Difference between revisions of "Talk:The God Delusion"
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
(Ben Stein asked him how likely) |
AtheistJohn (talk | contribs) |
||
| Line 6: | Line 6: | ||
:::In "[[Expelled]]" he hedges his bets, estimated the likelihood of no God between 50% and around 98%. --[[User:Ed Poor|Ed Poor]] <sup>[[User talk:Ed Poor|Talk]]</sup> 13:09, 23 April 2008 (EDT) | :::In "[[Expelled]]" he hedges his bets, estimated the likelihood of no God between 50% and around 98%. --[[User:Ed Poor|Ed Poor]] <sup>[[User talk:Ed Poor|Talk]]</sup> 13:09, 23 April 2008 (EDT) | ||
| + | |||
| + | ::::That is still not the same thing as "disproving" God. The point is, Christians, apologists, and conservatives (the main group of readers for this website) read the headline for this book and say, "But you can't disprove God! Dawkins is wrong!" Dawkins knows better to say this, because of the old argument about the celestial teapot orbiting Mars (one that is there, but because of our inferior technology, we can't see it). Since Dawkins never claims to disprove God, putting that as the headline of this article is deceiving. But as Humblpi said, any attempt to change this will instantly be reverted; it's probably pointless to even have a debate over this. --[[User:AtheistJohn|AtheistJohn]] 17:08, 23 April 2008 (EDT) | ||
Revision as of 21:08, April 23, 2008
Disprove God?
I don't think the headline is correct. He does not try to "disprove" God, he discusses why a supernatural creator almost certainly does not exist. He never contends that he is disproving God. --AtheistJohn 09:33, 23 April 2008 (EDT)
- Isn't that essentially trying to "disprove" God? Philip J. Rayment 11:32, 23 April 2008 (EDT)
- No, not the same thing. Good point, AtheistJohn. Dawkins is very careful to say that he offers no proof that god does not exist. He only says that the existence of a god or gods is extremely unlikely. I hesitate to change the opening sentence of the article (I suspect it would be instantly reverted!), but I propose "The God Delusion is a book by the atheist Richard Dawkins, in which he attempts to prove that the existence of God is extremely unlikely." Humblpi 13:05, 23 April 2008 (EDT)
- That is still not the same thing as "disproving" God. The point is, Christians, apologists, and conservatives (the main group of readers for this website) read the headline for this book and say, "But you can't disprove God! Dawkins is wrong!" Dawkins knows better to say this, because of the old argument about the celestial teapot orbiting Mars (one that is there, but because of our inferior technology, we can't see it). Since Dawkins never claims to disprove God, putting that as the headline of this article is deceiving. But as Humblpi said, any attempt to change this will instantly be reverted; it's probably pointless to even have a debate over this. --AtheistJohn 17:08, 23 April 2008 (EDT)