Dawkins Delusion

The Delusion

🗣️You do not write 20 books and give hundreds lectures to prove that Santa Clause is not real. So why Richard Dawkins spent his whole life proving God does not exist? It’s like holding a deep conviction that leprechauns weren’t responsible for the stock market crash—yet still obsessively telling everyone why that’s the case.

🗣️Dawkins’ biggest mistake is that he operates on faith while claiming to reject it. He has built a belief system on denying belief.

Richard Dawkins animosity toward faith and believers is unprecedented - clearly more emotional, than rational and fundamentally illogical at its core. It reassembles cult where it’s head leader profits of misinterpretation and falsehood, because he elevated himself to authority on what is real and what is not by employing perverted interpretation of science.

🗣️Science offers methodology and explanation, but it does not claim to have the Final Answer and is built on constant refinement of current understanding. The most logical position to take, in case you do not have full conviction, facts and understanding is to start gathering information, for the time being say, ‘I do not know’, then reassess, refine and take new position.
Richard Dawkin’s position itself, by offering final answer is quite leap of faith without proper backing - fundamentally founded on logical fallacy and frankly wrong.
It is sort of religion on its own, but not anchored in absolute truth.
He uses science as a tool to gain credibility, but ultimately does not tell the whole story, because if they admitted that science is not the final answer, they would have to acknowledge something beyond themselves.

Now, if you are clever you might try to reverse this on me and ask:

🧐 Well, then what gives you the authority to claim that Faith offers the Final Answer or Absolute Truth? If science is unable to do that, then why Faith would be any different?

🗣️I am glad you have asked: Here is the thing, both of us are making faith claim.
The difference between my faith and Dawkins’ faith is this: My faith allows for something beyond human limits. His faith traps itself within them because,
Richard Dawkins and his followers place it in science and materialistic reality, then somehow make illogical, unscientific claim that it proves non existence of entity they claim does not exist.
This is utter BS - ask them what methodology they have used to arrive at that conclusion. They have not even defined what God is and did not follow any concrete, rigid methodology, that would allow to form undeniable claim.

They milk this idea by selling books, hooking people on this lie and hijacking their attention. They claim the Church do this, but they do exactly the same thing.

🗣️Lets go back to question, you have asked so promptly, shall we? Reductionists do no allow to place belief in unknown and metaphysical sphere, instead they try to contain it within materialistic sphere. As you can clearly see it is a faith claim. And here is the kicker:
It is a mental trap and strategically worse position.

🤔Why?

Faith is unavoidable. The only question is where you place it—on something beyond yourself, or on the limits of human perception.
They have chosen to put faith in something that is too materialistic but produces very real psychological repercussions because there is nothing concrete you can anchor your thoughts on when things are getting tough.
A materialist must anchor their beliefs in a world that constantly changes. That means their foundation is always shifting, never stable. Faith in Divine Order, however, is an anchor—when the world shakes, it holds.
However, if you go opposite way and accept, that maybe ‘something is out there’ then you might get backing of Divine Order, things might start shifting for you positively and you have hope, which is a real deal.

You might ask:
🧐 How do you know it is your faith? huh?
🗣️Well, I can only infer and suspect, because the leap of faith is undeniably required, but if you consider certain event that happened in the past - you will quickly realise, that it created a ripple effect originating over 2000 years ago. It rippled, through the past, is rippling through the present and will continue rippling into the future. Even a sceptic cannot deny the influence of Christianity on the world.

The bottom line is, Richard Dawkins faith in ‘nothing beyond the material’ leads to a fragile, unstable mindset when facing the unknown. Faith in Divine Order, on the other hand, provides strength, resilience, and real-world positive effects.

Faith is not just an idea—it’s the foundation of civilization, the force that has shaped history, and the only thing that remains when everything else collapses. Reject it, and you are left with nothing but the fleeting illusions of your own mind.

If you are interested you might want to check out The Unshakable Core. There is explanation why I think the faith is source of real strength → The Unshakable Core

What is the motivation?

🗣️His constant attacks and emotional investment show something deeper at play. We can only infer motives, but if you want clues look at what he is profiting off - he is invested in defending a lie, because he built reputation around it and also consciously or subconsciously convinced those who followed him. He is too deep in the game to turn back. - It does not mean he cannot, but that would send shockwaves if it happened, so the cult continues and he doubles down.

But ask yourself this:
Do they not see God because He does not exist or rather blinded themselves to even considering possibility of Him existing? This world view has real-life consequences—it shapes how people live, think, and act which directly translates on how institutions, workplaces and political landscape are being shaped at its core. I would encourage anyone to at least reconsider the stance.

If we keep digging we will soon realise that its more than just science vs. religion—there’s a deeper psychological and philosophical layer and conflict at play.

This Is More Than Just Science vs. Religion—This Is About Power

This is ,more than just science vs. religion—this is about power, profit and influence

🗣️He sees faith as a threat to intellectual supremacy
🔹 Dawkins operates from a strictly materialist, rationalist worldview—meaning if something cannot be measured, it is not real.
🔹 Faith, by nature, rejects the idea that only what can be scientifically proven matters.
🔹 For him, this is a direct challenge—because if faith holds weight, then his worldview is incomplete.
🔹Atheists, blame religious institutions for past abuses, wars, and suppression of free thought. He doesn’t differentiate between true faith anchored in proper alignment and the political manipulation of religion throughout history.
🔹 Instead of seeing faith as a powerful force for order, meaning, and civilization, he sees it as a relic of ignorance that must be erased.

This Isn’t Just Debate—This Is Personal for Him

🗣️He is too emotionally invested in his position—this isn’t just rational debate for him.
🔹 Many of his writings show frustration, even anger, toward believers—not just disagreement.
🔹 This suggests that his rejection of faith is not just intellectual—it is personal.
🔹 Some people, when they reject faith, don’t just walk away—they need to destroy it in others to justify their own stance.

His Ultimate Fear? That Something Beyond Science Might Be Real.

🗣️He cannot tolerate the idea that something beyond science could be true
🔹 His entire life’s work is built on the idea that science holds the answers.
🔹 But science doesn’t claim to hold final truth—it only builds models based on what can be tested.
If faith is real, then he has spent his life denying something fundamental—and that is an unbearable thought for someone who prides himself on being intellectually superior.
He might be fighting possibility of being wrong, because you don’t fight ghosts unless you secretly think they might be real.