Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. Protection built in.

Meet the Other Phone.
Protection built in.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Original poster

The God Delusion

439 replies

YummyHoney · 18/08/2011 19:26

In thinking that Richard Dawkin's The God Delusion should be compulsory reading for all secondary school children?

Not only would it put paid to all the religious nonsense some parents spout, it would also put an end to a lot of wars and violence in the world.

OP posts:
freybean · 18/08/2011 20:50
Cocoflower · 18/08/2011 20:51

Nothing wrong with looking at both sides of the debate.

But to think some angry guy will stop someone belief in God shows little understanding of the power of faith.

AnyFuleKno · 18/08/2011 20:52

I absolutely love Richard Dawkins, and when I read The God Delusion it was like everything I've ever thought about religion was there in the book. I absolutely can't tell you how massive an effect it's had on my life.

But

You can't make anyone read anything. People have to come to it themselves.

What the book does is to give courage to people who have doubt about religion, and to give them the vocabulary to question.

I really hope those of you criticising the book or opening popcorn have read it.

ChickensHaveNoEyebrows · 18/08/2011 20:54

I was definitely taught about Darwin in school. I was not taught creationism in any way, shape or form. Evolution was taught as fact at secondary school.

EndoplasmicReticulum · 18/08/2011 20:55

I've read (most) of it.

He wasn't telling me anything I didn't think already though, and I don't think his "I'm very pleased with myself" tone is the most persuasive way to get an argument across.

fluffles · 18/08/2011 20:56

i am atheist, i liked the book, it opened my eyes to some things i'd never thought of before that i agree with, but i don't agree with all of it and i found some bits really damn boring...

but, i think that chapters should be covered in RE at school and i am glad to hear above that some schools are covering it.

NotADudeExactly · 18/08/2011 20:58

it was like everything I've ever thought about religion was there in the book

If you already thought that, why did you need the book then. No offense intended, I just don't quite get it.

FWIW, yes, I have read the book. Once all the way through and several times partially in the hope of finding some help with an argument. I've already given some of my reasons for just not liking it much.

handsomeharry · 18/08/2011 21:01

I've read it - really didn't enjoy it. Mainly because of the hectoring tone he takes. Quite unnecessary and off putting.

There must be pleasanter people out there to be the 'public face' of atheism.

QueenOfAllBiscuitsandMuffins · 18/08/2011 21:06

"Not only would it put paid to all the religious nonsense some parents spout, it would also put an end to a lot of wars and violence in the world."

Ha ha ha ha ha BOLLOCKS, it's not religion thats the problem it's PEOPLE.

lenak · 18/08/2011 21:08

I had to give up half way through - I can't abide being preached at and oh my does that man preach in that book. I am an agnostic bordering on atheist and reading his sanctamonious whining actually pushed me back towards the agnostic.

I've started reading the Selfish Gene which is much better.

I agree with the poster up the thread who said that Philip Pullman's Dark Materials would be better - or even The Good Man Jesus and the Scoundral Christ which is absolutely brilliant for pointing out the problems with organised religion without making it seem like anyone who has faith must be highly stupid.

Salmotrutta · 18/08/2011 21:11

Dawkins is smug and dismissive. I am an atheist but I think he alienates people - I heard him give a seminar years ago and he was almost contemptuous with people in the question session afterwards,

queenmaeve · 18/08/2011 21:12

I hope some daaay you will join us. And the worrrrld will be as one

Salmotrutta · 18/08/2011 21:13

Oh and yes, I read the book but I don't think he did himself any favours with the tone.
And yes, Darwin/evolution has been taught in schools for many decades in the UK. But apparently not in some US states IIRC.

NotADudeExactly · 18/08/2011 21:16

Dawkins is smug and dismissive. I am an atheist but I think he alienates people

Agreed. Hell, the guy alienates me and I agree with him on most matters religious, ...

TrillianAstra · 18/08/2011 21:18

I'm wondering how many of the people criticizing the book here have read it.

I much prefer Dawkins when he is writing about science, and I was prepared to find the book a bit of an anti-religious rant. It's not. It's quite calm and rational. He doesn't say anything that I haven't heard before, but I have a fairly privileged experience when it comes to intelligent people debating difficult issues and I imagine that he does say things that most people (especially teenagers) have not heard before.

I still think BoF is right about teenagers being more likely to embrace the philosophy if it were banned :o

TrillianAstra · 18/08/2011 21:18

I would prefer to make them all read Bad Science and understand critical thinking a bit better.

Solo · 18/08/2011 21:20

Shock Good God OP!!! really?! Hmm

pamplemousserose · 18/08/2011 21:21
EndoplasmicReticulum · 18/08/2011 21:22

TrillianAstra I was going to say make everybody read Bad Science instead.

VictorianIce · 18/08/2011 21:25

"I'm wondering how many of the people criticizing the book here have read it."

I wondered the same thing. A lot of the criticism doesn't match up to my experience of his writing, although I'm aware people can take different things from the same book.

I agree about 'Bad Science' too.

Animation · 18/08/2011 21:25

YANBU

I believe in God actually - but NOT in man-made religion - of the people.

NotADudeExactly · 18/08/2011 21:28

It's quite calm and rational.

Surely the bit where he goes on about how describing a child as "Catholic" or "Muslim" is abusive is at the very least emotive?

FWIW, I agree completely that children should have the right to determine their own religious identity. But to imply that ascribing a certain opinion or set of beliefs - even a wrong one - to a child is somewhere up there with hitting them is really OTT as far as I'm concerned. Plus it only serves to make people feel more defensive. Who on earth would not if they were termed a child abuser?

I also happen to think that Dawkins has a rather irrational tendency to exaggerate the role of religion where other issues are really the problem. Israel-Palestine, for example, is not about religion. It's about land. Etc.

I'm not at all claiming that Dawkins makes no good points. He does. I agree with a lot of what he says. I just hate the way he says it. And I happen to think he's wrong on some of the details.

NotADudeExactly · 18/08/2011 21:29

I would prefer to make them all read Bad Science and understand critical thinking a bit better.

Oh, yeah, now that's a book I really like quite a lot. :)

afussyphase · 18/08/2011 21:35

What about 'Why I am not a Christian' by Bertrand Russell? I was heading towards somewhat indoctrinated at one point after being in a Religion class in school, when I was 12. My mother left a copy of this book/essay somewhere where I would find it. I rethought my incipient views completely, in under two days.

AnyFuleKno · 18/08/2011 21:38

Do people understand what a massive problem there is in the world where it is utterly unacceptable to be an atheist

The majority of people in the US would not elect an atheist president, regardless of their other beliefs

We need a passionate and LOUD voice to match those of the religious leaders peddling their own dogma

Swipe left for the next trending thread