Product Description The essential book for dismantling Richard Dawkins' atheistic agenda. Scott Hahn and Benjamin Wiker collaborate to debunk Dawkins' theories and show how inconsistent and illogical his conclusions truly are. This is the definitive book for college students or faithful Christians hoping to answer Dawkins' claims and assert the logic and beauty of their faith.
Interesting but not much help to the seekerAugust 24, 2008 10 out of 14 found this review helpful
Dawkins and his like-minded associates have written what many consider to be polemics rather than sound, scientific arguments against the existence of God. Dawkins, in particular, seems to write more out of anger and frustration than on the basis of sound critical thinking and detailed factual analysis. That is not to say that he fails to ask key questions and to point out weaknesses and fallacies in much of Christian thinking. Alas, his snide, condescending, and pretentious style so puts off many of his readers that they fail to consider the possible worth of his arguments. Thereby, he does himself and other proponents of reasoned atheism a great disservice.
Into the frey marches then Scott Hahn, a prolific and pablumesque purveyor of conventional Roman Catholic doctrine. (Forgive the disgusting alliteration.) Dr. Hahn is a popularizer of the Roman Church who attempts to subject Dr. Dawkins to a thrashing based on the basis of old Roman arguments in not-quite-so-acid tones of dismissal.
Neither author is especially successful. Dawkins because he picks the low-hanging fruit of doctrinaire Christianity and assumes that by poking holes in some of its more simple-minded assertions he has destroyed theism in toto. Hahn because, like Aquinas, his reasoned deconstructions of Dawkins' thought begin with a number of basic assumptions that he puts forward with little or no effort at proof.
If only philosophers and theologians would recall that their disciplines are invariably retrospective and reductionist, it would be easier to focus on the underlying question of whether or not there is a sentient generative force in the creation. Lacking the tools to research that ultimate question very effectively,we use the tools that we have, often without realizing just how frail and flawed they are.
The strongest argument that human beings have for appreciating the reality and presence of God is experience of the divine. So long as Dawkins considers that he can vitiate such experience by declaring it irrational and delusional, and so long as Hahn can parlay that experience into the glories of the Roman Church, neither will be of great help to the seeker. They will only serve as cheerleaders and propagandists for their respective followers.
The Best Book Against the New AtheistsAugust 22, 2008 3 out of 32 found this review helpful
I must admit that I am rather excited to finally be reviewing this book since it's taken me some time to actually find it. I searched everywhere at my local book stores in hopes to get a glimpse and I finally had to resort to buying it here on Amazon. Needless to say, it was worth the wait and the hassle.
In the short sum of 151 pages, "Answering the New Atheism" lives up to its title. As a Philosophy major, I was impressed with the contents of this book as well as how well reasoned the arguments were. This came as a relief to me seeing as most of the other books trying to refute Dawkins, Harris, Hitchens, and Dennett failed miserably and missed the mark. While I was especially entertained by such books like the "Irrational Atheist" by Vox Day, I didn't find a formal philosophical argument worth mentioning if I were to engage one of the New Atheists in person. It was good for some ammo, at least.
The authors of "Answering The New Atheism" start off with the motivation of disproving the claims of the New Atheists for the sake of those who know little about Philosophy and are put into a trance by the power of the rhetoric displayed in books like the "God Delusion". What the authors attempt to do is uncover the rhetoric for what it really is: shallow rhetoric and nothing more. There is no good argument within the New Atheist literature today. Not one, and I feel that this book shows why.
Chapter I starts off by explaining Dawkins belief in chance vs. the idea of an intelligent creator. It goes into detail regarding his unwavering faith in materialism and his inability, by virtue of this faith, to accept anything else.
Chapter II points out many scientific and statistical errors that Dawkins makes in favor of his faith and shows why his faith is irrational.
Chapter III shows how Dawkins Philosophical views regarding the "Chance God" are irrational as well as his views against ancient proofs of Gods existence. This chapter is especially helpful for the lay person and explains why Dawkins has no idea what he's talking about as well as how he is not justified in critiquing things he knows little about.
Chapter IV is actually a brief chapter in regards to some proof for the existence of God in nature, but tells the reader that a much deeper analysis can be explored in other books mentioned.
Chapters V-VI are especially enlightening showing the hypocrisy of Dawkins moral position as well as his lack of foundation. It also goes on to show how Dawkins has no right to blame religion for anything since his own beliefs in Evolutionary Ethics are actually to blame and justify the sort of things that he himself opposes. Noting this, it also explains that Dawkins does not actually want to follow evolutionary ethics, however he has no foundation for supposing anything else. At the heart of it all, without the moral argument on the side of Dawkins he has no justification for blaming religion for anything.
Chatpers VII-VIII are the final ones and calmly and convincingly show that the only thing distinguishing the religious fanatics from Dawkins himself is power. Many may disagree, but it seems apparent to a person with common sense that Dawkins anti-intellectualism, intolerance, and lack of concern for reason would likewise leave him in the same position as any terrorists or tyrant if he were to be placed in power. The only thing that is missing is power. Just because the New Atheists have yet to do something doesn't mean they are immune to doing something horrible. Their views eerily reflect the same views as the Soviets and the Red Terror revolutionaries.
In other words...buy this book. Promote this book. Give it to your friends. Give it to all the Atheists out there that seem to think that Dawkins etc. are posing intelligent arguments for the masses. The plain truth is that they are not. They are simply playing to the open ears of the ignorant and those who would prefer to suit their prejudices rather than motivate themselves to think deeply about these issues.
Surprisingly supportive of Dawkins.August 6, 2008 44 out of 59 found this review helpful
I was amazed at the loose argument put together by the authors. Everybody should just fast-forward to the last chapter and have a good laugh at the backwards thinking associated with these religious supporters.
Stem cell research is actually equated to an evolved form of cannibalism. Smart a@@ remarks are made about Dawkins. A hyperthetical King Dawkins is dragged through the mud and for some reason they bring his wife into the discussion in an attempt to irritate Dawkins. Clearly nothing is sacred to the writers.
Yes, that last chapter really shows the true colors of our religious authors. It is clear that by the end of their book they must have realized, as I did, that they had better throw some sticks and stones because the words used surely did nothing to dent Dawkins' argument.
For me they actually reinforced Dawkins argument. Pity they couldn't just turn the other cheek. Instead they apparently are going to take it on the nose.
Dismantling Dawkins IndeedJuly 28, 2008 6 out of 51 found this review helpful
I read Dawkins' God Delusion and found it to be just a whole lot of rhetoric, no substance, and a veritable compendium of logical fallacies. Hahn and Wiker do a great job demonstrating the inconsistencies, double-standards, and absurdities in Dawkins arguments. And I really appreciated the fact that they addressed Dawkins alarming social agenda--and with great force. I did dock the book one star because it seemed that in a couple of instances the book lost momentum in the course of one or two of its arguments--either by being unclear, or repeating a point to often, or just failing to seize the opportunity to drive a very pivotal point home (such as Dawkins' illogic surrounding the Cosmological Argument.) Nevertheless, I read this book with great relish and have yet to find a better, more readable one of its kind.
A very important book. Everyone should read it.July 12, 2008 13 out of 63 found this review helpful
I know we should never judge a book by its cover, but in this case the cover is particularly good. It depicts a caricature of Dawkins, cast as Adam in Michelangelo's Creation of Adam. But in contrast with the original painting, in which Adam submissively holds his finger out to receive life from the finger of God, Dawkins arrogantly holds his finger up, refusing to acknowledge God's existence. A painting represents a moment of time frozen in eternity, and thus, the finger of God continues to point, offering life to Dawkins, but he continues to refuse it. Also unlike the original, in which Adam in his innocence is completely naked, Dawkins at least has a copy of The God Delusion to cover him - but the book is rather small and serves to emphasize his nakedness as much as to cover it. And that is the message: this excellent book leaves him looking very naked indeed.
I have seen several attempts, both long and short, to unravel the errors of The God Delusion (and I have even made one myself), but as far as I can see, this book far surpasses all of them. Its great strength is that the authors do not attempt to knock down Dawkins' assertions point by point but tease out the illogicalities and inconsistencies underpinning his whole argument.
The first four chapters deal with the question of God's existence. Here the authors demonstrate admirably how Dawkins fudges the concepts of probability and the anthropic principle to manufacture arguments which have the illusion of substance but in reality are utterly invalid. They then explain how his failure to grasp the basic principles of philosophy and theology lead him to misinterpret completely the demonstrations of the existence of God, most significantly Thomas Aquinas' five proofs. Since these arguments are central to Dawkins' thesis, discrediting them destroys his whole case.
Along the way, they make some other interesting points: for example, that the human intellect and the development of science cannot be explained on evolutionary principles, since the intellect goes far beyond what is necessary for survival and reproduction, and science, at least in its early stages, was a purely intellectual pursuit with no relevance to survival or reproduction. They also demolish the "prayer experiment" quoted by Dawkins. Most importantly, perhaps, they show how his refusal to understand the nature of God makes most of his arguments irrelevant.
Chapters 5 and 6 deal with moral principles and show that both Darwin and Dawkins are inconsistent in their application of morality. Darwin stated that morality should be based on evolutionary principles, but then contradicted this by exalting the value of sympathy over everything else. Dawkins, claiming that our moral values have all been derived from natural selection and that there is no such thing as absolute good or evil, goes on to propose that we should support good and oppose evil by upholding moral norms which are directly opposed to natural selection. Tellingly, neither of them could give any good reason why this does not invalidate their principles.
Chapter 5 is very well argued but probably a bit long-winded and heavy for the average reader, but chapter 6 is the climax of the book, a brilliant tour de force, which does not so much demolish Dawkins' arguments on morality as allow him to demolish them himself by showing that his ideas are completely self-contradictory. Essentially, Dawkins believes that our understanding of the universe should be based on evolutionary principles, yet all his complaints against the morality of the Bible are really directed against the application of these principles. The Jews of the Old Testament were the perfect exemplars of a world ruled by natural selection, and thus should be most worthy of an evolutionist's praise.
However, it is chapters 7 & 8 which are the most important. They show that Dawkins' atheist rhetoric is not merely an academic exercise but a manifesto designed to be put into practice, like The Communist Manifesto or Mein Kampf. Their glimpse of a world based on Dawkinsist principles is truly frightening, and perhaps closer than we think.
Everyone who has read Dawkins, and even those who have not, should read this book. The tragedy is that relatively few will.
P.S. I must admit, however, that there is one respect in which The God Delusion is far superior to Answering the New Atheism: Dawkins provides an excellent index, while Hahn and Wiker have none.
