Sunday, June 22, 2008 | Reason : Backlash | print version

The Flea Delusion

by Tao De Haas

See:
http://thedelusiondelusion.com/

A strange new flea book?

The Delusion Delusion

PAST FLEAS:

http://www.xulonpress.com/book_detail.php?id=5390
Dawkins Dilemas

Dawkins' Dilemmas – thought-provoking and intriguing Will Richard Dawkins' atheism grip millions – fade – or stir lingering doubts? Baffled or intrigued by his passionate arguments? With this book, you will be able to: Find out how biblical Christianity uncovers Dawkins' dilemmas. Discover why atheism does not rest on rational foundations. Use a fascinating approach that helps you to weigh up Dawkins' beliefs — As you explore Dawkins' dilemmas — • The dilemma of a flawed world • The dilemma of humanity • The dilemma of atheism and probability • An intriguing chapter on: SETI – the search for meaning • The dilemma of the ultimate paradox And take a fresh look at the gospel of Christ.

http://www.amazon.co.uk/Why-There-Almost-Certainly-God/dp/0745953301
and
http://shop.ekklesia.co.uk/christian-bookshop/why_there_almost_certainly_is_a_god_1212372.html

Why There Almost Certainly Is a God: Doubting Dawkins by Keith Ward

Synopsis
Richard Dawkins recently claimed that 'no theologian has ever produced a satisfactory response to his arguments'. Well-known broadcaster and author Keith Ward is one of Britain's foremost philosopher-theologians. This is his response. Ward welcomes all comers into philosophy's world of clear definitions, sharp arguments, and diverse conclusions. But when Dawkins enters this world, his passion tends to get the better of him, and he descends into stereotyping, pastiche, and mockery. In this stimulating and thought-provoking philosophical challenge, Ward demonstrates not only how Dawkins' arguments are flawed, but that a perfectly rational case can be made that there, almost certainly, is a God.

The Devil's Delusion: Atheism and Its Scientific Pretensions
http://www.amazon.com/Devils-Delusion-Atheism-Scientific-Pretensions/dp/0307396266/ref=pd_bxgy_b_text_b

http://www.amazon.com/GOD-QUESTION-Response-God-Delusion/dp/B0013VHC0G/ref=sr_1_5?ie=UTF8&s=digital-text&qid=1205351261&sr=1-5
[No Image Available]

'The God Question: A Response to The God Delusion' by Rev. John Edgell

The Delusion of Disbelief: Why the New Atheism is a Threat to Your Life, Liberty, and Pursuit of Happiness

http://www.amazon.com/Delusion-Disbelief-Atheism-Liberty-Happiness/dp/1414317085/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1203958557&sr=8-1
delusion disbelief

http://www.lulu.com/content/605271
"The Confutation of Dawkins' The God Delusion" by Malcolm McLean
flea

Richard Dawkins' book is systematically refuted. Dawkins' arguments are analysed, and invariably found wanting. However the confutation is charitable in tone, and sometimes allows that Dawkins may have a constructive point. A must read for anyone who has read "The God Delusion".

http://www.mobipocket.com/en/eBooks/BookDetails.asp?BookID=35163&Origine=1718
rd delusion

http://www.cokesbury.com/forms/ProductDetail.aspx?pid=654057
God and the new atheism

Read an interview with the latest flea author John Haught at Salon.com here (thanks to Richard Prins)

PZ Myers has done a nice breakdown of the above interview here

Suggit

"Challenging Richard Dawkins: Why Richard Dawkins is Wrong About God"
Kathleen Jones Flea

God Is No Delusion: A Refutation of Richard Dawkins

UPDATE: This looks like it is actually the SAME book as you see in Richard's flea-orbit below titled "A Catholic Replies to Professor Dawkins (UK)" (they have the same blurb). This must be a case of them trying to hype it up for the US market.

Sam's Fleas

And some general fleas:

The New Atheist Crusaders and Their Unholy Grail: The Misguided Quest to Destroy Your Faith
by Becky Garrison

The Truth Behind the New Atheism: Responding to the Emerging Challenges to God and Christianity

"The New Atheists: The Twilight of Reason & The War on Religion"
by Tina Beattie

Add to del.icio.us Posted: Sunday, June 22, 2008 | Permalink

Comments 1 - 50 of 194 |

Reload Comments | Back to Top | Page Numbers

1. Comment #197547 by Nails on June 22, 2008 at 10:07 am

Toe De Has?
Never heard of him.

But how patronising is the 'allowing you to reach your full potential' banner on his website!!

http://www.taodehaas.com/index.php?incl=Profile

Can't open the link to thedelusiondelusion.com/, so I havn't got a clue what the book is about either.

Anyone else got any ideas?

Other Comments by Nails

2. Comment #197548 by Cartomancer on June 22, 2008 at 10:08 am

Some kind of high-level meta-delusion? Sounds suspiciously like Neoplatonism to me...

Other Comments by Cartomancer

3. Comment #197550 by bugaboo on June 22, 2008 at 10:13 am

learn how to embrace your inner delusion and come to love it.

Other Comments by bugaboo

4. Comment #197554 by decius on June 22, 2008 at 10:18 am

It looks like he is involved with a lot of bollocks.
"He composed the music for his CD The Ultimate Stress Buster, Meditation CD" and ripping people off with self-help techniques.

Other Comments by decius

5. Comment #197557 by Oystein Elgaroy on June 22, 2008 at 10:19 am

Who said "All have a book within, and in most cases that is exactly where it should stay"?

Other Comments by Oystein Elgaroy

6. Comment #197558 by TeraBrat on June 22, 2008 at 10:19 am

The fact that so many books were written to refute that book shows how worried they are about it.

Other Comments by TeraBrat

7. Comment #197559 by Steve Zara on June 22, 2008 at 10:22 am

Comment #197557 by Oystein Elgaroy

I believe it was Chris Hitchens. Sure sounds like him!

Other Comments by Steve Zara

8. Comment #197565 by Frankus1122 on June 22, 2008 at 10:30 am

From what I was able to read from the back cover (testimonials from Oprah and Deepak) it does not look like a serious book. There are many references to it being extremely funny.
It looks like a true flea; exploiting the title of Dawkins' book to make a quick buck.

Other Comments by Frankus1122

9. Comment #197567 by Oystein Elgaroy on June 22, 2008 at 10:32 am

Comment #197559 by Steve Zara

Thanks. He is a bit of a bully, but the quote seems relevant here.

Other Comments by Oystein Elgaroy

10. Comment #197570 by Forti on June 22, 2008 at 10:37 am

My guess is that it's a parody.

Poe's Law strikes back! :D

Other Comments by Forti

11. Comment #197572 by decius on June 22, 2008 at 10:37 am

testimonials from Oprah and Deepak

There you go, a certified quack.

Other Comments by decius

12. Comment #197575 by bugaboo on June 22, 2008 at 10:44 am

10. Comment #197570 by Forti

My guess is that it's a parody

Dont count on it. The self help industry is full of this type of drivel and these books sell like hotcakes.

Other Comments by bugaboo

13. Comment #197577 by Layla Nasreddin on June 22, 2008 at 10:45 am

There was another "flea" I saw a while back; I sent it in but it isn't up there. It's called Answering the New Atheism: Dismantling Dawkins' Case Against God. I mean, not that anybody here would want to READ such a thing, but just to keep the list current, you know? The fact that it comes with recommendations from Antony Flew and Michael Behe...well, that speaks for itself.

I suppose it's only a matter of time before we see The Dawkins Delusion Delusion Delusion...I'm already getting dizzy!

Other Comments by Layla Nasreddin

14. Comment #197578 by maton100 on June 22, 2008 at 10:45 am

The flea eggs are past their incubation period. Time for the hatching of horseshit.

Other Comments by maton100

15. Comment #197579 by Diacanu on June 22, 2008 at 10:47 am

Josh has to either get his butt in gear, or have someone else do it, but all the new ones have to be spliced onto that little orbit chart.

Come on, someone here has to be a graphic artist, let's get that shit done, gang.

Other Comments by Diacanu

16. Comment #197582 by mordacious1 on June 22, 2008 at 10:51 am

We all have a book within us. Sometimes it's in the brain, sometimes the heart, sometimes the lower GI tract.

Other Comments by mordacious1

17. Comment #197584 by Corylus on June 22, 2008 at 10:53 am

How vastly peculiar. Seems to be just a marketing ploy to sell a self-help psychology book.

If his point is simply that modern psychology has shown we humans all have our individual crazy ideas, then I have to say that this is neither a novel insight nor a particular shocker.

However, I haven't read it so perhaps I am being unkind. One plus point is the deep amusement I feel at the evidence that someone might be making some pennies off the back of McGrath for a change.

Generally though,... a book about a delusion, about a book about a delusion, about a book...

Puts me in mind of a strange experience I had at work the other week. I was attending training on how to use Powerpoint for delivering training/lectures. It was being given by a trainer using Powerpoint.

I got so distracted by the contemplation of the infinite regress inherent in this situation that I learnt precisely bugger all.

Ho Hum.

Other Comments by Corylus

18. Comment #197586 by decius on June 22, 2008 at 10:59 am

To make a penny out of McGrath, you shall have to pimp him out in some latrine. No one would buy a book because its title sounds similar to McGrath's.

Other Comments by decius

19. Comment #197587 by TeraBrat on June 22, 2008 at 10:59 am

Here's some information about

Tao de Haas

http://www.taodehaas.com/index.php?incl=13

Other Comments by TeraBrat

20. Comment #197588 by black wolf on June 22, 2008 at 11:01 am

Afleogenesis or fleacial creation? The most important question mankind has ever faced!
... or not

I speculate that it's perhaps along the 'we can think about thinking and therefore thought is independent of our brain, so therefore our mind must be somehow inspired by something higher' or 'we wouldn't have the concept of a delusion if we were actually deluded' or something. MPhil will know how to phrase that better than I can, and he'll surely have seen it all before. I'd love to read a review or a comment about its content by my very clever countryman.
I just awoke from a nap, please excuse my poor language.

Other Comments by black wolf

21. Comment #197589 by Steve Zara on June 22, 2008 at 11:02 am

Comment #197587 by TeraBrat

Oh dear the link to "The Delusion Delusion" on his page doesn't work.

That means the link is a Delusion Delusion Delusion.

Other Comments by Steve Zara

22. Comment #197591 by Sargeist on June 22, 2008 at 11:04 am

It must be a parody: "The unintentional best seller", come on!

Other Comments by Sargeist

23. Comment #197593 by mordacious1 on June 22, 2008 at 11:06 am

unintentional bestseller...you think it would be on amazon by now...it's not. Probably sold two copies, yeah his wife bought one too.

Other Comments by mordacious1

24. Comment #197600 by quill on June 22, 2008 at 11:16 am

What is it with these people and fake names? What was the name of that last guy? Vox Dei?

Other Comments by quill

25. Comment #197606 by thewhitepearl on June 22, 2008 at 11:20 am

I'm scared to click on this link!!

The unintentional best seller?? what?

EDIT* I had fun "flippin" the pages...

Other Comments by thewhitepearl

26. Comment #197609 by TeraBrat on June 22, 2008 at 11:23 am

Why not wait and find out what the book actually says before putting it down.

Other Comments by TeraBrat

27. Comment #197615 by Sargeist on June 22, 2008 at 11:31 am

Tera,

I'm not even going to pick it up...

Other Comments by Sargeist

28. Comment #197617 by bugaboo on June 22, 2008 at 11:32 am

Hi Tera

I think that in this case you CAN judge a book by its cover.

Spain V Italy starting

must go

Other Comments by bugaboo

29. Comment #197618 by Layla Nasreddin on June 22, 2008 at 11:35 am

Hmm. On the site, it says, "Sydney psychotherapist Tao De Haas has written The Delusion Delusion in response to The God Delusion, by the world renowned Oxford professor and scientist Richard Dawkins and The Dawkins Delusion? by Alister McGrath. Rather than debating who is or isn't deluded, The Delusion Delusion answers both. De Haas says that it is not essential to have read Dawkins' or McGrath's book in order to understand The Delusion Delusion."

The back says, "Are you deluded? The answer is probably 'yes'. Recognising your delusions as just that will give you a renewed sense of perspective and freedom. If you think you're not deluded, then read on..."

The parody "endorsements" that follow kind of give the game away. For example: "This book will definitely not be seen or mentioned on the Oprah Winfrey show. -- Winprah Onfrey; "I'm confused -- but I like it. -- John Smith, not an author but wants to write a book one day.

I say part parody, part serious.
(This space unintentionally left blank.)

Other Comments by Layla Nasreddin

30. Comment #197620 by black wolf on June 22, 2008 at 11:37 am

From the author's bio, he's apparently a qualified psychotherapist, and a business and achievement counselor. His lectures are about emotional and corporate intelligence, communication and mental training.
http://www.taodehaas.com/index.php?incl=Profile

My earlier comment is way off probably. I now speculate his book is more about the emphasis of delusions in our lives, where they come from and what important insights we can potentially gain from realizing them, in order to resolve conflict. Probably denouncing the criticism atheists and faith proponents have for each other as delusions of themselves. As in, delusions are a part of how our mind functions, and getting rid of them is the wrong way to address them. "Tao de Haas has the secret of not just dealing with stress, but making it good for you. Tao's passionate and entertaining teaching methods and effective stress reduction techniques, will leave you relaxed and de-stressed." (http://www.scvb.com.au/scvb/index.cfm?921AE9F0-BCDE-7715-B8DC-1631F2989A0B)
My father is a professional in stress management and business counseling, maybe I'll ask him if he's heard of Mr. de Haas. Probably not, as the market for such counselors is huge.

edit: Thanks Layla for the information in her above post, confirming my ideas.

Other Comments by black wolf

31. Comment #197628 by decius on June 22, 2008 at 11:57 am

black wolf,

go over his site once more and read carefully. A lot of red flags, all over the place. For instance the claims that he makes about the so-called emotional intelligence (the wildest one being "emotional intelligence is science", not even acknowledging its controversial nature).

Other Comments by decius

32. Comment #197629 by epeeist on June 22, 2008 at 11:57 am

Comment #197589 by Steve Zara

Oh dear the link to "The Delusion Delusion" on his page doesn't work.

Just another web site with appalling accessibility.

Other Comments by epeeist

33. Comment #197632 by doglived on June 22, 2008 at 12:04 pm

If you can read the quotes on the back of the book you'll see some pretty odd blurbs. I think this is a fake to get some pr for the consulting business "Toa" runs (if this is his site, if he exists) (or an outright scam via paypal). Extremely strange. Until more is known I'd remove the links. I'm very skeptical, so why post it here and drive traffic there, increasing search engine rankings for him ?

Other Comments by doglived

34. Comment #197639 by Richard Dawkins on June 22, 2008 at 12:12 pm

From what I was able to read from the back cover (testimonials from Oprah and Deepak) it does not look like a serious book. There are many references to it being extremely funny.
It looks like a true flea; exploiting the title of Dawkins' book to make a quick buck.

There are no testimonials from Oprah and Deepak. The testimonials are from Woprah Onfray, Chopak Deeprah, Onchel Milfray, Frolic Crancis and Archbishop Osmond Tupu.

It is not religious, but is rightly classified as a flea in that it is obviously an attempt to cash in. It is trying to be funny. I don't think it is funny, but what do I know? Many people on this site think "Dick to the Dawk to the PhD" is the very acme of wit.

The jokes in The Delusion Delusion are all variants on "This page is left intentionally blank." "There is no page 5 in this book, so I added one because we have to make up the page count somehow" "This page is not a delusion. This is just to help me get past page 58." "Remember that the real purpose is to fill up the pages so we can call this a book." "Congratulations! You have read beyond page 18 and you are still awake. And I have managed to fill 57 pages of a real book." In other words it is an unabashed pot-boiler and the only joke it contains is "This book is an unabashed pot-boiler." My advice is, clock it as another flea and then ignore it.

Richard

Other Comments by Richard Dawkins

35. Comment #197642 by DamnDirtyApe on June 22, 2008 at 12:16 pm

Roger that. Definately a delusion delusion - delusion.

Other Comments by DamnDirtyApe

36. Comment #197644 by Cartomancer on June 22, 2008 at 12:23 pm

If writing flea books is this easy I might just have a go myself. Got to be an easier way to make money than academia, surely? All I have to do is fill page after page with poor arguments, non sequiturs and lame jokes then come up with an unimaginative parodic title to bundle the whole crock of badly-written nonsense in. Maybe not so different from academia after all on second thoughts. Ok, how about...

The Cod Diffusion - Migratory Patterns in Marine Fish and how they prove Richard Dawkins is Wrong -
by Vincent Poffley and the British Seafood Marketing Board

Chapter one, Why the Roman Catholic Church almost certainly exists

Chapter two, Why the Roman Catholic Church almost certainly shouldn't exist

Chapter three, Why Richard Dawkins almost certainly doesn't exist

Chapter four, The Larch

Chapter five, Stalin ate my neighbours, therefore Jesus...

Chapter six, The Larch

Chapter seven, St. Thomas Aquinas ate my neighbours, therefore Jesus...

etc.

Other Comments by Cartomancer

37. Comment #197654 by Layla Nasreddin on June 22, 2008 at 12:37 pm

I don't doubt that the whole "Delusion" motif is just a cash-in. Basically, it looks like a typical pop-psych book, wrapped in a parody of the "delusion" books.

One thing that keeps popping up from the anti-atheists is that atheists are "humourless", that they take things far too literally and "can't take a joke." Well, OK, it's good to laugh at yourself sometimes -- though it would help if the jokes were actually, you know, funny.

Many people on this site think "Dick to the Dawk to the PhD" is the very acme of wit.

Aw, come on! It's funny precisely because it is so ridiculous--or, rather, ridiculously stupid (although it could just be that it's my sense of humour that's off-kilter). Then again, would I laugh at a parody of myself which portrayed me as an Atheist Slut in a Burqa (or something equally stupid)? Well...I hope so! No use getting upset over something so ridiculous...

Other Comments by Layla Nasreddin

38. Comment #197661 by blasphemer on June 22, 2008 at 12:52 pm

If writing flea books is this easy I might just have a go myself. Got to be an easier way to make money than academia surely?

Writing books isn't the way to get rich, unless you are fortunate enough to write a blockbuster. My father-in-law wrote, along with another author, the book "Quantum Enigma, physics encounters consciousness." The book is meant to be a popular book which discusses the apparent paradoxes of the quantum realm. Both authors are professors of Physics at UC Santa Cruz. The book got an interesting mixture of reviews and a decent amount of press but my father-in-law has seen little proceeds from sales.

Other Comments by blasphemer

39. Comment #197672 by Hypoluxa on June 22, 2008 at 1:20 pm

Id be curious as to what arguments these fleas tend to use to refute Dawkins and the others, as to justify the writing of the their book to begin with.

I mean their arguments from what I have read so far here and elsewhere have been beaten down pretty well time and time again.

Other Comments by Hypoluxa

40. Comment #197674 by decius on June 22, 2008 at 1:27 pm

Hypoluxa,

our Paula Kirby has done a great job in reading the most important ones and reviewing them in great detail and with superb competence.

http://richarddawkins.net/article,2285,Fleabytes,Paula-Kirby

Other Comments by decius

41. Comment #197675 by Teratornis on June 22, 2008 at 1:28 pm

Comment #197559 by Steve Zara:

Comment #197557 by Oystein Elgaroy

Who said "All have a book within, and in most cases that is exactly where it should stay"?

I believe it was Chris Hitchens. Sure sounds like him!

I want to think that in one of the several dozen odd YouTube etc. videos I've watched, Hitchens did say that, and I think he quoted someone else, possibly Orwell.

I Googled in vain for the quote (maybe I didn't guess the proper synonyms, and I'm still waiting on that search engine that passes the Turing test well enough to sort through synonyms to find what we want), but I did find this:

http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9B0CE4DE1638F93BA1575AC0A9649C8B63
Think You Have a Book in You? Think Again

Other Comments by Teratornis

42. Comment #197676 by TeraBrat on June 22, 2008 at 1:30 pm

Cartomancer,

Make sure you put in a chapter on bigfoot being a devout Christian.

Other Comments by TeraBrat

43. Comment #197678 by Border Collie on June 22, 2008 at 1:36 pm

LMAO at the posts. You guys are way too funny and witty for a guy who's just eaten lunch! I think these fleas should try writing some sort of proactive, instead of reactive, book. I don't care about what ... doesn't matter. I think they'd find it infinitely more difficult to come up with their own original stuff. Like that will happen ...

Other Comments by Border Collie

44. Comment #197682 by shemp333 on June 22, 2008 at 1:45 pm

Richard must have one hell of a rash by now. Damn I bet they itch!

Other Comments by shemp333

45. Comment #197683 by Steve Zara on June 22, 2008 at 1:46 pm

Comment #197672 by Hypoluxa

There is a book which actually does contain an attempt at a scientific and logical proofs that God is a reasonable concept. It is "The Irrational Atheist" by Vox Day. Trouble is, it is just plain trivially wrong in these arguments. The arguments are also buried in so much ad-hominem and vitriol that it is positively painful to read.

Not all flea books are the same - they all seem to be pretty painful reads in different ways.

Other Comments by Steve Zara

46. Comment #197684 by bugaboo on June 22, 2008 at 1:47 pm

An old saying i think by that chap anonymous

They say everyone has a novel inside them but......

Edit: Carto. The larch should be number 1, surely

Other Comments by bugaboo

47. Comment #197686 by mordacious1 on June 22, 2008 at 1:48 pm

shemp333

Yes, maybe we should all chip in and buy him some "Frontline, for Scientist Author's". Guaranteed to kill fleas and ticks for up to 3 months.

edit: Although, I find smacking them down with a well-written 400 page book, works well too.

Other Comments by mordacious1

48. Comment #197687 by Brian English on June 22, 2008 at 1:48 pm

Carto, you been watching a bit of Python lately?

Richard, sorry you didn't like the piss take. I thought it was funny as the "I'm a sex-maniac" bit in the Stork theory clip. Oh well, whatever floats one's boat. :)

Other Comments by Brian English

49. Comment #197689 by decius on June 22, 2008 at 1:51 pm

I sincerely admire whoever can stomach any of this garbage for more than three pages without developing an encephalitis.

Other Comments by decius

50. Comment #197691 by TeraBrat on June 22, 2008 at 1:52 pm

Steve,

Have you ever read the "guide for the perplexed?" It was written in the 12th centurey and considering what they knew about sciece at the time it's a very good attempt to scientifically prove gods existence. Some of the stuff he says is pretty astute for that time period.

Other Comments by TeraBrat