or
Sign in to turn on 1-Click ordering.
or
Amazon Prime Free Trial required. Sign up when you check out. Learn More
More Buying Choices
Have one to sell? Sell yours here
The Dawkins Delusion?: Atheist Fundamentalism and the Denial of the Divine
 
 
Tell the Publisher!
I'd like to read this book on Kindle

Don't have a Kindle? Get your Kindle here, or download a FREE Kindle Reading App.

The Dawkins Delusion?: Atheist Fundamentalism and the Denial of the Divine [Hardcover]

Alister McGrath (Author), Joanna Collicutt McGrath (Author)
3.1 out of 5 stars  See all reviews (100 customer reviews)

List Price: $16.00
Price: $10.77 & eligible for FREE Super Saver Shipping on orders over $25. Details
You Save: $5.23 (33%)
o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o
In Stock.
Ships from and sold by Amazon.com. Gift-wrap available.
Only 14 left in stock--order soon (more on the way).
Want it delivered Tuesday, January 31? Choose One-Day Shipping at checkout. Details

Formats

Amazon Price New from Used from
Hardcover $10.77  
Paperback $10.29  

Book Description

May 25, 2007
World-renowned scientist Richard Dawkins writes in The God Delusion: "If this book works as I intend, religious readers who open it will be atheists when they put it down." The volume has received wide coverage, fueled much passionate debate and caused not a little confusion. Alister McGrath, along with his wife Joanna, are ideal to evaluate Dawkins's ideas. Once an atheist himself, he gained a doctorate in molecular biophysics before going on to become a leading Christian theologian. He wonders how two people, who have reflected at length on substantially the same world, could possibly have come to such different conclusions about God. McGrath subjects Dawkins's critique of faith to rigorous scrutiny. His exhilarating, meticulously argued response deals with questions such as Is faith intellectual nonsense? Are science and religion locked in a battle to the death? Can the roots of Christianity be explained away scientifically? Is Christianity simply a force for evil? This book will be warmly received by those looking for a reliable assessment of The God Delusion and the many questions it raises--including, above all, the relevance of faith and the quest for meaning.

Frequently Bought Together

Customers buy this book with The God Delusion $10.85

The Dawkins Delusion?: Atheist Fundamentalism and the Denial of the Divine + The God Delusion
  • This item: The Dawkins Delusion?: Atheist Fundamentalism and the Denial of the Divine

    In Stock.
    Ships from and sold by Amazon.com.
    Eligible for FREE Super Saver Shipping on orders over $25. Details

  • The God Delusion

    In Stock.
    Ships from and sold by Amazon.com.
    Eligible for FREE Super Saver Shipping on orders over $25. Details



Editorial Reviews

From Publishers Weekly

When authors write books that criticize other books, they have usually already lost; the original book has set the agenda to which the critics respond, and the outcome is foretold. Not in this case. The McGraths expeditiously plow into the flank of Dawkins's fundamentalist atheism, made famous in The God Delusion, and run him from the battlefield. The book works partly because they are so much more gracious to Dawkins than Dawkins is to believers: Dawkins's The Blind Watchmaker remains the finest critique of William Paley's naturalistic arguments for deism available, for example. The authors can even point to instances in which their interactions with him, both literary and personal, have changed his manner of arguing: he can no longer say that Tertullian praised Christian belief because of its absurdity or that religion necessarily makes one violent. The McGraths are frustrated, then, that Dawkins continues to write on the a priori, nonscientific assumption that religious believers are either deluded or meretricious, never pausing to consider the evidence not in his favor or the complex beliefs and practices of actual Christians. They conclude disquietingly: perhaps Dawkins is aware that demagogic ranting that displays confidence in the face of counterevidence is the way to sway unlearned masses. (July)
Copyright © Reed Business Information, a division of Reed Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Review

"McGrath identifies Dawkins' flawed arguments with surgical precision. McGrath spotlights Dawkins' embarrassing biblical ignorance and exposes his religion-as-virus-of-the-mind theory as sociological naivete. This intelligent, yet accessible book is a must-read for anyone interested in the subject or for those with friends sucked under by the new current of atheist literature." (New Man, November/December 2007 )

"The McGraths expeditiously plow into the flank of Dawkins's fundamentalist atheism, made famous in The God Delusion, and run him from the battlefield." (Publishers Weekly, May 14, 2007 )

"Combining scholarship with a popular style, the McGraths examine Dawkins's arguments and find them wanting. They show the inadequacy of his argument on the major points, contending that Dawkins's critique of religion is based on hearsay and anecdotal evidence rather than on hard research and that he employs rhetoric rather than rationality." (Library Journal, August 2007 )

"One could hardly think of a better apologist for theism than Alister McGrath. This atheist-turned-Christian, also of Oxford, is a professor of historical theology. But as a student of molecular biophysics, he possesses the dual credibility in science and religion that Dawkins lacks. Like watching one schoolboy do another's work, McGrath's true gift is pointing out what Dawkins is obliged to show in order to make his case." (Christianity Today, November 2007 )

"Alister and Joanna McGrath offer a meaty book without all the gratuitous gristle, clearly making their points." (Jim Miller Review, June 2007 )

"You cannot help but be impressed with the depth of scholarship which the McGraths bring to this discussion--something markedly different than Dawkins." (Deinde blog, deinde.org, August 18, 2007 )

"You cannot argue with the McGraths' credentials or the content of this book. It is very well done." (Does God Exist? November/December 2007 )

"Alister McGrath provides an excellent rebuttal to Dawkin's arguments against God and religion. Scholarly, yes but also very readable for lay people." (M. F. in Libraries Alive, February 2008 )

"[T]he McGraths' book is an effective response." (Mark D. Barret, Esq., in Lay Witness, March/April 2008 )

"While not exhaustive (by design), the McGraths have offered us a well-reasoned critique of the atheistic arguments of Dawkins, and left us with a cogent description of the inherent weaknesses in The God Delusion. I recommend it to my friends on both sides of this debate." (Cliff Martin, Outside the Box (cliff-martin.blogspot.com), June 14, 2008 )

"[H]elps theistic people respond more intelligently to the current religion-bashing that has become a source of schadenfreude for some (though certainly not all) nonbelievers." (David von Schlichten, Lutheran Partners, July/August 2008 )

"This book will be warmly received by those looking for a reliable assessment of The God Delusion and the many questions it raised--including all the relevance of faith and the quest for meaning." (Enrichment Journal, Fall 2008 )

"This book will be warmly received by those who are looking for a real assessment of The God Delusion." ("What's New on the Bookshelf" with Shirley Updyke, WRGN )

"Alister McGrath invariably combines enormous scholarship with an accessible and engaging style." (Rowan Williams, Archbishop of Canterbury )

"The God Delusion makes me embarrassed to be an atheist, and the McGraths show why." (Michael Ruse, Lucyle T. Werkmeister Professor of Philosophy, and Director of the Program in the History and Philosophy of Science, Department of Philosophy, Florida State University )

"Richard Dawkins's utopian vision of a world without religion is here deftly punctured by the McGraths' informed discourse. His fellow Oxonians clearly demonstrate the gaps, inconsistencies and surprising lack of depth in Dawkins's arguments." (Owen Gingerich, Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics, and author of God's Universe )

"With rigorous logic and exquisite fairness, the McGraths have exposed Dawkins's very superficial understanding of the history of religion and theology. Because he is so 'out of his depth' in these areas, Dawkins uses his fundamentalistic scientism and atheism to constantly misjudge the possibilities for dialogue between religion and science. Thank God for scholars like the McGraths who are committed to finding truth in both." (Dr. Timothy Johnson, physician, journalist and author of Finding God in the Questions )

"Addressing the conclusions of The God Delusion point by point with the devastating insight of a molecular biologist turned theologian, Alister McGrath dismantles the argument that science should lead to atheism, and demonstrates instead that Dawkins has abandoned his much-cherished rationality to embrace an embittered manifesto of dogmatic atheist fundamentalism." (Francis Collins, Director of the Human Genome Project )

"In this crisp and cogent book, Alister and Joanna McGrath note, among other things, how fundamentalist scientism fuels antiscientific Christian fundamentalism. They also remind us of well-documented associations between an active faith and measures of health and well-being. A must-read contribution to today's debate other whether religion spreads dangerous falsehoods or benevolent wisdom." (David G. Myers, Professor of Psychology, Hope College )

"McGrath has distinguished himself . . . as an historical theologian, [and] a generous, . . . witty writer who brings to life topics that would turn to dust in others' hands." (Publishers Weekly )

Product Details

  • Hardcover: 118 pages
  • Publisher: IVP Books (May 25, 2007)
  • Language: English
  • ISBN-10: 083083446X
  • ISBN-13: 978-0830834464
  • Product Dimensions: 8.3 x 5.7 x 0.7 inches
  • Shipping Weight: 10.4 ounces (View shipping rates and policies)
  • Average Customer Review: 3.1 out of 5 stars  See all reviews (100 customer reviews)
  • Amazon Best Sellers Rank: #135,723 in Books (See Top 100 in Books)

More About the Author

Alister E. McGrath is a historian, biochemist, and Christian theologian born in Belfast, Northern Ireland. A longtime professor at Oxford University, he now holds the chair in theology, ministry, and education at the University of London. He is the author of several books on theology and history, including Christianity's Dangerous Idea, In the Beginning, and The Twilight of Atheism. He lives in Oxford, England, and lectures regularly in the United States.

 

Customer Reviews

100 Reviews
5 star:
 (30)
4 star:
 (18)
3 star:
 (14)
2 star:
 (11)
1 star:
 (27)
 
 
 
 
 
Average Customer Review
3.1 out of 5 stars (100 customer reviews)
 
 
 
 
Share your thoughts with other customers:
Most Helpful Customer Reviews

267 of 342 people found the following review helpful:
2.0 out of 5 stars Poor attempt, July 22, 2007
This review is from: The Dawkins Delusion?: Atheist Fundamentalism and the Denial of the Divine (Hardcover)
At the beginning I felt this book had promise. It was nice to know that the author of the book had previously been an atheist, so I felt that he could at least bring some understanding to the table. I was also heartened by his generally positive treatment of Dawkins, especially in speaking of his previous book. For these reasons, I became interested immediately in the rebuttal McGrath would bring to the table. I was sorely disappointed.

As an over-arching theme of the entire book, McGrath claims that Dawkins fails to bring any sort of scientific rigor to the table. There is some (emphasis some) truth to that statement. But, as is generally the case with criticism, McGrath finds himself guilty of the same sin throughout. If the writing style of Dawkins is so polemic then it would be wise to take the high road and avoid it, rather than hiking up the pant legs and hopping right down into the muck.

The most frustrating thing about this book was how consistently McGrath claimed Dawkins holds certain views, then proves those views false. Unfortunately, a quick glance at the actual text shows over and again that Dawkins never claimed those arguments in the first place.

The place where this is most prevalent is in the middle 20 pages where McGrath attacks Dawkins views on where a belief in God came from. He says that Dawkins falls back on all sorts of arguments such as memes that are completely insubstantial. The funny thing is that if you read Dawkins's book, you see that he makes no claim to the authenticity of the ideas. In fact, he is quite careful to couch all of the claims as hypothesis, nothing more. Whereas McGrath claims that Dawkins is saying that these are true. It's even odd that so much space of this 100 page book was spent discussing this issue as it is completely ancillary to Dawkins's argument in the first place.

Next, McGrath seems to imply that Dawkins hates all religious people. He does not. In fact, he talks many times about how much he likes these people. It's not the people he hates, it's the belief systems. I felt that this was very clear throughout. I will admit that his tone can be quite sarcastic and condescending at times. He does not take that to the next level of hate, which is what McGrath seems to imply.

McGrath continually amazed me at the odd selection of talking points. He seemed to just be frustrated and not know where to go so he just went wherever the wind would take him. This is most evident in his refutation of Dawkins's discussion of infinite regress. He actually claims that scientists searching for the grand unification theory debunks the infinite regress argument. How ridiculous of an argument is that? I just couldn't believe that such an idea could possibly strike someone as even remotely cogent.

Another of his tactics is to counter claims made by Dawkins by saying, "I don't believe that." That's wonderful that he is a progressive person with regards to religion, but such is generally not the case. Dawkins never claims that beliefs he's countering are held by everyone. Just because some Christians realize the Earth is older than 6,000 years doesn't mean that it's not an important talking point, because the fact remains that many people do believe it.

And I have one more thing while I'm bashing the book. Why was he only able to come up with 96 large print pages against Dawkins's 400 page behemoth? I left the book feeling that McGrath hadn't really tried to respond to Dawkins. He feels like he just gave up half way through. The majority of "The God Delusion" remains completely unmentioned, unrefuted.

But now for the reason I gave the book two stars instead of just one. His last chapter made me think. Dawkins blames much of the world's problems on religion, especially violence. McGrath makes a good argument that it is really dogmaticism, not religion (though he stops short of saying it thusly). There have been dogmatic atheists that have caused untold horror just as there are dogmatic theists that have also caused untold horror. This last chapter really made me have to think a bit about where the problem of violence stems. If the book had simply been this chapter rather than the previous nonsense, I probably would have rated it four stars.

Ultimately, McGrath explains very well his purpose in writing this book. His purpose is not scholarly, his purpose is to supply people answers for when their friends come around. I think that's a shame. Is that what our public dialogue is? Are we simply looking for pre-written answers to throw at those with whom we disagree? Or are we honestly seeking for truth and answers?
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews 
Was this review helpful to you? Yes No


23 of 28 people found the following review helpful:
4.0 out of 5 stars The McGrath's on Real Delusions, May 19, 2011
Author Alister McGrath studied chemistry, theology, and molecular biophysics at Oxford, and earned doctorates in science and theology (author of Dawkins' God: Genes, Memes, and the Meaning of Life, and numerous other volumes). Likewise, Mrs. McGrath is also well-educated. The McGraths write: "The fact that Dawkins has penned a four-hundred-page book declaring that God is a delusion is itself highly significant." He compares Dawkins's "total dogmatic conviction of correctness" to "a religious fundamentalism which refuses to allow its ideas to be examined or challenged"(p.12).

McGrath and Mrs. McGrath on Dawkins' argument: "Anecdote is substituted for evidence; selective internet trawling for quotes displaces rigorous and comprehensive engagement with primary sources. The good doctor opines that Dawkins' "argument from improbability" is a poorly structured expansion of the child's 'Who made God?' query. He also contends that the capacity of science to explain itself requires explanation, and that the best account of this explanatory capacity lies in the notion of God.

McGrath argues that "Dawkins clearly has no mandate whatsoever to speak for the scientific community at this point or on this topic. There is a massive observational discrepancy between the number of scientists that Dawkins believes should be atheists, and those who are so in practice....Dawkins is clearly entrenched in his own peculiar version of a fundamentalist dualism."

Chapters include:

- Deluded about God?
- Has Science disproved God?
- Origins of Religion
- Is religion evil? (115 pages).

The Mcgrath's offer a volume that is short, breezy, yet engages the reader with the real difficulty of the atheistic worldview, and particularly Dawkins' weakness as a thinker.

No one has enough faith to believe that:

* Order came from disorder
* Uniformity came from the accidental
* Intelligence came from non-intelligence
* Love came from hard matter

The atheists overturn their materialistic worldview as they claim that they have a purpose in their science, lectures, and books. If the material universe is all there is, there is no foundation for purpose and no ultimate meaning. One reason the NAs seem so ornery and militant is their lack of spiritual sight and logical thought.

Atheist Ruse notes: "Let me say that I believe the new atheists do the side of science a grave disservice. I will defend to the death the right of them to say what they do--as one who is English-born one of the things I admire most about the USA is the First Amendment. But I think first that these people do a disservice to scholarship. Their [the New Atheists] treatment of the religious viewpoint is pathetic to the point of non-being. Richard Dawkins in "The God Delusion" would fail any introductory philosophy or religion course. Proudly he criticizes that whereof he knows nothing. As I have said elsewhere, for the first time in my life, I felt sorry for the ontological argument. If we criticized gene theory with as little knowledge as Dawkins has of religion and philosophy, he would be rightly indignant. ... I am indignant at the poor quality of the argumentation in Dawkins, Dennett, Hitchens, and all of the others in that group. ... "The God Delusion" makes me ashamed to be an atheist. Let me say that again. Let me say also that I am proud to be the focus of the invective of the new atheists. They are a disaster and I want to be on the front line of those who say so" (Ruse: "Science and Spirituality").

If the atheist has a pre-commitment to wide metaphysical naturalism he dwells in a self-nullifying epistemic structure. Broad Naturalism is a philosophical system that asserts that the universe and everything in it are made up solely of matter and motion (the only things that exist are physical things in motion). Naturalistic skeptics have a nonphysical presupposition that assumes that only the physical reality exists. That is one of the reasons that the zealous evolutionist Dawkins begins his book "The Blind Watchmaker" with a confession: "Biology is the study of complicated things that give the appearance of having been designed for a purpose." An immense problem surfaces for the man who refuses to believe in God considering that he cannot find any foundation for purpose or meaning. He has no ultimate goal, direction, or purpose. In the anti-theistic worldview of strict naturalism, everything is heading for insensibleness and oblivion since the universe is winding down.

"An article of our secular faith: there is nothing exceptional about human life" (Tom Bethell).

"To expect to learn anything about important theological problems from Richard Dawkins or Daniel Dennett is like expecting to learn about medieval history from someone who had only read Robin Hood" (Rodney Stark).

Dawkins attempts to disprove theism through empiricism (truth is found through man's unchaperoned five senses). But the form of any worldview, including the NAs', requires a priori (something prior to or independent of observation and experience, which is assumed to be true) equipment. But a priori truths cannot be justified from observation. Universal norms (laws of logic and moral absolutes) must be taken for granted in forming any worldview, but empiricism cannot provide the conditions that are necessary for universal fixed norms. Resting one's worldview on observation, apart from the universal pre-essentials, can only result in nonsense and the unintelligibility of that which one observes. Interpreting and making sense of that which is observed cannot come from observation alone. There must be knowledge equipment already supplied that is not wholly justified by the five senses. God provides the a prior essentials for the intelligibility of observation that even empiricism requires. God is unavoidable for the construction of any worldview, including a faulty one that rests upon empiricism.
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews 
Was this review helpful to you? Yes No


22 of 29 people found the following review helpful:
3.0 out of 5 stars The polemical battle continues, June 10, 2008
This review is from: The Dawkins Delusion?: Atheist Fundamentalism and the Denial of the Divine (Hardcover)
I read Alister McGrath's small book--little more than a broadside, actually--when it first appeared, and wasn't terribly impressed by it. It struck me as a largely polemical riposte thrown together in hasty response to Dawkins' own polemic. Rereading it, I find nothing that alters my original judgment.

I suppose McGrath's book is good enough as polemics go. Dawkins' God Delusion really is a wretchedly bad book--rambling, shrill, mean-spirited, and short on argumentation. There are extremely strong arguments for atheism, and Dawkins--who may be a decent scientist but definitely is no philosopher--overlooks nearly every one of them. So on one level, McGrath's quick and not very heady criticisms of Dawkins--the latter strawmans in characterizing religious belief, focusing on the pathological rather than the normal; his God-meme thesis seems to violate the scientific standards Dawkins otherwise insists on; his claims that religious belief always leads to moral evil are grossly unsubstantiated; his criticism of the Anthropic argument presumes without argument that improbability suggests nonexistence (this, by the way, is a potentially interesting response to Dawkins, but it's typically underdeveloped here by McGrath); his militancy both apes and encourages the religious fundamentalism he despises--are justified, or at the very least predictable. The poor and polemical quality of Dawkins' work gets answered here in kind.

But on another level, none of us should settle for polemics of either the McGrath or Dawkins variety. The question of whether God exists is too important to be left to these sorts of street fights. They may be entertaining up to a point, and obviously serve as outlets for barely-concealed rancor. But they generate more heat than light. It's curious and sad that the discussion has degenerated so quickly from the higher and more insightful discussions of just the recent past.

I'd suggest that better starting points than the Dawkins/McGrath one include the essays in The Cambridge Companion to Atheism (Michael Martin, editor), David Ramsey Steele's Atheism Explained, Hume's Natural Dialogues Concerning Religion, and John Haught's God and the New Atheism. These authors avoid polemics and focus on arguments. What a concept.

Help other customers find the most helpful reviews 
Was this review helpful to you? Yes No

Share your thoughts with other customers: Create your own review
 
 
 
Most Recent Customer Reviews











Only search this product's reviews



Inside This Book (learn more)
Browse Sample Pages:
Front Cover | Table of Contents | First Pages | Surprise Me!
Search Inside This Book:

What Other Items Do Customers Buy After Viewing This Item?


Tags Customers Associate with This Product

 (What's this?)
Click on a tag to find related items, discussions, and people.
 
(11)
(10)

Your tags: Add your first tag
 

Sell a Digital Version of This Book in the Kindle Store

If you are a publisher or author and hold the digital rights to a book, you can sell a digital version of it in our Kindle Store. Learn more

Customer Discussions

This product's forum
Discussion Replies Latest Post
How is Dawkins qualified to talk about God (Theology)? 36 May 25, 2010
Does Richard Dawkins Exist? 25 Mar 5, 2010
"Atheist Fundamentalism" 3 Feb 13, 2010
The Power of Now is the Power of Self 0 Dec 2, 2008
See all 4 discussions...  
Start a new discussion
Topic:
First post:
Prompts for sign-in
 


Active discussions in related forums
Search Customer Discussions
   
Related forums





Look for Similar Items by Category


Look for Similar Items by Subject