This week I quickly read "The Dawkins Delusion. Atheist Fundamentalism and the Denial of the Divine" by Alister McGrath and Joanna Collicutt McGrath.
It's a short and powerful critique of Dawkins' "The God Delusion". Loved it. Mrs. McGrath's special interest is in neuropsychology.
I think I'll post several quotes. This is one I need today:
Dawkins also offers a naturalist explanation of religion--in this case, one that is highly contrived and unpersuasive. Belief in God might be a byproduct of some other evolutionary mechanism. Here he moves into territory explored by fellow atheist Daniel Dennett in his recent book Breaking the Spell. Yet both Dawkins and Dennett adopt a very cognitive view of religion, defining it virtually exclusively in terms of "belief in God." Yet this is certainly not the sole aspect of religion; not is it even necessarily the most fundamental. A more reliable description of religion would make reference to its many aspects, including knowledge, beliefs, experience, ritual practices, social affiliation, motivation and behavioral consequences.