جستجوی مقالات مرتبط با کلیدواژه "the god delusion" در نشریات گروه "فلسفه و کلام"

The issue of efficiency of religion is one of the most important current theological topics. Since this concept does not require complex philosophical and scientific grounds, it can easily engage the general public, and for this reason, it has been used by atheists like Richard Dawkins. Following the pragmatic approach to religion, Dawkins has discussed the relationship between religion and morality in some chapters of the The God Delusion, but not in the usual way, rather, he tries to deny religion by denying the moral efficacy of religion. It is not that simply Dawkins declares that ethics is separate from religion and that religion can enter other fields such as issues related to belief, rather he attempts to undermine the authenticity of religion through showing its inefficiency. In denying religious ethics, Dawkins presents his argument in two ways. First, he explains human ethics from a scientific and evolutionary point of view, and in the next stage, he criticizes religious ethics, and then, by proving human ethics and negating religious ethics, he concludes the negation of religion and God with a pragmatic approach. This article examines Dawkins' pragmatic approach with descriptive-analytical method, regardless of his scientific-evolutionary arguments which have been criticized in other articles. The following results have been achieved: 1. fallacy in his pragmatic approach, 2. imperfection of the human ethics claimed by him, and 3. criticizing his perspective toward religious ethics and presenting the rational-scriptural model of religious ethics.

The natural atheism is based on two items: “the concept of God” and “the explanatory realm of science and religion”. The concept of God in new atheism is different from that in Abrahamic religions, especially Islam. Besides, the science and religion are two different spheres and are, as far as explanation is concerned, essentially different. Since past, various methods have been used to prove the existence of the Necessary Being, one of which is founded on the very “concept of existence” itself; that is, the philosophical explanation of God’s existence a priori. Richard Dawkins maintains that the “ontological argument” is nothing except a word game, and Kant has rejected that argument. Descartes, however, presented a new exposition which was totally ignored by Dawkins. This article seeks to explain and review Dawkins’ statement in The God Delusion to show that Dawkins’ critique of Anselm’s ontological argument is by no means right and is a cheap reading of that argument.

In The God delusion, in detail, Richard dawkins denies the God who gives order to the natural system; of course, in this book, in brief, he rejects God who hears prayer, does miracle and is aware of everything's and is omnipotent. dawkins’ Discussion on orderer God has three main concepts: natural selection, complexity and a low probability. When he substitutes orderer God with the natural selection, thus dosn’t criticise this popular theory that know divine way of creation as natural selection, but ridicules it and his discussion on complexity of the orderer God, use verbal share paralogism. In addition to, his discussion about to accepting or denying what its truth has a low probability have paradoxes in his book. In this article, in addition to above, I argue that in the books of theologians, the most important Dawkins arguments have been answered long before that he debate them. However, dawkins without criticism of responses and without being aware of it, give unfinished Discuss about God. Also in this paper, I indicate that dawkins’s investigation in the god delusion is biased.