OnlineBookClub.org

The author has a biased point of view since he clearly states that religion is a hoax and he claims that the Church has been wrong for a long time. Do you think that being biased in a book that seeks to prove God's essence with scientifical arguments is valid? In my opinion, the author should be impartial, bringing points against and in favor of religion, but that's not what we see in this book.

I don't think that he is saying that religion is a hoax, as he himself seems to believe in God. It's not unbiased, but you can't really be unbiased when it comes to religion. The author is instead offering an alternative point of view, and since the book is more aimed at those feeling lost in religion, it allows the reader to develop their own opinion based off of facts and research.

In an ideal situation the author as well as the book should have been unbiased. But what we must keep in our minds is that the author is merely another human being and is prone for being biased

Maddie Atkinson wrote: ↑01 Dec 2020, 17:59 I don't think that he is saying that religion is a hoax, as he himself seems to believe in God. It's not unbiased, but you can't really be unbiased when it comes to religion. The author is instead offering an alternative point of view, and since the book is more aimed at those feeling lost in religion, it allows the reader to develop their own opinion based off of facts and research.

I think that it's indeed really hard to be unbiased when it comes to religion. Still, I believe that the author should bring more arguments against his point of view, even to prove that those arguments are wrong.

Sushan wrote: ↑02 Dec 2020, 04:29 In an ideal situation the author as well as the book should have been unbiased. But what we must keep in our minds is that the author is merely another human being and is prone for being biased

It's true that we all have opinions, so it is just normal to see that the author showed his own. However, I also think that when we are talking with a scientific point of view we should try to distance ourselves of the theme too.

I feel that being unbiased in this case would be hard as he came to these conclusions by not only life experiences, but also by what he has learned. To come to a conclusion by ones experiences instead of a scientific experiment or study that you are not involved in makes bias almost certain.

I believe the author wrote this book to prove a point or to suggest a new idea, at the very least. He suggests that God exists in a somewhat different sense than what the Bible teaches and that this existence can be approached from a scientific point of view. In this case, it's difficult to stay unbiased, and I don't believe it was his ultimate goal either. However, I don't think he means to suggest that religion, as a whole, is a hoax.

gabrielletiemi wrote: ↑02 Dec 2020, 17:12

Maddie Atkinson wrote: ↑01 Dec 2020, 17:59 I don't think that he is saying that religion is a hoax, as he himself seems to believe in God. It's not unbiased, but you can't really be unbiased when it comes to religion. The author is instead offering an alternative point of view, and since the book is more aimed at those feeling lost in religion, it allows the reader to develop their own opinion based off of facts and research.

I think that it's indeed really hard to be unbiased when it comes to religion. Still, I believe that the author should bring more arguments against his point of view, even to prove that those arguments are wrong.

Oh for sure! If they are trying to give a well rounded argument, you should show both sides of the argument and then prove why yours is the correct side. But yeah, it is so hard to be unbiased with religion because it's based on one's moral values at heart!

I agree completely! The author is so biased that his writings come across as more of an impassioned outburst than a well-researched and thought out argument. Something cannot be proven or disproved based on one's opinion.

Sadly, many religious books are biased even when they claim that they are not. Based on what I have read in this book so far, it is definitely biased. I think that it shouldn't be biased because the author may be able to reach more readers this way.

I don't think this book needs to be unbiased. I see it as being similar to the "opinion" or "editorial" section of a newspaper where someone with a point to make presents arguments to support their views. This author believes that organized religion is harmful because beliefs are presented as facts and because people are judged according to a set of arbitrary rules. He also thinks that it is nevertheless possible to have faith in god. The book describes his reasons for reaching these conclusions with appropriate reference to logic, philosophy, and science.

I believe the book would be better to be unbiased. Like all debates, everyone is entitled to an opinion once given all the relevant information and facts. I think the book is great to discuss and explore religious belief and also scientific theories. In an ideal world this information should be given for the reader to form their own thoughts regarding the subject matter. I imagine this is hard for any author who has a particular opinion and is eager to discuss this with the world.

The book is incredible to talk about and investigate strict conviction and furthermore logical speculations. In an ideal world this content should be given for the peruser to frame their own considerations with respect to the topic. I see this is hard for any author who has a specific assessment and is anxious to talk about this with the world.

I do not think the author is biased everyone has his own point of view. What matters is what is your view? and also the author aims to leave you with something to think about.

Eareeves99 wrote: ↑03 Dec 2020, 12:04 I agree completely! The author is so biased that his writings come across as more of an impassioned outburst than a well-researched and thought out argument. Something cannot be proven or disproved based on one's opinion.

I don't think he set out to be unbiased, it is impossible to be unbiased with religion, because your beliefs are entirely based on the values you hold closest. I don't think he is trying to prove anything, but instead try and make sense of a religion which to him seems to have been a lie from the start. It is an opinionated book, but that's the point. Everyone's religious values are entirely based on ones opinion and interpretation of the scriptures, this is just his.