Die hilfreichsten Kundenrezensionen
|
|
45 von 55 Kunden fanden die folgende Rezension hilfreich:
5.0 von 5 Sternen
Dawkins Lays Out the Case for Atheism, 29. November 2006
Richard Dawkins is an evolutionary theorist and holds the Charles Simonyi Chair in the Public Understanding of Science at Oxford University. He is also a best seller author of science books, and quite easy to read.
In this book, Dawkins tackles the problem of religion -- and he does see it as a problem. Dawkins begins by pointing out that there is no evidence whatsoever of god. True, he cannot prove that god does not exist, but the same is true of all possible gods, including Zeus and Wotan. The fact that something cannot be proven false is no evidence whatsoever that is true.
Dawkins further points out how religion (or, more precisely, faith) is so damaging. Faith is, quite simply, the enemy of reason. If one believes something on faith then, be definition, it does not matter what the evidence shows, one will still believe. It is a matter of faith. No matter how strong the evidence of evolution, for example, many faithful simply refuse to believe. With faith, there is no argument, no evidence good enough. With reason, one will still make mistakes, but at least one is trying to get it right.
Dawkins believes very strongly in what he says, but that does not make him just another fundamentalist. Dawkins came to his beliefs by looking at evidence, considering all arguments and applying reason. If, tomorrow, one presented him with evidence that he was wrong, he would change his mind.
This book will offend many readers, but that is not what Dawkins intends and it only proves his point: readers who are offended have been so blinded by religion that they are unable to consider that they might be wrong without suffering pain.
For an explanation of how evolution works, read Dawkins' The Blind Watchmaker. For a small sample of the evidence behind the theory (and a brief history of life on earth), read The Ancestor's Tale. These books are written in a less strident manner, and would only offend the those who take the Bible completely literally, and cannot tolerate the thought that they are mistaken.
Helfen Sie anderen Kunden bei der Suche nach den hilfreichsten Rezensionen
War diese Rezension für Sie hilfreich?
 
|
|
|
|
|
|
55 von 69 Kunden fanden die folgende Rezension hilfreich:
5.0 von 5 Sternen
Ein Buch für die Insel, 28. Januar 2007
Bei bisher 231 Rezensionen auf dem Server von amazon.co.uk und 6 hier, erübrigt es sich, noch irgendetwas auf Englisch über dieses Buch zu schreiben.
Für den deutschen Sprachraum können wir eine spezielle Lektion daraus lernen: Religionskritik soll deutlich sein und nicht so verschämt, wie das bei uns oft der Fall ist. Deswegen muß sie nicht ungerecht oder geschmacklos werden.
Dawkins' Buch ersetzt zur Not, nein, nicht nur zur Not, ein philosophisches Buch über Gottesbeweise, ein religionskritisches über die tatsächlichen Glaubensinhalte der (Buch-)Religionen (a là Buggles "Denn sie wissen nicht, was sie glauben"), ein physikalisches Buch über Kosmologie, ein wissenschaftstheoretisches und wissenschaftsgeschichtliches über Evolutionstheorie, evolutionäre Erkenntnistheorie und evolutionäre Erklärungsansätze von Religion und Moral. All dies mit anschaulichen Erläuterungen und einer Fülle von Beispielen aus der persönlichen Lebenserfahrung und der gesellschaftlichen Auseinandersetzung. Besonders mag ich die Stelle, wo Dawkins für die von ihm favorisierte Erklärung der Religion als "Nebenprodukt" evolutionär vorteilhaften Autoritätsglaubens argumentiert: "Das Kind kann nicht wissen, daß 'Plantsch nicht im krokodilverseuchten Limpopo' ein guter Rat ist, aber 'Du mußt bei Vollmond ein Ziege opfern, sonst bleibt der Regen aus' bestenfalls eine Verschwendung von Zeit und Ziegen bedeutet." (Er informiert uns aber über alternative Ansätze bei diesem alles andere als ausdiskutierten Thema.)
Dawkins trifft auch die Abgrenzung zwischen einer kritischen und wissenschaftsorientierten Weltsicht und religiösem Glauben in der wünschenswert klaren Weise: Revidierbarkeit durch neue Fakten und Argumente ist in aller Kürze der Knackpunkt.
Am Schluß des Buches hat er dann spürbar genug von der Auseinandersetzung mit veralteten Weltbildern und Weltanschauungen: Da geht's nur noch um die Frage, wie weit unsere Erkenntnismöglichkeiten als in der "Mittelwelt" evolvierte Lebewesen reichen und in Zukunft reichen könnten (hierzulande hat sich insbesondere Gerhard Vollmer unter dem Begriff des Mesokosmos mit dergleichen auseinandergesetzt).
Überblickswissen und Lesespaß! Wenn jemand in unserer Zeit die Rolle des wirkungsmächtigen Aufklärers einnimmt, wie sie einst Bertrand Russell ausfüllte, dann ist es am ehesten Dawkins.
Helfen Sie anderen Kunden bei der Suche nach den hilfreichsten Rezensionen
War diese Rezension für Sie hilfreich?
|
|
|
|
|
|
44 von 55 Kunden fanden die folgende Rezension hilfreich:
5.0 von 5 Sternen
A message from the Middle World, 30. Oktober 2006
There is a challenge in reviewing a book of this sort - being "objective". Customers want reviewers to stand aside from prejudices when they assess an item's value as a purchase. It's a stance nearly impossible with this book - few people are indifferent to their perceived gods.
That is the point of this effort - most people are "religious", some violently so in its name. Why should either circumstance hold among Homo sapiens - "wise man"? "Wise" men figure prominently in this book, even when their wisdom - whether through ignorance or manipulation - is misunderstood by others. Einstein's words about "playing dice" are trotted out and examined. The famous "Pascal's Wager" about the usefulness of "denying God" is scrutinised [was Pascal making a joke?]. Scientists of many stripes, particularly three in Dawkins' own Britain, are cited with their logic, if any, carefully dissected. Religion and the idea of a god permeate our society and Dawkins wants to examine the real roots of that phenomenon. In this stimulating study, which will fail to reach those who need it most, the author of "The Blind Watchmaker" and other fine works spells out why the notion of "God" is untenable. He accepts the capitalised version because it's the one his readership accepts.
After explaining why the many and various arguments supporting the idea of "God" are based on false or illogical premises - the author must explain why the notion persists. One reason, he insists, is the "hands-off" approach to the subject that has been so widely accepted. "It's bad form to question religion". Dawkins dismisses such timidity as unworthy of the scientific enterprise. If we can investigate an unseen force that can be measured, such as gravity, why must we pass over one that cannot manifest itself? If this god is "everywhere", why weren't the Ten Commandments engraved on the Moon? There must be another answer, and Dawkins, as an evolutionary biologist, supplies one. However, readers are here cautioned by Dawkins that an understanding of natural selection is the prerequisite.
Having already disposed of the "traditional" [in the Western world, at least] arguments such as "it's just there" or the "argument from design", about the existence of a deity, Dawkins provides a two-pronged evolutionary basis. The first, and most compelling, is the training of children. "Honour thy parents" makes no distinction about whether parental advice and direction is valid. Our primate heritage ties the young to their parents longer than other species. There's a vast span of time to provide both valuable and worthless material for their retention. What is retained, is due to the second of his two reasons, the "meme". The meme, units of information retained by the mind and passed on have featured largely in Dawkins' views on religion. Cognitive studies have shown that information planted early tends to remain in place and guide later behaviour. Religion is far more often "passed down" than it is "picked up" in later life.
The "faithful" are often quick to point out that in religion rests "morality", "comfort" and the roots of what we consider "beauty". Dawkins skilfully demolishes each of these contentions. "Morality", already a vague term, is hardly exemplified by what religion sources provide. Intemperate and massive slaughters, hypocrisies at wholesale rates and misogynist examples that make the reader shudder with disgust. "Beauty" is a topic at which Dawkins shines best. Long an advocate of the beauties in Nature science has revealed, he extols the wonders science has demonstrated to us. We often have difficulty dealing with those fascinating, if normally hidden, aspects of nature because we didn't evolve to perceive them. We live in a narrow zone of perception, which Dawkins calls the "Middle World". We see only a small set of light frequencies. We hear in a limited range of sounds. We can't detect "colours" by smell or see the magnetic fields used by porpoises.
To those who already accept the idea that lack of evidence for any deity renders the concept implausible at best [such as this reviewer], there won't be much new in this book. People consider it sufficient to "declare" there are gods without feeling the need to "demonstrate" them. All of the phenomena attributed to a god have been examined and shown to have natural causes. Even the beginnings of life are well enough understood to forecast confidently that "life" will emerge from some laboratory, as Dawkins points out cogently. The zoologist is even able to handle questions of cosmology with better than layman's skills, as he outlines the various concepts currently under investigation. None of these theories needs a deity to either start the universe or regulate it. This is a formidable examination, redundant aspects or not, deserving the widest possible audience. [stephen a. haines - Ottawa, Canada]
Helfen Sie anderen Kunden bei der Suche nach den hilfreichsten Rezensionen
War diese Rezension für Sie hilfreich?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Die neuesten Kundenrezensionen
|
von Richard Dawkins
von Christopher Hitchens
von Richard Dawkins
von Richard Dawkins
