I'm generally a fan of Dawkins' work and bought this expecting a lucid and rational deconstruction of religion. However, I quite soon became frustrated with the book for several reasons.
Firstly, Dawkins fails to balance the argument with a serious treatment of religious thought and instead reduces it to a set of over simplistic bullet points. I never had the impression that Dawkins understood his "opponent" and therefore wasn't really hitting the mark. It was almost like religion was such a different paradigm to his own scientific background that he never engaged the subject properly - instead, picking off peripheral issues.
Secondly, I found his writing tone arrogant and zealous. "Arrogant" in that he seems to assume the mantle of flag bearer for atheists. "Zealous" in that his argument quite often runs along the same lines as religious bigotry - with an assumption that his point of view is obviously correct and if the reader can't see it they must be a little simple minded (or "lost"). Like I said before - he seems locked in his own paradigm. This should have been a logically robust, dispassionate critique - not a soap box exercise in slightly childish name calling.
There is enough good stuff in here to warrant purchasing the book, but I wish Dawkins had made it more objective and treated the subject of religion with more respect - it's obvious bias makes it unconvincing otherwise.
96 people found this helpful.
Was this review helpful to you?