Hide this

Results from Google Books

Click on a thumbnail to go to Google Books.

The God Delusion by Richard Dawkins

The God Delusion (original 2006; edition 2008)

by Richard Dawkins

MembersReviewsPopularityAverage ratingConversations / Mentions
12,239292207 (3.99)1 / 350
Title:The God Delusion
Authors:Richard Dawkins
Info:Mariner Books (2008), Edition: Reprint, Paperback, 464 pages
Collections:Your library
Tags:Happy Heathens, Audiobook

Work details

The God Delusion by Richard Dawkins (2006)

  1. 213
    Why I Am Not a Christian and Other Essays on Religion and Related Subjects by Bertrand Russell (BGP, yakov.perelman)
  2. 162
    God Is Not Great : How Religion Poisons Everything by Christopher Hitchens (hnn, BGP)
  3. 70
    Misquoting Jesus by Bart D. Ehrman (robertf)
    robertf: Dawkins is passionately trying to refute an undefined hypothesis - this is perhaps one of his least succesful works. Ehrman's book does not have conversion to atheism as its aim - it is a description of the scholarly analysis of texts. The reason it is devastating to religion is that it undermines any claim to biblical authenticity by exposing contradictions between different manuscripts. It achieves what Dawkins aims to much more subtly and scientifically.… (more)
  4. 61
    Atheist Manifesto: The Case Against Christianity, Judaism, and Islam by Michel Onfray (gust)
  5. 51
    Breaking the Spell: Religion as a Natural Phenomenon by Daniel C. Dennett (ljessen)
  6. 41
    Why I Became an Atheist: A Former Preacher Rejects Christianity by John W. Loftus (Percevan)
  7. 31
    Irreligion: A Mathematician Explains Why the Arguments for God Just Don't Add Up by John Allen Paulos (infiniteletters)
  8. 31
    The Christian Delusion: Why Faith Fails by John W. Loftus (Percevan)
  9. 10
    The Selfish Gene by Richard Dawkins (yakov.perelman)
  10. 32
    Why God Won't Go Away: Brain Science and the Biology of Belief by Andrew Newberg (bertilak)
  11. 21
    God and the State by Michael Bakunin (BGP)
  12. 32
    What Is Good?: The Search for the Best Way to Live by A. C. Grayling (chrisharpe)
  13. 21
    Atheism Advanced: Further Thoughts of a Freethinker by David Eller (hnn)
  14. 22
    Talking With God: The Many Faces of Religious Delusion by Robert A. Clark (bertilak)
  15. 22
    Why Gods Persist: A Scientific Approach to Religion by Robert A. Hinde (bertilak)
  16. 00
    The Greatest Show on Earth: The Evidence for Evolution by Richard Dawkins (yakov.perelman)
  17. 23
    God's Undertaker: Has Science Buried God? by John Lennox (bfrost)
  18. 34
    The Whys of a Philosophical Scrivener by Martin Gardner (ehines)
    ehines: While I agree with Dawkins and disagree with Gardner about the existence of God, Gardner's open-mindedness judicious and friendly tone, even in error, serves as a rebuke to Dawkins' inability to understand or respect his intellectual opponents.
  19. 313
    The Dawkins Letters: Challenging Atheist Myths by David Robertson (OwenGriffiths)
    OwenGriffiths: The God Delusion offers some of the most popular, if not the most reasoned or effective, arguments "against faith". Robertson attempts to dispel a few perceived misconceptions. This is a good place to start if you wish to understand why a lot of people of (any) faith disregard Dawkins argument in this book. Robertson does not provide a total response to atheism itself, nor does he set out to do so. The God Delusion repays careful reading, because even if one may disagree with them, or argue that they do not represent the best of Atheistic philosophy, one can not deny that Dawkins represents some of the most common critiques of faith, which people of faith are forced to respond to.… (more)
  20. 212
    The Selfish Genius: How Richard Dawkins Rewrote Darwin's Legacy by Fern Elsdon-Baker (Gavin_Hardcastle)
    Gavin_Hardcastle: Interesting Read

(see all 23 recommendations)


Sign up for LibraryThing to find out whether you'll like this book.

English (273)  Dutch (4)  Swedish (4)  Portuguese (2)  German (1)  Spanish (1)  Italian (1)  Turkish (1)  Icelandic (1)  Hebrew (1)  Finnish (1)  French (1)  All languages (291)
Showing 1-5 of 273 (next | show all)
Unless you teach in a religiously-sponsored school, religion probably plays little role in your teaching of science. However, the "prior knowledge" of your students includes some decidedly non-scientific, religion-inspired viewpoints that ought to be taken into account. Renowned evolutionist Richard Dawkins' best-selling atheist thesis, "The God Delusion", attacks faith of all kinds head-on, and challenges the beliefs of every reasoning person. While he points out that few distinguished scientists hold traditional religious values, that is not true of most teachers of science and is definitely not true of our students. I recommend that teachers read this book, but be cautious about how the material in it is used in the classroom. Even if you fully agree with his very skeptical view of religion, it does not serve our educational mission to confront students with ideas that they will reject out of hand because those concepts do not comport with previous religious training. On the other hand, I agree with Dawkins that religious ideas are given more deference than they deserve, just because they are "religious". ( )
  hcubic | Aug 2, 2015 |
The God Delusion
2.4% of Americans claim to be atheist. As an evolutionary biologist, Dawkins puts great faith in natural selection to develop nature as it should be. Why should he be so alarmed, then, that there are so many who believe in the supernatural or are deists? Perhaps the belief in the supernatural has aided the species' survival. Perhaps it's very important to our evolution as a species. Dawkins does not give this idea much thought, however. While he does address possible biological and psychological reasons for why people believe in God, he separates the world into "enlightened" and "unenlightened," which many find offensive.

Weaknesses of the book:
In Black Holes and Baby Universes, Stephen Hawking says that if the universe is unlimited in scope then the laws of physics were the same at its creation as they are now. The universe was not created nor can be destroyed--it just is. However, if the universe is actually limited in scope, then the laws of physics didn't apply at its creation as they do today. Some outside entity, like God, must be responsible for its creation. Hawking said that he chooses to believe a Grand Unifying Theory of physics will explain everything from how the universe started to why I drank coffee this morning; he rejects God as the other explanation for these events. This is one way of looking at the problem that Dawkins leaves out or even ignores. Many people find it easier to believe in God than some grand unifying theory of everything-- that has yet to be discovered or proven.

Dawkins also criticizes the various ways in which those who believe in God claim that he works because the working is so inefficient or implausible. If a Creator God does exist, wouldn't he be infinite compared to anyone-- even Dawkins-- such that it would be silly for anyone to critique his efficiency or rationality? This idea doesn't dawn on Dawkins, which makes some of his critiques sound petty. Likewise, Dawkins defends religious freedom and belief as diversity, but he rails against tax money going to a British school that teaches a 6,000 year old earth and literal Noah's Ark. If you believe in an infinitely powerful being that created the universe, it's only a small step to believe he could do it in any time frame or in any way he so chose-- it's therefore illogical to say "that's just too much."

On a smaller level, Dawkins selectively quotes from the Old Testament and criticizes passages and comments on its incomprehensibility without consulting any scholar's explanation of that text and its context. That carelessness (why even go there if you're not equipped?) makes me doubt other areas that Dawkins makes confident claims on. He holds up John Shelby Spong (whose work I've reviewed earlier this year) as an "enlightened" person even though Spong's beliefs are a mess of blatant contradictions. Dawkins' tone is different than that of Christopher Hitchens, who had no problem having many friends who had different beliefs. Dawkins makes it clear that he will have nothing to do with those who are not at least inclined to believe as he does-- a philosophical problem that he never works out.

He also attacks Christians specifically for "immorality" and being the perpetrators of "evil," while holding up atheists or even just general deists as "enlightened" and "moral." He highlights the hatemail he receives from purported Christians as support of this, but likewise ignores the billions of dollars and time and effort that Christian charities spend around the world in humanitarian aid.

Dawkins, like most atheists, ignores the problem of evil-- although Dawkins actually claims to address it. He, like Christopher Hitchens and others, hold up certain acts as "good" or "evil" even though it's not clear from what basis he can judge. A Jew or Christian can say that murder is wrong because man was made in God's image. Dawkins never explains why he thinks murder is wrong-- he just states that it is. Dawkins gives some ideas from evolutionary psychology to explain morality-- altruism as a biproduct of natural selection-- and religion -- our desire to love is a biproduct of the desire to reproduce as a result of the processes of natural selection.

He also never deals with the why problem of natural selection. Dawkins addresses pretty thoroughly Michael Behe's work on irreducible complexity. He explains how natural selection creates an avenue for cells and organs to mutate piecemeal, in a trial-and-error fashion, over billions of years in order to come into the "right" solution to be the working parts we know today. But Dawkins never addresses the why-- for example, say the eye develops its intricate parts piecemeal over billions of years. The eye allows the brain-- which also must develop along with the eye-- to receive information from signals of light. But how did those cells know that there was such a thing as light from which it could receive data? Why did it develop to receive that data? Why did it mutate in the first place?
You can ask the same question of all body parts and species. How did it know to pass the learned information from its trial-and-error process onto the next organism? There is also no evidence--fossil or otherwise-- that such microscopic piecemeal trial-and-error advancements were made.

Dawkins purports that since we see natural selection in process today and do have fossil record of species evolving, then it stands to reason that every part of every thing developed in such a piecemeal fashion. As Dawkins writes, ultimately you get something that is statistically-speaking highly improbable. But each step along the way wasn't so improbable, it's just that now we see the end result of billions of years of these trial-and-error processes on millions of planets and we happen to be the cosmic winners. That, in a nutshell, is what non-atheists find very dissatisfying.

Dawkins spends much of the beginning of the book attacking nonsense theories and generally making fun of non-atheists. He readily acknowledges how he's been criticized for his attitudes but does not care as he seems himself as having the moral high ground-- even though it's not clear from what basis he can call something "moral" or not.

A couple of oddities in the book. He acknowledges that when the police went on strike in Quebec, chaos ensued. Non-atheists often argue that removing God from our believes removes the moral restraint of people, just like removing police from an area creates chaos and violence (Christians call this "common grace"). However, Dawkins thinks that if Christians are right then there should have been no problems in Quebec since he bets that most of them believe in God in some way or another.

Another oddity is toward the end in his defense of the Catholic church from accusations of pedophilia. While he admits to being abused by a priest while in a Catholic school he hated, he has such fond memories of the whole upbringing that he thinks it's a shame that the church has been "unfairly punished" by lawyers. His overall point is that the teaching of the Catholic church-- especially that there is an eternal hell to fear-- is the worst crime.


Dawkins forcefully attacks certain arguments that Christians often fall back on-- irreducible complexity, Pasal's wager, etc. He also has a chapter where he assails several anti-abortion arguments often used by Christians. All Christians need to be prepared to give an answer for the hope that they have. For many, this will boil down to a personal experience that seemingly defies scientific explanation. Someone who goes from being an alcoholic to completely clean after getting on his knees, turning to Christ, and confessing his sins. Someone who feels happier and much more fulfilling than she did before becoming a Christian. Someone who had terminal cancer and was prayed for by a church and saw the tumors miraculously disappear-- something for which his doctors could give no explanation. Someone who went into a hut in the deepest part of Africa and met a reportedly demon-possessed woman who spoke perfect English and knew exactly who he was-- despite her never having learned the language or left the country. Dawkins rejects these experiences as either impossible, or at best not something proveable. Jesus' resurrection is one of those events. Even the most skeptical Bible scholars acknowledge that "something happened" that turned Jesus' followers from cowering and disappointed into highly-motivated impoverished martyrs for their beliefs, foresaking their former power, prestige, and religious/cultural beliefs.

All Christians should be a bit more humble about what they believe. Dawkins is correct that most of the endless debating and name-calling among religious circles is about things people cannot possibly know. Most evangelicals I know are convinced that they are the most correct in their theology-- that their denomination/church/team is therefore somewhat superior to the others (whether they admit it or not). But it takes a lot of chutzpah to believe that of all the billions of people who have existed on the earth, God ordered things such that you personally ended up in the right branch of the right denomination of the right religion with the right heritage such that you are the "most correct." Most people do not recognize that they are bent toward _______ denomination because they were raised that way or it happened to be the first church they encountered after choosing Christ (call it "by the grace of God" if you will). Christians should also be more knowledgeable about the brain, chemistry, psychology, cognitive biases, and other physical processes that influence how we perceive God, the world around us, and ourselves.

As such, I would recommend this book as a good starting point for Christians and non-atheists to start to get introspective as to why exactly they believe what they believe. 3 stars out of 5. ( )
  justindtapp | Jun 3, 2015 |
Everyone must read it! ( )
  taecelle | Jun 1, 2015 |
Wouldn't want to argue the other side with him. Could also be called the Human Delusion or the delusion of humans. ( )
  DeanClark | Mar 26, 2015 |
This took me a while to get through, not because it was bad, but because there is a lot of information and material to get through and understand (and I had to take multiple breaks to get away from the realistic, logical arguments and read something fun).

Overall, I think this was very well written. As an atheist there are a lot of arguments I can get behind. At times I felt that Dawkins' language was a little too strong and often he came off as demeaning and mean. And while it was in no way his intention to be nice regarding religion, I think his rude attitude didn't help persuade people (an unfortunate example of the privilege of religion that Dawkins points out in the book, but is no less true).

This is quite a heavy, dense book, however, so as the only other book I have read by Dawkins is The Greatest Show on Earth: The Evidence for Evolution, I wasn't prepared for this book. It is a good book to read if you actually have time to sit down and think about the material.

I really enjoyed some of the later chapters, especially the chapters on morality and possible origins of religion.

This is a good book for people looking for a powerful perspective on the unnecessary existence of religion. ( )
  CareBear36 | Mar 19, 2015 |
Showing 1-5 of 273 (next | show all)
That was the first time I had ever considered, even in my own thoughts to myself, that I could be an atheist. I was 36. My husband was down with this—he told me he was an atheist, too. I felt it was weird we were finally having a conversation about this after being married for six years, but maybe we intrinsically knew all along.
added by paradoxosalpha | editDaily Kos, boofdah (Oct 28, 2011)
In The God Delusion, Dawkins argues that evolution has removed the need for a God hypothesis to explain life, and advances in physics may soon do the same for the universe. Further, the existence of God is a proper question for science, and the answer is no.
added by Taphophile13 | editThe Age, Barney Zwartz (Nov 24, 2006)
Despite the many flashes of brilliance in this book, Dawkins’s failure to appreciate just how hard philosophical questions about religion can be makes reading it an intellectually frustrating experience.
Creationists and believers in God are right to see him as their arch-enemy. In The God Delusion he displays what a formidable adversary he is. It is a spirited and exhilarating read. In the current climate of papal/Islamic stand-off, it is timely too.
added by ghilbrae | editThe Guardian, Joan Bakewell (Sep 26, 2006)

» Add other authors (16 possible)

Author nameRoleType of authorWork?Status
Richard Dawkinsprimary authorall editionsconfirmed
Vogel, SebastianTranslatorsecondary authorsome editionsconfirmed
Ward, LallaNarratorsecondary authorsome editionsconfirmed
You must log in to edit Common Knowledge data.
For more help see the Common Knowledge help page.
Series (with order)
Canonical title
Original title
Alternative titles
Original publication date
Important places
Important events
Related movies
Awards and honors
In Memoriam
Douglas Adams (1952-2001)

'Isn't it enough to see that a garden is beautiful without having to believe that there are fairies at the bottom of it too?'
First words
As a child, my wife hated her school and wished she could leave.
Deserved Respect
The boy lay prone in the grass, his chin resting on his hands.
Pantheism is sexed-up atheism. Deism is watered-down theism.
But hate only has to prove it is religious, and it no longer counts as hate.
The God of the Old Testament is arguably the most unpleasant character in all fiction: jealous and proud of it; a petty, unjust, unforgiving control-freak; a vindictive, bloodthirsty ethnic cleanser; a misogynistic, homophobic, racist, infanticidal, genocidal, filicidal, pestilential, megalomaniacal, sadomasochistic, capriciously malevolent bully.
I am agnostic only to the extent that I am agnostic about fairies at the bottom of the garden.
I am no more fundamentalist when I say evolution is true than when I say it is true that New Zealand is in the southern hemisphere.
Last words
(Click to show. Warning: May contain spoilers.)
Disambiguation notice
Publisher's editors
Publisher series
Original language
Book description
Haiku summary
You believe in God.
I believe you've been deceived.
I will tell you why.

Amazon.com Product Description (ISBN 0618918248, Paperback)

A preeminent scientist -- and the world's most prominent atheist -- asserts the irrationality of belief in God and the grievous harm religion has inflicted on society, from the Crusades to 9/11.

With rigor and wit, Dawkins examines God in all his forms, from the sex-obsessed tyrant of the Old Testament to the more benign (but still illogical) Celestial Watchmaker favored by some Enlightenment thinkers. He eviscerates the major arguments for religion and demonstrates the supreme improbability of a supreme being. He shows how religion fuels war, foments bigotry, and abuses children, buttressing his points with historical and contemporary evidence. The God Delusion makes a compelling case that belief in God is not just wrong but potentially deadly. It also offers exhilarating insight into the advantages of atheism to the individual and society, not the least of which is a clearer, truer appreciation of the universe's wonders than any faith could ever muster.

(retrieved from Amazon Thu, 12 Mar 2015 18:13:00 -0400)

(see all 3 descriptions)

Argues that belief in God is irrational, and describes examples of religion's negative influences on society throughout the centuries, such as war, bigotry, child abuse, and violence.

(summary from another edition)

» see all 10 descriptions

Quick Links

Popular covers


Average: (3.99)
0.5 7
1 60
1.5 12
2 129
2.5 40
3 515
3.5 148
4 1124
4.5 166
5 1035


An edition of this book was published by Audible.com.

See editions

Tantor Media

An edition of this book was published by Tantor Media.

» Publisher information page

Is this you?

Become a LibraryThing Author.


Help/FAQs | About | Privacy/Terms | Blog | Store | Contact | LibraryThing.com | APIs | WikiThing | Common Knowledge | Legacy Libraries | Early Reviewers | 99,059,828 books! | Top bar: Always visible