lacked the confidence in that position to express it. It is really a book designed to support them in articulating why religion is nonsense and feeling ok with believing that.

You don't strike me as in the closet so you probably won't find much in the book you don't already know or think. It is still worth a read (or listen).

ShoulderChip

if you haven't lsitened to the Harry Potter's they are great on audiobook,

get Jim Dales' version not Stephen Fry's believe it or not he is better.

Turtwig

Umm, that's a toughie.

Why got get in paperback anyways?:)

Dawkins argues against the hypothesis of a deity from a pure rationlist point of view - he discounts theology as a subject.

It is humourous, it is well written, but if it's necessary depends on what other books you've planned reading.

I myself read it as a sideline to other books (something by Daniel Goldman, I think)

Either way it's a worthy read, but as an audiobook - I really do not know, Dawkins argument, I think, just need to be read.

Daftendirekt

Yeah, go for it. You probably won't learn a whole lot from it, particularly if you're already an atheist; that said, there's a chapter in it called something like "The Poverty of Agnosticism" which convinced me to stop referring to myself as agnostic and change to atheist. Apart from that, it's a relatively entertaining and well written book, worth a read.

Why audiobook though?

The Mad Hatter

Thanks everyone.

For those who asked, audiobook because I can't read non-fiction - I get bored and read something else - but I quite like listening to it.

Wicknight - I appreciate the suggestion, but very few people who know me irl know I'm an atheist. Does that count as "in the closet"?

ShoulderChip - I've heard a couple of Fry's recordings of HP and I've heard that the Dales version is very good but, er, I'm talking about The God Delusion...

Turtwig

Daftendirekt wrote: »

Why audiobook though?

Ummm OP, you're not a bus/rail driver are you?:)

there's a chapter in it called something like "The Poverty of Agnosticism" which convinced me to stop referring to myself as agnostic and change to atheist.

Ditto, forgot that.

Coriolanus

Well, you sound kind of in the closet then. I wouldn't credit GD with it entirely, but it certainly did give me a lot more confidence in understanding my own suspicions about why religion was stupid. Ie: Knowing family and friends likely reaction was going to anti-atheist, I felt better equipped to "come out" having read it.

So, I say go for it.

I can't stand audio books. They make me sleepy. :pac:

ShoulderChip

The Mad Hatter wrote: »

Thanks everyone.



ShoulderChip - I've heard a couple of Fry's recordings of HP and I've heard that the Dales version is very good but, er, I'm talking about The God Delusion...

sorry,

I just saw that you were considering buying an audiobook but were unsure of it, so I recommended a different one,


nevermind.

The Mad Hatter

Ah right, ShoulderChip, np thanks.

Come to think of it, most of my close friends and immediate family know I'm an atheist, as far as I'm aware. Sort of typed without thinking I guess...

Húrin

get it in the library, tis cheaper

Coriolanus

Húrin wrote: »

get it in the library, tis cheaper

Yes, but you can't use the book as a physical weapon against a recalcitrant theist if you're just carrying around a loaner.

dvpower

The Mad Hatter wrote: »

I'm thinking of picking up TGD as an audiobook but just wondering if it's worth my while?

Is it really mainly for people who are religious? Will it just tell me stuff I already know?

Its an OK read. There's nothing new in it (at least nothing that will be new to you), but I guess that any book that gets labelled as a bible for atheists (sometimes even by atheists) is worth a read.

On the question of getting it as an audiobook; I don't know - does Dawkins narrate it?

Tyler MacDurden

dvpower wrote: »

On the question of getting it as an audiobook; I don't know - does Dawkins narrate it?

As far as I know, Dawkins and his wife, Lalla Ward, narrate it. Reputed to be quite good as audiobooks go.

Overblood

By Jove 'tis a mighty book.

I'm reading it for the second time. This time I have a highlighter. It's a very clear and concise book. It may seem to drag a bit but that's only because you've heard a lot of it before. Don't be fooled though, you will learn from this book.

The only problem with it is that, as another poster already mentioned, it's really for the closet atheist who wants their gut feelings confirmed and bolstered. This isn't for the average Joe Christian. And it won't convert the average Joe Christian even if they read it, which they probably won't. Just as you wouldn't buy a book titled "The Lovely Power of God within Your Beautiful Spirit", a regular christian wouldn't buy this.

Anyway, buy it. Tesco have it and they're open 24/7. Go now.

bigeasyeah

Sounds interesting, I may pick up a copy.
I dont care either way so it ll be good for thinking material.

Dave!

Good book. Nothing new though, no. Worth buying though. If only to give to a friend.

stevejazzx

It's middling book to be honest. I love Dawkins but his earlier were better by a country mile.

Valmont

Overblood wrote: »

Just as you wouldn't buy a book titled "The Lovely Power of God within Your Beautiful Spirit", a regular christian wouldn't buy this.

LOL
Hey, that's a great book.

Hivemind187

I have it on audiobook. It is well produced, beautifully read (Dawkins is a particularly calm and well spoken man) and the content, while for many is either heresey or simply nothing new, is a brilliantly laid out argument incorporating much of the best positions and points of many other atheists as well has is own.

It is certainly worth it.

To be honest a lot of criticisms of the book revolve around either

1) We've heard this before/ it isn't new. (atheists and agnostics who have been at this a while).

2) Isnt as good as his earlier works (atheists and scientists).

3) It intellectually dishonest/shrill/heresey/close minded etc etc (theists who have no ability to refute its contents).

The truth is the book isnt geared towards these people. its meant for, as wicknight put it (paraphrazing the man himself), "closet atheists". Its aslso meant for those individuals who havent yet got the fundamental intellectual basis for their non-belief - people who have strong but poorly formed ideas of why they dont believe. This book provides a kind of "crash course" in the atheists position.

It was also, I have to admit, the first place I had come across "russles teapot".

Sam Vimes

Hivemind187 wrote: »

3) It intellectually dishonest/shrill/heresey/close minded etc etc (theists who have no ability to refute its contents).

Or feeble and not well written, as described by someone who it later turned out had not actually read the book, because I mentioned a story from it and he demanded to know where I'd got my information from :P

Galvasean

I must say TGD helped me articulate my beliefs. The examples and phrasing used are easily grasped and easy to remember. After reading it I am more comfortable discussing said beliefs in person. It just flows more easily for me.

kenon

Hivemind187 wrote: »

I have it on audiobook. It is well produced, beautifully read (Dawkins is a particularly calm and well spoken man)

First audiobook I ever got and listened to it going to college. Excellent to listen to for the reasons quoted.

I found it hard to take everything in though and I'd say it would be easier to take in the content if you read it.

ChocolateSauce

I honestly didn't like it. I wasn't as hard hitting as I thought he could have managed and it wasn't as interesting as, say, God Is Not Great. He uses too many scientific arguments in favour of atheism.

Coriolanus

ChocolateSauce wrote: »

I honestly didn't like it. I wasn't as hard hitting as I thought he could have managed and it wasn't as interesting as, say, God Is Not Great. He uses too many scientific arguments in favour of atheism.

Burn the heretic! :pac:

ChocolateSauce

Nevore wrote: »

Burn the heretic! :pac:

The only thing one needs to discount the gods of men is logic. Science just helps.

Flamed Diving

Read 'God is not Great' by Hitchens. Much better.

JamesTaylorfan

The Mad Hatter wrote: »

I'm thinking of picking up TGD as an audiobook but just wondering if it's worth my while?

Is it really mainly for people who are religious? Will it just tell me stuff I already know?

I'd be very surprised if you did'nt feel enriched after reading it.

Coriolanus

True. If anything, if one was looking at the book as an arsenal of ideas, then people are more used, and more responsive to, arguements from some form of logic rather than from science.

Galvasean

ChocolateSauce wrote: »

The only thing one needs to discount the gods of men is logic. Science just helps.

Science is logic.
Logic is science.
Your logic is faulty.
Ergo, you are faulty.
Exterminate!

Osgoodisgood

Flamed Diving wrote: »

Read 'God is not Great' by Hitchens. Much better.

I own both books and haven't finished either of them. Not because I don't agree with the contents, but rather because I agree with every word. For these books to have relevance, or better yet, for them to be compelling, I think you need to have some semblance of doubt about the hard atheist's position.

equivariant

Flamed Diving wrote: »

Read 'God is not Great' by Hitchens. Much better.

I disagree. I think that Hitchens is a more entertaining debater and is more confrontational than Dawkins and also much wittier. However as an argument for atheism and even as an argument against religion I find TGD more convincing than GING

Morbert

The Mad Hatter wrote: »

I'm thinking of picking up TGD as an audiobook but just wondering if it's worth my while?

Is it really mainly for people who are religious? Will it just tell me stuff I already know?

The book is enjoyable but it probably won't have much that you haven't heard already. The first half of the book focuses on defending the atheist position, and the second half (the weaker half in my opinion) focuses on why religion is horrible.

wayhey

It's a good book and Dawkins does have an undeniable talent for presenting his arguments logically (and as others said I guess it gives the atheist a weapon).

My main problem with it was that Dawkins was (it seemed to me) more preoccupied with ramming his opinion down your throat. He's already given me the evidence, I can figure it out myself Dickie... anyone else get that?

The Mad Hatter

Thanks for all the input, folks. I think I will pick it up, if only to insulate myself should another creationism vs. evolution debate break out over Christmas dinner. (Wish I was making that up - my family are not creationists; they're not even especially religious, but I was utterly unable to get my points across.)

Rainbowrapids

It's worth a read and is informative, he has a clear way of putting his arguments.

The only thing is I felt he got a bit shrill at points which took away from it slightly.

Dave!

The Mad Hatter wrote: »

Thanks for all the input, folks. I think I will pick it up, if only to insulate myself should another creationism vs. evolution debate break out over Christmas dinner. (Wish I was making that up - my family are not creationists; they're not even especially religious, but I was utterly unable to get my points across.)

Might be worth noting that Dawkins has a new book coming out in September with the subtitle 'The evidence for evolution' Couldn't hurt to pick it up ! I shall be getting it

ChocolateSauce

Galvasean wrote: »

Ergo, you are faulty.

Sure I've known that for years. :P

Flamed Diving

Osgoodisgood wrote: »

I own both books and haven't finished either of them. Not because I don't agree with the contents, but rather because I agree with every word. For these books to have relevance, or better yet, for them to be compelling, I think you need to have some semblance of doubt about the hard atheist's position.

Well, I'm not an atheist, and I certainly disagree with the hard atheist position. In addition, Dawkins has stated countless times that he is 99.99999% sure that god/s doesn't exist. Is he a hard atheist?

Furthermore, Hitchens is not attempting to convince people that god/s doesn't exist in his book. Hint: the clue is in the title.

equivariant wrote: »

I disagree. I think that Hitchens is a more entertaining debater and is more confrontational than Dawkins and also much wittier. However as an argument for atheism and even as an argument against religion I find TGD more convincing than GING

I find TGD a bit overly simplistic and watered down. It's clearly written for the lowest common denominator/broadest audience.

andy1249

My main problem with it was that Dawkins was (it seemed to me) more preoccupied with ramming his opinion down your throat. He's already given me the evidence, I can figure it out myself Dickie... anyone else get that?

Ive read everything by Dawkins , the man started out as a good popular science writer , explaining a non intuitive subject in a great way.
His best by far is The Extended phenotype , then about halfway through his work he starts to degenerate into this most non scientific and very very boring no God rant .... once he stopped explaining science and started down this road he has become an attention seeking media whore. He seems to spend most of his time actually arguing with fundamentalist christian morons on TV , where is the scientific value in that , it is frankly embarrassing to watch. Its easy to flaunt your intelligence in front of fools.

The God delusion is the sad nail in the coffin of what could have been a brilliant career , its very like watching David Icke crack up all those years ago, sad really.

Turtwig

Flamed Diving wrote: »

Well, I'm not an atheist, and I certainly disagree with the hard atheist position. In addition, Dawkins has stated countless times that he is 99.99999% sure that god/s doesn't exist. Is he a hard atheist? .

I don't think anyone can ever be a pure atheist, simply because of the fear religion can instill subconsciously in the mind. Most of us, will always have hesitations, but one thing Dawkins (and I'm sure most of us here) is (are) certain of is that the God(s) depicted in the ancient texts are complete and utter drivel.

CerebralCortex

Malty_T wrote: »

I don't think anyone can ever be a pure atheist, simply because of the fear religion can instill subconsciously in the mind. Most of us, will always have hesitations, but one thing Dawkins (and I'm sure most of us here) is (are) certain of is that the God(s) depicted in the ancient texts are complete and utter drivel.

And utter drivel they are. Unfortunately theists in these forums all too often forget that that is actually the case and therefore we spend half our time arguing with them over the most irrelevant of topics like exgesis or biblical inconsistencies.

Rant over.

Flamed Diving

Malty_T wrote: »

I don't think anyone can ever be a pure atheist, simply because of the fear religion can instill subconsciously in the mind. Most of us, will always have hesitations, but one thing Dawkins (and I'm sure most of us here) is (are) certain of is that the God(s) depicted in the ancient texts are complete and utter drivel.

Therefore he is not a hard atheist, I agree.

Zillah

andy1249 wrote: »

The God delusion is the sad nail in the coffin of what could have been a brilliant career , its very like watching David Icke crack up all those years ago, sad really.

I can't disagree enough. To compare Richard Dawkins to David Icke is just so monumentally wrong, I can't believe someone would be so ignorant. He has had a long and illustrious career, doing things far beyond publishing books. He's also about to publish a book detailing the best evidence for evolution soon, so his career is by no means over, either.

Galvasean

Zillah wrote: »

I can't disagree enough. To compare Richard Dawkins to David Icke is just so monumentally wrong, I can't believe someone would be so ignorant. He has had a long and illustrious career, doing things far beyond publishing books. He's also about to publish a book detailing the best evidence for evolution soon, so his career is by no means over, either.

Wheras David Icke's football career is certainly over.

Flamed Diving

I don't think the Icke comment was meant to be taken literally. But I agree in its sentiment. He is far better when he simply sticks to publishing popular science books, rather than his personal crusade against religion.

andy1249

He's also about to publish a book detailing the best evidence for evolution soon, so his career is by no means over, either.

His career as a scientist is over. He would rather spend his time these days arguing nonsense out in public.

Do you really think science needs a book detailing the " Best Evidence" for Evolution ? Who exactly do you think this book is for ? Anyone even remotely read up on the subject either through pop science or serious study does not need Dawkins to tell them the " Best evidence ever ".

Honestly the way hes behaving its like hes just discovered Evolution and is trying to convince the world !! Its ridiculous !

The book is clearly aimed at the religious , which is a complete waste of time , it cannot possibly be aimed at the scientific community because it is totally unnecessary , in other words a complete waste of the mans talents. Its worthless work !

The only possible reason I can see for this book is to get him some more TV slots and inflate his already overblown ego.

robindch

andy1249 wrote: »

The book is clearly aimed at the religious

Yes, and he says so in the introduction.

andy1249 wrote: »

The only possible reason I can see for this book is to get him some more TV slots and inflate his already overblown ego.

It's disappointing to see that you think that his interest is entirely selfish.

Have you had the time to read the book?

Turtwig

andy1249 wrote: »

His career as a scientist is over. He would rather spend his time these days arguing nonsense out in public.

Do you really think science needs a book detailing the " Best Evidence" for Evolution ? Who exactly do you think this book is for ? Anyone even remotely read up on the subject either through pop science or serious study does not need Dawkins to tell them the " Best evidence ever ".

Honestly the way hes behaving its like hes just discovered Evolution and is trying to convince the world !! Its ridiculous !

The book is clearly aimed at the religious , which is a complete waste of time , it cannot possibly be aimed at the scientific community because it is totally unnecessary , in other words a complete waste of the mans talents. Its worthless work !

The only possible reason I can see for this book is to get him some more TV slots and inflate his already overblown ego.

To be fair, I'm going to wait until the reviews.

If the book is mainly a factual argument for evolution being true, then no purchase. If however it is an appreciation of evolution and nature (you gotta admit his biologist stuff is brill) then it's a get natch

Zombrex

andy1249 wrote: »

His career as a scientist is over. He would rather spend his time these days arguing nonsense out in public.

Do you really think science needs a book detailing the " Best Evidence" for Evolution ? Who exactly do you think this book is for ? Anyone even remotely read up on the subject either through pop science or serious study does not need Dawkins to tell them the " Best evidence ever ".

Honestly the way hes behaving its like hes just discovered Evolution and is trying to convince the world !! Its ridiculous !

The book is clearly aimed at the religious , which is a complete waste of time , it cannot possibly be aimed at the scientific community because it is totally unnecessary , in other words a complete waste of the mans talents. Its worthless work !

The only possible reason I can see for this book is to get him some more TV slots and inflate his already overblown ego.

Ewwww .. hang bags at dawn! Oh no you didn't!! *snap* :P