[PDF] ↠ Dawkins' God: Genes, Memes, and the Meaning of Life Author Alister E. McGrath – Thomashillier.co.uk

Dawkins' God: Genes, Memes, and the Meaning of Life A Fully Updated New Edition Of A Critically Acclaimed Examination Of The Theories And Writings Of Richard Dawkins By A World Renowned Expert On The Relation Of Science And Religion Includes In Depth Analysis Of Dawkins Landmark Treatise The God Delusion 2006 , As Well As Coverage Of His Later Popular Works The Magic Of Reality 2011 And The Greatest Show On Earth 2011 ,and A New Chapter On Dawkins As A Popularizer Of Science Tackles Dawkins Hostile And Controversial Views On Religion, And Examine The Religious Implications Of His Scientific Ideas Including A Comprehensive Investigation Of The Selfish Gene Written In An Accessible And Engaging Style That Will Appeal To Anyone Interested In Better Understanding The Interplay Between Science And Religion

10 thoughts on “Dawkins' God: Genes, Memes, and the Meaning of Life

  1. says:

    This book is a helpful response to much of Dawkins earlier work before his massively popular The God Delusion This book was originally published before The God Delusion came out and does not interact with it However, one will find it a beneficial critique of Dawkins as a whole First, McGrath is both a scientist and a theologian He is an expert on the history of idea and the history of both theological and scientific development He respects Dawkins as a scientist where Dawkins makes reasoned and empirical observations but is quite honest about when and how Dawkins jumps the shark into irrational critiques of religion with little or no logic, historical depth and empirical research to the extent that he even makes assertions trends established by the best scholarship and research McGrath points this out through the work McGrath begins with a discussion of evolution and the role of genetics, including Dawkins the Selfish Gene He then goes on to show historically and philosophcially that evolution did not entail the rejection of God The reader may be surprised to find numerous 19th century theologians who accepted evolution along with scientists established at the forefront their field who either believe in God or believe that Darwinism cannot adjudicate on the issue.McGrath shows how Dawkins critique of William Paley misses where most Christians have stood on issue of God s relationship to th...

  2. says:

    Note This review was written a long time ago which was when I read the book It may not totally reflect my modern opinions, which have changed drastically since 2007 in the realm of politics at least.Dawkins God A Critical LookThis essay is a critical look at the ideas of Alister McGrath, who argues against some of Richard Dawkins ideas I will deal with the arguments that he uses against Dawkins Chapter Two The Blind WatchmakerMcGrath portrays Dawkins ideas as being Darwinism is necarssarily atheistic Darwinism is the only way to explain the world because as God and other expalantions like Lamarckism fail as explanatory principles Dawkins reasoning goes along these lines It either came about by creation or it came about by some form of evolution The mind first view the creator explains nothing, because it leaves us with the bigger problem of who created the creator Thus, we end up in an infinite regress of gods if we do not postulate some way of getting complexity from non complexity, hence evolution see Dennett 1995 Dawkins 2006 McGrath has three objections to Dawkins positions 1 The Scientific method is incapable of proving or disproving God s existence Science only deals with naturalistic explanations If we are to answer the question of whether God exists, we cannot decide by science.2 Just because God need not be invoked in the explanatory process of evolution doesn t mean he doesn t exist 3 The God as watchmaker idea...

  3. says:

    This was a fantastic book Alister McGrath is a good writer and enjoyable to read In this book he dissects and rips apart Richard Dawkins piece by piece It s a fair treatment of the data and arguments and I would highly recommend it to anyone interested in the relationship between science and faith.

  4. says:

    A part of science vs religion controversy It critizes the anti religion school led by Dawkins and its idea of evolution biologically dna and spiritually meme Not so very convincing, as expected And rather boring.

  5. says:

    Too much biology focused I was hoping for a philosophical theme.

  6. says:

    I really enjoyed this book because it is a really good response to Richard Dawkins and his arguments against god Let me mention somethings in this like it tells you on how Richard Dawkins refutation on the watchmaker argument doesn t refute God s existence, how a scientific method can prove or disprove god and on thing I realised while reading this book is that all those people that credit god for evolution , an agnostic choice on whenever god caused or didn t evolut...

  7. says:

    Richard Dawkins is a compelling author with serious chops Any book claiming to take on Dawkins must be similarly compelling from an author with similar chops Alister McGrath has written, and is, one.McGrath adopts the right approach here, IMO He does three things skillfully Accepts science By endorsing the core of evolution and showing his excellent scientific depth in other domains, McGrath creates credibility for himself and avoids dismissal of his rebuttal Puts Dawkins in context Science and people exist, and should be interpreted within a context McGrath provides the context for Dawkins science, and importantly, the context for Dawkins himself McGrath provides credible assertions that the latter is what drives Dawkins to his anti religious assertions, and that it is less so his science Simultaneously, he lauds Dawkins as being an important, credible, and welcome voice in the human dialog about religion Identifies Dawkins logical scientific missteps He gracefully shows how the pretty veneer of Dawkins narrative uses common logical slight of hand tricks to make a point, and how Dawkins has allowed his anti religious views to become a religio...

  8. says:

    Some decent comments and criticisms of Dawkins work I think he rightly attacks Dawkins for infusing certainty into his claims than is warranted by the evidence inferring atheism from Darwinism for instance, or not being sufficiently mindful of the possibility of radical change within science given past scientific revolutions McGrath is correct I think, in stating that the obvious implication of Darwinism is agnosticism and not atheism, particularly not the excessively confident atheism that Dawkins claims is a logical extension of Darwinism Russell s skepticism I have always felt, was a reasonable stance and I am inclined to agree with McGrath on this.It is sad that this book came out before the God Delusion and therefore does not interact with it McGrath s defense of Christianity as a hermeneutic tradition that seeks authenticity by constant reinterpretation in the light of evolving science was quite terrible His assertion that god is an ultimate that can only be described and is not in need of explanation is also difficult to stomach.McGrath believes that the Christian definition of faith is nothing at all like Dawkins understanding of it i.e the Christian faith is not blind trust without despite evidence He cites W H Griffith Thomas s definition of the Christian faith which, he says, affects all of man s nature It commences with the conviction of the mind based on adequate evidence, continues in the confidence of the heart or emotions based on conv...

  9. says:

    One of the challenges that I find in reading the works of Richard Dawkins critically is that so much seems intuitively right to me So for me this book was an attempt to see the weaknesses perceived by others I think McGrath is fair in some of his points, especially a broad division of the Dawkins corpus into empirical, and rhetorical piles, with greater merit in the former But I think fairness to Dawkins requires recognition that McGrath s highly educated strain of Christianity is by no means all that one encounters the belligerence of Dawkins is not in a vacuum, and Christian vehemence against science in general, and Darwin in particular is not hard to find McGrath is probably convincing for those who already agree with him Certainly, the theist who had preceded me through the public library copy I read seemed to feel that body blows were being landed, defacing the text in his relish But if Dawkins s characterization of faith as belief in the absence or even contradiction evidence is unsatisfactory to a theist, the definition that he quotes with praise strikes me as unsatisfactory as well Ultimately, McGrath provides the key to criticizing his own work the argument is ...

  10. says:

    It s difficult to for me to accept any theological positioning on our realities when one is an agnostic atheist who used to be a Christian I read this book because I believe in giving myself a balanced input of perspectives when it comes to matters of existence, purpose, meanings of life, etc But, I guess, because of the difficulty I have in accepting theological positioning, I found it hard to not say this is just ridiculous.I will grant that McGrath made a solid effort to be scientific in his propositions here But he us...

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *