tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10835776.post6379000436864060335..comments2023-10-30T07:45:43.656-04:00Comments on Thoughts and Ideas: Briefly Reviewed: The God Delusion by Richard DawkinsA Wiser Man Than Ihttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02405864709965908573noreply@blogger.comBlogger8125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10835776.post-8261029191050239832011-01-28T11:27:22.633-05:002011-01-28T11:27:22.633-05:00As a Newbie, I am always searching online for arti...As a Newbie, I am always searching online for articles that can help me. Thank you Wow! Thank you! I always wanted to write in my site something like that. Can I take part of your post to my blog?.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10835776.post-92153083910474302392008-07-28T11:36:00.000-04:002008-07-28T11:36:00.000-04:00As Dawkins predicted in his book, religion, and th...As Dawkins predicted in his book, religion, and those who are slaves to it, will not be able to see a bigger picture even having read the said book. The majority of remarks seem to be vitriolic and patronizing towards Dawkins - just what they were complaining Dawkins was to the reader in his work...how ironic! My question, and I thought I was relatively ambivalent until I read the cliche and truly depressing responses from the religious to Dawkins' book: How many hundreds of thousands more humans will die in the name of your invisible, 'good' God?Jehova unwitnessedhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01766736496203711138noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10835776.post-43011820474564901462008-01-11T13:48:00.000-05:002008-01-11T13:48:00.000-05:00How can anyone take religion seriously. It is an ...How can anyone take religion seriously. It is an ugly, divisive<BR/>idea where humans must beg and grovel to please a sadistic god. Oh please! You may feel that you belong groveling and praying, since your monothesism tells you you are filthy, sinning creatures, but I am sickened by your beliefs. Read, read, read, and then you may understand. Read history and philosophy and science. Read about the great ideas and the humans who explored them. Read all the "holy books" which were writen by folks who know a good scam when they saw one. They also knew how to usurp and control the reasources they wanted, with the permission of their correct"god". Read all the ancient wisdom writings and find the wheat from the chaff yourselves. Dawkins doesn't say anything that can't be researched for your own knowledge. Wake up people and throw off your sad religions. Let's find a better way to go into the future.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10835776.post-60694071286176827192007-09-08T13:09:00.000-04:002007-09-08T13:09:00.000-04:00But Dawkins is not only vitriolic, he is a piss-po...<I>But Dawkins is not only vitriolic, he is a piss-poor philosopher.</I><BR/><BR/>I completely agree. Reading his book was, unfortunately, little more than a waste of time, though it is telling that he is respected in certain circles.A Wiser Man Than Ihttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02405864709965908573noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10835776.post-44068766444625150692007-09-08T03:06:00.000-04:002007-09-08T03:06:00.000-04:00Interesting comments. I have just posted my own cr...Interesting comments. I have just posted my own critique of the book on my own blog, and Sphere led me to yours. It IS interesting that Dawkins manages to insult the intelligence and/or integrity of just about anybody who doesn't share his particular narrow viewpoint. But his arguments really are almost laughable. I've seen several comments by atheists that they are embarrassed by his book. Reading good, well-reasoned atheistic arguments is good for theists; it makes one examine and think clearly about one's own beliefs. But Dawkins is not only vitriolic, he is a piss-poor philosopher.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10835776.post-88304558719431287382007-09-05T11:38:00.000-04:002007-09-05T11:38:00.000-04:00Is he not a moral parasite? If he sided with Aris...Is he not a moral parasite? If he sided with Aristotle and the natural law, I wouldn't have as much of a problem with his morality, but he rejects Aristotle and his follower Thomas Aquinas because they both believed in God.<BR/><BR/>Instead, to Dawkins, morality is whatever the Zeitgeist says it is. His morality is entirely drawn from cultural "truths" which he subjectively determines. Hence he is a moral parasite.A Wiser Man Than Ihttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02405864709965908573noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10835776.post-1049283803943368162007-09-05T11:31:00.000-04:002007-09-05T11:31:00.000-04:00Good to see you are not "indignant" about the rece...Good to see you are not "indignant" about the recent writings of this "moral parasite".troutskyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16020298501632120830noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10835776.post-29758314079161855612007-09-05T01:44:00.000-04:002007-09-05T01:44:00.000-04:00http://www.richard-dawkins.is-a-jerk.com<A HREF="http://www.richard-dawkins.is-a-jerk.com" REL="nofollow"> http://www.richard-dawkins.is-a-jerk.com </A>Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com