Journal of
eISSN: 2373-6445
Submit manuscript...
Perspective Authors String Book Reviews - II
Book Review God Is No Delusion
Samuel A Nigro M D
Verify Captcha
Regret for the inconvenience: we are taking measures to prevent fraudulent form submissions by extractors and page crawlers. Please type the correct Captcha word to see email ID.
Verify Captcha
Regret for the inconvenience: we are taking measures to prevent fraudulent form submissions by extractors and page crawlers. Please type the correct Captcha word to see email ID.
Retired, Assistant Clinical Professor Psychiatry, Case Western Reserve University School of Medicine, USA
Correspondence: Dr. Samuel A Nigro M.D., Retired, Assistant Clinical Professor Psychiatry, Case Western Reserve University School of Medicine, 2517 Guilford Road, Cleveland Heights, Ohio 44118, USA, Tel 216 932-0575
Received: August 19, 2015 | Published: October 6, 2015
Citation: Nigro SA (2015) Book Review God Is No Delusion. J Psychol Clin Psychiatry 3(5): 00156. DOI: 10.15406/jpcpy.2015.03.00156
Perspective
Book Review
God is No Delusion: A Refutation of Richard Dawkins, by Thomas Crean OP (2007), Ignatius Press, San Francisco, USA, pp. 160.
This short book is an incredibly erudite disquisition and then absolute discrediting of Richard Dawkins in his book The God Delusion. Reading this book took me back to the wonderful days at the University of Notre Dame when we students were treated to amazing academic presentations that I thought were no longer possible. What a treat this short book is! Father Crean is a scholar who dissects Richard Dawkins to the bone revealing him to be, if not brainless, then a fraud, liar, and, at best, a public relations expert. All must read this book!
I will not duplicate the truth and wisdom of the book encouraging you, the reader, to not miss it yourself. Instead, I will use this review to add my past efforts to deconstruct Richard Dawkins. My book review of The God Delusion focused on Dawkins imprecision and fraudulent refusal to use the accepted scientific definition of “delusion.”
A false belief of symptom of mental illness...delusions are distinct from cultural religious based beliefs and may be seen as untrue by outsiders. Encyclopedia of Medicine, 2006.
Dawkins admitted to ignoring severe objections and criticisms from three psychiatrists about his use of the word “delusion.” Second, in my book review of God is Not Great, by Christopher Hitchins, I noticed Hitchins claiming that the evolution of the eye was accommodating by evolution – and the reference was a book by Richard Dawkins entitled “Climbing Mount Improbable.” So I got the latter book and found the reference used by Dawkins to claim “the central message of this chapter is that eyes evolve easily and fast, at the drop of a hat” (Pg 190). Dawkins’ referenced article was Proc. R. Sc. Lond. B (1994) 256 53-58. Dawkins’ description of this article in his book “Climbing Mount Improbable” is an academic crime. In psychiatric terms, Dawkins’ description of this article consists of multiple confabulations which made me think of brain damage because that is where most confabulations are regularly seen. All are encouraged to read his referenced article and compare it to what Dawkins has to say on it in his book pages 160-163.
Finally, I have yet to hear from the editors of Scientific American responding to my objection to Dawkins (along with Case Western Reserve Physicist Krauss) and their belief that “teaching is seduction.” This admission is an absolute proof of not only the incompetence of Richard Dawkins but of his own immorality. Just look up the contemporary and usual definition of “seduce,” and you will know what I mean.
I sent all my findings to the Chancellor of the University of Oxford as well as to all the major newspapers in the United States. Their protection of this proven liar, blow-hard and academic criminal is proof positive of the unreliability and dishonesty of the press and media in the United States.
I hope Thomas Crean’s God is No Delusion gets a more fair, honest, and forthright presentation to the public which has the right to know when someone of Richard Dawkins’ standing is proven to be a fraud and a fool.
Acknowledgments
None.
Conflicts of interest
The authors declare that there is no conflict of interest.
©2015 Nigro. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and build upon your work non-commercially.