News1 min ago
Atheist Literature
152 Answers
Do any of the religious people here ever read books written by atheist authors such as Richard Dawkins and Sam Harris? If ‘yes’, what have you read and what are your thoughts - and if ‘no’ why not?
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by naomi24. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
Ratter,I have come to the conclusion having read various posts by theists on the subject of atheism, that many of them are incapable of comprehending what non-belief is. It is as if belief so pervades their brains that they cannot conceive (even if they try) of not having belief. That is why some of them can only understand atheism as a form of religion and why some feel obliged to believe in some kind of religion.
Sith123 - “... haha, so you think that just because i am a muslim, i do not read other books... this just shows stereotypes. As i am a muslim you believe that all i read is the quran? lol, classic...”
Err, no... that's not what I'm saying at all! You've complete misunderstood my position.
I repeat - “... One might conclude that the inability of various theists to debate the works of Dawkins and Hitchens is borne not from an unwillingness to engage in debate about specific points but is rather an inevitable consequence of them not being familiar with what these authors have actually written.”
I thought I was being pretty unequivocal. I'm not saying I believe that theists only read their own holy scripture and never expand their knowledge by reading other books. What I am suggesting – not unreasonably – is that most theists wouldn't pay money and take the time to read a book that suggested that God simply does not exist. In a nutshell – I believe that 99% of all those people who believe in God will not have read a book that counters their belief. I would be very surprised if you yourself have read 'God Is Not Great' or 'Climbing Mount Improbable' or any of the books that Naomi lists above.
You have badly misinterpreted my post if you think I believe that those of a religious persuasion are unable, incapable or unwilling to read anything other than their sacred texts.
Err, no... that's not what I'm saying at all! You've complete misunderstood my position.
I repeat - “... One might conclude that the inability of various theists to debate the works of Dawkins and Hitchens is borne not from an unwillingness to engage in debate about specific points but is rather an inevitable consequence of them not being familiar with what these authors have actually written.”
I thought I was being pretty unequivocal. I'm not saying I believe that theists only read their own holy scripture and never expand their knowledge by reading other books. What I am suggesting – not unreasonably – is that most theists wouldn't pay money and take the time to read a book that suggested that God simply does not exist. In a nutshell – I believe that 99% of all those people who believe in God will not have read a book that counters their belief. I would be very surprised if you yourself have read 'God Is Not Great' or 'Climbing Mount Improbable' or any of the books that Naomi lists above.
You have badly misinterpreted my post if you think I believe that those of a religious persuasion are unable, incapable or unwilling to read anything other than their sacred texts.
no birdie. i got your point entirely:
//Have you really? Do you mean 'read' in a Keyplusian kind of way? That is to say, you haven't read any of Dawkins' books but simply claim to have done so in order to make blasé statements along the lines of, “I've read his book(s) but I do not agree with his conclusions”, or “He has nothing new to say in this debate”? //
there you go. You say i did not read it and that i only pretend to to make biased opinions?
Naomi, i understood the books and some of the key concepts but when i tried to apply it to practicallity it didnt work. thats just my opinion. i researched islam and found it for myself more convincing.
//Have you really? Do you mean 'read' in a Keyplusian kind of way? That is to say, you haven't read any of Dawkins' books but simply claim to have done so in order to make blasé statements along the lines of, “I've read his book(s) but I do not agree with his conclusions”, or “He has nothing new to say in this debate”? //
there you go. You say i did not read it and that i only pretend to to make biased opinions?
Naomi, i understood the books and some of the key concepts but when i tried to apply it to practicallity it didnt work. thats just my opinion. i researched islam and found it for myself more convincing.
Sith - “... You can say that it is a non belief but that is technically still a belief. You dont BELIEVE in god...”
If you are going to pugilistically pummel words into meaning what you want them to mean rather than what they actually mean, then I shall tentatively agree that a lack of belief can, in itself, be a belief if you also agree that bald is a hair colour.
If you are going to pugilistically pummel words into meaning what you want them to mean rather than what they actually mean, then I shall tentatively agree that a lack of belief can, in itself, be a belief if you also agree that bald is a hair colour.
Sith - “... no birdie. i got your point entirely... You say i did not read it and that i only pretend to to make biased opinions?...”
When you say you read 'it', what 'it' specifically are you referring to? I was speaking about multiple books (hence my phrase, “... any of Dawkins' books...”) but you have responded in the singular. This suggests to me that you are not being entirely honest with us. If you were, you would have stated which books you have read rather than simply claiming that you have read 'it'.
Also, I notice that you haven't bothered to address Naomi's question, “So what did you think of ‘The God Delusion’, ‘The Blind Watchmaker’, and ‘The Selfish Gene’?”
I wonder why?
When you say you read 'it', what 'it' specifically are you referring to? I was speaking about multiple books (hence my phrase, “... any of Dawkins' books...”) but you have responded in the singular. This suggests to me that you are not being entirely honest with us. If you were, you would have stated which books you have read rather than simply claiming that you have read 'it'.
Also, I notice that you haven't bothered to address Naomi's question, “So what did you think of ‘The God Delusion’, ‘The Blind Watchmaker’, and ‘The Selfish Gene’?”
I wonder why?
birdie, i find it quite silly that you can say what i am saying is true or false over a computer on a debate thorum. Unless you have super human powers which i highly doubt than you cannot say i am a lyer or a fraud or not entirely truthful just because i do not agree with any of your points.
so just to get your point. youre saying that you do not believe in a god but however you believe in nothing else. In my eyes that is quite silly. you believe in nothing???
so just to get your point. youre saying that you do not believe in a god but however you believe in nothing else. In my eyes that is quite silly. you believe in nothing???
ok, what i thought about the god dellusion. I read it, some things seemed to make sence, a lot did not. However than i read the dawkins dellusion and i have to say that that put the god dellusion into perspective for me. So no, that book did not convince me.
The blind watchmaker. read that. It made again, some sence than when i read more into it nothing in it seemed to really answer any questions and even though it did answer some, it was what we muslims already believe as, although many of you may find it unlikely, we do believe that animals do evolve however with the help of god.
The selfish gene. A good book. However did not convince me at all. Although, again, we muslims do believe in genes.
There you go, i answered your questions but now i have something to ask? Birdie you have not answered my question.
When you stated i did not read it than i put this. You seemed very quite after this lol.
//Have you really? Do you mean 'read' in a Keyplusian kind of way? That is to say, you haven't read any of Dawkins' books but simply claim to have done so in order to make blasé statements along the lines of, “I've read his book(s) but I do not agree with his conclusions”, or “He has nothing new to say in this debate”? //
The blind watchmaker. read that. It made again, some sence than when i read more into it nothing in it seemed to really answer any questions and even though it did answer some, it was what we muslims already believe as, although many of you may find it unlikely, we do believe that animals do evolve however with the help of god.
The selfish gene. A good book. However did not convince me at all. Although, again, we muslims do believe in genes.
There you go, i answered your questions but now i have something to ask? Birdie you have not answered my question.
When you stated i did not read it than i put this. You seemed very quite after this lol.
//Have you really? Do you mean 'read' in a Keyplusian kind of way? That is to say, you haven't read any of Dawkins' books but simply claim to have done so in order to make blasé statements along the lines of, “I've read his book(s) but I do not agree with his conclusions”, or “He has nothing new to say in this debate”? //
Sith, I also have ‘The Dawkins Delusion’ on my shelf. It claims its authors evaluate Dawkins’ ideas and subject his ‘critique of faith to rigorous scrutiny’. In fact it does neither. It is a skinny scrap of a book that, in the main, does not address the issues, but simply attempts to inflict a personal assassination upon Richard Dawkins. When read in conjunction with Dawkins’ own work, it fails dismally.
//we muslims do believe in genes.//
If you have read these books, you haven’t understood them.
//whats a keyplusian kind of way???//
I was initially surprised that Keyplus, who is usually very keen to gender support, hadn’t joined you in your efforts on here – but on second thoughts, I’m not.
//we muslims do believe in genes.//
If you have read these books, you haven’t understood them.
//whats a keyplusian kind of way???//
I was initially surprised that Keyplus, who is usually very keen to gender support, hadn’t joined you in your efforts on here – but on second thoughts, I’m not.
Latest Posts
Crosswords2 mins ago
Crosswords3 mins ago
Quizzes & Puzzles11 mins ago
ChatterBank11 mins ago
