Dawkins' God: Genes, Memes, and the Meaning of Life
Alister McGrath
 McGrath begins with an overview of evolutionary biology and Darwinist theory. He then presents Dawkins’ view that the current state of scientific knowledge should lead a rational person to conclude that there is no God. McGrath argues that Dawkins fails to declare or defend several crucial assumptions or premises. McGrath also defends other conclusions in the book, including: * the scientific method cannot conclusively prove that God does or does not exist; * the theory of evolution does not necessarily entail any particular atheistic, agnostic, or Christian understanding of the world; * Dawkins’ refutation of William Paley’s watchmaker analogy does not equate to a refutation of God’s existence; * Dawkins’ proposal that memes explain the evolutionary development of human culture is more illogical and unscientific than a clearly articulated defence of Christianity; * Dawkins is ignorant of Christian theology and mischaracterizes religious people generally. McGrath argues that Dawkins’ rejection of faith is a straw man argument. According to McGrath, Dawkins’ definition that faith “means blind trust, in the absence of evidence” is not a Christian position. In contrast, argues McGrath, accepting Dawkins’ definition would require blind trust since he offers no evidence to support it. Rather, it is based upon what McGrath calls “an unstated and largely unexamined cluster of hidden non-scientific values and beliefs” (p.&nbsp;92). McGrath then argues that Dawkins frequently violates the very tenets of evidence-based reasoning that Dawkins himself claims to uphold and use to dismiss all religious belief. Also on page 92, McGrath states "... Darwinism neither proves nor disproves the existence of God (unless, of course God is defined by his critics in precisely such a way...)."