Klicka på en bild för att gå till Google Book Search.
Laddar... Darwin's Angel: An Angelic Riposte to "The God Delusion"av John Cornwell
Ingen/inga Laddar...
Gå med i LibraryThing för att få reda på om du skulle tycka om den här boken. Det finns inga diskussioner på LibraryThing om den här boken. inga recensioner | lägg till en recension
Richard Dawkins's The God Delusion has been one of the most divisive books of modern times. Whilst championed by atheists, the response from the majority of the religious community was one of dismissive anger. John Cornwell reacted differently. Masquerading as a guardian angel, Cornwell corrects Dawkins on his errors of judgement and fundamental misunderstanding of faith. Instead of anger Cornwell confronts Dawkins calmly, offering rational, reasoned opinions, defending religion with elegance and great imagination. Inga biblioteksbeskrivningar kunde hittas. |
Pågående diskussionerIngen/ingaPopulära omslag
Google Books — Laddar... GenrerMelvil Decimal System (DDC)211.8Religions Natural Theology and Secularism Deism and Atheism AtheismKlassifikation enligt LCBetygMedelbetyg:
Är det här du? |
Cornwell's book strikes just the right tone - faintly amused and rather derisive of Dawkins' great foray into religious studies: treating a dogmatic zoologist as a serious entrant in the philophy of religion would be to afford him too much respect: a courtesy Dawkins himself wouldn't extend for a moment if confronted with a dogmatic religious fundamentalist wishing to discuss biology (famously, Dawkins refuses to even debate such people).
Cornwell is also wise not to get dragged too far into the merits of the issue (i.e., whether there actually is a God) and instead spends his few pages more profitably remarking that, whatever ones position on that question, Dawkins' arguments simply can't carry the day, unless you really want them to.
That's important because Cornwell can therefore carry along skeptics like me, who don't personally subscribe to religious belief, but still find Dawkins' dogmatic essentialism a crashing bore.
Along the way Cornwell makes some thumping scores and while, as other reviewers have noted, he may misconstrue Dawkins' arguments in a couple of places, they don't really make a difference and, in any case, for a Dawkinite to make that protest really is to call the kettle black. The scores he does make are doozies, and one in particular stood out: Dawkins' support for Martin Rees' rebuttal of the Anthropic Principal by means of the "multiverse" - the suggestion that there are many universes, co-existing like bubbles of foam, in a "multiverse", and only one of these universes needs to have the right "bye-laws" to sustain evolved life. Of course, that's a moronic idea, and Cornwell shows admirable restraint in his derision: "there are no more observable data for this "suggestion" than the positing of [Bertrand Russell's hypothetical] miniature teapot circumnavigating the earth". Quite.
In other words, Richard Dawkins is prepared to resort to unfalsifiable, non-causal explanations when it suits him, along with the best of the theists he decries.
I still think there is room for a book taking an expressly non-religious (and therefore non-defensive) line - that the scientific realism that Dawkins insists on is indefensible; that there is room on the planet for religious, literary, scientific and moral stories to sit alongside each other - that they need not (and given their different applications, cannot) get in each others way: the late Stephen Jay Gould got closest to that with his appeal for religious-scientific detente in "Rocks of Ages: Science and Religion in the Fullness of Life", and the late Richard Rorty, especially in "Philosophy and the Mirror of Nature" and "Philosophy and Social Hope" had a thing or two to say about it, too.
Stop press: since composing this review I have come across a book written by a (ostensibly non-religious) scientist that completely fits the bill: Jacob Bronowski's wonderful Origins of Knowledge and Imagination which I wholeheartedly recommend to anyone with an interest in the topic.
Nonetheless, this volume (perhaps once in paperback) has much to recommend it. ( )