Product Description

"The God Delusion" is a clarion call to the faithless, the waverers, and even firm religious believers, to follow the author into radical atheism not merely as a private conviction but as a public profession. Wouldn't humankind be better off without religion, he asks. John Cornwell's "Darwin's Angel" is not so much a combative repudiation of Dawkins' arguments as a playful conversation with them, posing alternative viewpoints, exposing lapses in logic and errors of fact, from the vantage point of a friendly Guardian Angel.

Product Details

• Amazon Sales Rank: #24725 in Books
• Published on: 2007-09-06
• Original language: English
• Binding: Hardcover
• 168 pages

Review
"'Monkeys make men... Men make angels' - Charles Darwin"

Sunday Times
`...he (Dawkins) might find some of the (other) arguments made by Cornwell in this short and elegantly written response (more) worthy of consideration.'

Independent, 14 September 2007
`Cornwell has done an excellent job in providing a book that should, in an ideal world, be sold taped to every copy of The God Delusion as an essential corrective.'

Customer Reviews

Not worth the thick paper and wide margins it's printed on
i think before publishing a rebutal of anothers work one should at least do the other the service of reading and understanding the work. Understanding is totally lacking from this book.

Undone by an Angel
This was an enjoyable book because it addressed specific aspects of the God Delusion succinctly and without unecessary embellishment. One can only wonder how Dawkins would respond to these points. There again, someone (Dawkins) who gets his wife to read out loud his own book - twice - is hardly likely to take kindly to criticism of it. Dawkins's myopic views seem mirrored by the reviews of some of his supporters. Dr V Stewart [Real Name, apparently] finds Cornwell's 'patronising tone repellent'. You couldn't make it up! Has Dr Stewart ever read anything Dawkins has written? If he had he'd easily recognize patronising words. S Page [Real name, apparently] accuses Cornwell as "deliberately misrepresenting Dawkins' argument". Anyone who had actually read the book could hardly make this claim with any objectivity. If anyone wants a precis of the book they could do worse than read Chapter 2 'Your Sources' to evaluate the background to Dawkins' views and Chapter 9 'Theories of Everything' for a robust and, arguably, unanswerable challenge to Dawkins' firmly held belief that science will one day provide an answer to everything.

I hoped for better; I was disappointed. Another critic bites the dust.
I thought John Cornwell would do so much better than this. Often sly and rarely convincing. He is playing out of his league in taking on Dawkins although this is much better than most of the boring, extended Christian tracts which, delivered ex cathedra, merely repeat, "I know best and Richard Dawkins is ignorant."

To any Dawkins haters reading this all I would say is, "Keep on practising but success in undermining Dawkins with any fair minded readers is a long way off. I suppose you could try prayer except that it is Dawkins who seems to be on the side of the angels."