Product Description

The best-selling biologist Richard Dawkins has written that
belief in God is not only a delusion, but also that religion actually has a
harmful influence on society.

In this new book Thomas Crean OP tackles Dawkins head on, explaining the
straightforward rational arguments which lead Christians to believe in God,
in miracles, and in the authority of Scripture. He also explains why
religion really is necessary if morality is to be regarded as more than
merely what seems right in the opinion of each individual.

The arguments offered by the author are profound, and rooted in the
tradition of the Church, but are expounded clearly and lucidly for the
ordinary reader. By showing that Dawkins' criticisms are founded on
misunderstandings, superficial readings, a lack of historical awareness,
and not a little prejudice, Crean reveals the Professor to be a writer well
out of his philosophical depth.

Product Details

• Amazon Sales Rank: #171957 in Books
• Published on: 2007-05
• Original language: English
• Binding: Paperback
• 160 pages

From the Publisher
This new book is in the form of a reply to Richard Dawkins
book, The God Delusion.

It is patiently argued, without polemic, in a clear and reasoned way. It
is accessible to all readers, and will be of interest to all those who have
read The God Delusion or listened to Dawkins' arguments on TV.

Customer Reviews

Excellent arguments; not for beginners though
I read this book eagerly to see what a trained theologian's response would be to Dawkins (who leapt far out of his area of expertise with his 'God Delusion'). Although I am highly educated, I am not a theologian or philosopher by training. Despite this, I found Crean's examples helpful, his arguments lucid and his points clear.

From time to time I found it difficult to follow his synopses of St. Augustine and other thinkers but I chalk this up to my own inexperience with these ancient authors rather than Crean's writing. An author has to expect a certain level of knowledge from the reader in order to make an argument. As such, from my view, this book would not be the easiest thing for someone who has not had a basic training in philosophy or logic to read. However, if you have a University degree, you should be able to follow most of the arguments presented.

Regardless, Crean accurately but fairly points out the ameteurish logical pitfalls that Dawkins fell into because he (Dawkins) failed to consult or even acknowledge the over two millenia worth of works arguing the existence of God. Crean brings the arsenal of these great thinkers to bear on Dawkins and, as a result, Dawkins' work is soundly refuted. Crean accomplishes his mission both expertly and professionally, without falling into any ad hominem attacks that so frequently appear on the other side of the argument. Bravo!

Friar Tucked.
An exellent riposte to the God delusion drawing on the philosophical tradition of St Thomas Aquinas (Scholasticism). A Clear and rational defence of metaphysics in the face of Dawkins Materialist rhetoric although, as Thomas Crean points out, in the last chapter of the God Delusion our author seems to have converted to Platonism!

Exposes Dawkins ignorance and naive handling of any suject that lies beyond his specialised area of study (Zoology) and a curious over reliance on his local branch of Waterstones for referece material.

Once you cut away the angry empty rhetoric of the God Delusion all you are left with is the toxic mixture of Nihilism and Misanthropy that lie at the (dead) Heart of that profoundly irrational book.Dawkins maybe an Atheist but he certainly isn't a humanist (using the word in its broadest sense).

The fact that this book forms a coherent rational argument is enough to defeat Dawkins assertion that the Religious are inherently irrational.

A clear and successful defense of the Catholic worldview
Fr Crean has written an excellent book that explains clearly the flaws in Professor Dawkins' arguments. It communicated very clearly the fundamental differences between the two camps and uses a consistently reasoned approach to analyse Prof. Dawkins arguments:
The beauty of the Catholic worldview, as espoused so well by Fr Crean, is that it incorporates both scientific understanding of the universe and human experience in the fullest way. It is also non-dogmatic at the outset in that it is open to whatever conclusions reason points to, including the existence of the metaphysical (in the sense of something "beyond the physical"). The weakness of the atheist-materialist worldview, as espoused by Professor Dawkins, is that it incorporates a dogmatic statement at the outset without justification: that there is no metaphysical existence. When addressing questions of the metaphysical therefore, it is not equipped to deal with them rationally, because it will not acknowledge even the possibility of its existence. In order to assert that the metaphysical does not exist, its proponents do not use reason. They either remain silent or resort to forceful re-assertions of their prejudice in order to hide the lack of reason and to silence those who have a different point of view.
As he states at the outset, Fr Crean is a response and he is not aiming to establish the basis of Catholic thought. So the general format in his book is first a clear statement of what Catholics do believe on a particular issue and then an analysis Dawkins' arguments against it with a view to examining the truth of them. It should be stated that the Catholic worldview can be justified in reason, but for the reasons given, there is no obligation on Fr Crean to provide it in this context.
Fr Crean describes in step-by-step logic his response to Professor Dawkins main argument (from complexity) to support his claim that faith in God is a delusion (see below). As we know, Professor Dawkins does attack other things also in his book; and he tries to undermine some (but not all) of the rational proofs for the existence of God. I am thinking of things such as the existence of miracles, the truth of the bible, the authority of religions and the Five Ways of St Thomas Aquinas. Fr Crean explains well why Professor Dawkins is unsuccessful in trying to undermine these other things too.
Fr Crean reinforces his points, quite legitimately, with speculation as to what Professor Dawkins might say at various points. It is done to try to anticipate counter arguments or to take the logic of Professor Dawkins through to its natural and absurd conclusion (sometimes amusingly so). Regarding the argument from complexity: Fr Crean explains that Professor Dawkins' argument is based upon the assumption that all that exists behaves in the way that the material universe does. Therefore, Professor Dawkins uses a circular argument - its conclusion is, in effect, one of its assumptions. This reduces the argument from complexity to a red herring. In order to be valid, those who use it must first prove by another means that there is no omniscient, omnipotent being that exists outside the universe, brings it into existence and sustains it. A being which, as it is not material, is indivisible and therefore simple in that sense. This is the debate of centuries and I am not aware that any new argument has been provided in this regard.
Regarding the nature of consciousness and the division of an idea: to develop the idea that something complex can originate from something simple, Fr Crean provides a philosophical discourse that is derived from the Catholic worldview. As such it incorporates both the material and the metaphysical and so accounts for both human experience and current scientific knowledge. If find this very convincing. I design things all the time as part of my work and Fr Crean's description of the design of a cathedral relates very well to my experience of the design process. I never hold every detail of what I design in my consciousness at a single moment and so the idea of every detail of a cathedral does not exist. However, during the design process I do address different details of it at different times and each of these constitutes a complete idea of part of a cathedral. To be able to order all of these ideas of parts of the cathedral in a coherent way, I need an idea that contains the essence of the whole cathedral. This is the idea of a cathedral as described by Fr Crean. All the ideas of parts of a cathedral unfold from this original idea and so from a simple thought unfolds the complexity of my cathedral.