Also online is the
New York Times review of
The God Delusion, which deals at some length with Dawkin's insistence that God must be more complex than His creation. This appears to be another strawman, but it struck me as particularly odd given how many scientific examples there are of the simple giving birth to limitless complexity. Natural selection; the equation of the Mandelbrot Set; the low-entropy initial state of the universe. (Interestingly, mythology is full of simple initial creations which were succeeded by complexity - the inert, homogenous oceans of Mesopotamian and Egyptian religion are examples.)
The review also states (my emphasis): "Dawkins’s gullible-child proposal is, as he concedes, just one of many Darwinian hypotheses that have been speculatively put forward to account for religion. (Another is that
religion is a byproduct of our genetically programmed tendency to fall in love.)" omg, that's a delightful idea! I must track it down!
( Now with additional grumbling )