almartin's review
1.0
frrt. First 160 pages are a great summary of de Botton's TED Talk on the same subject, and a worthy sequel to [b:The Consolations of Philosophy|23419|The Consolations of Philosophy|Alain de Botton|http://d.gr-assets.com/books/1320528869s/23419.jpg|14280291] - talky, earnest, good-hearted, with de Botton doing his patented upmarket, erudite self-help thing. His message:
patience, humility, community, or trips out of the city to look at the stars on clear summer nights. These are all good ideas, and de Botton's light touch on these questions is peerless.
The remainder of this one, though, is a total mess - to the point where I began to wonder if the last chapter, 'Institutions', was some sort of mean-spirited joke at the expense of the reader; an exercise to see how many people he could get to nod uncritically at such howlers as
Secular society has been unfairly impoverished by the loss of an array of practices and themes which atheists typically find it impossible to live with because they seem too closely associated with, to quote Nietzsche's useful phrase, 'the bad odours of religion'.is, as far as it goes, is a useful corrective to some of the particularly strident brickbats that have been lobbed at the general concept of faith. I'm all for secular pilgrimages to Yosemite Valley,
patience, humility, community, or trips out of the city to look at the stars on clear summer nights. These are all good ideas, and de Botton's light touch on these questions is peerless.The remainder of this one, though, is a total mess - to the point where I began to wonder if the last chapter, 'Institutions', was some sort of mean-spirited joke at the expense of the reader; an exercise to see how many people he could get to nod uncritically at such howlers as
"It is a failing of historic proportions, for instance, that BMW's concern for rigour and precision has ended so conclusively at the bumpers of its cars rather than stretching to the founding of...a political party, or that Giorgio Armani's eponymous corporation has determinedly skirted the possibility of running a therapy unit or liberal arts college."The experience is a lot like reading a brash, half-baked philosophy paper by a particularly clever undergraduate who has found himself way over his skis as he reaches the turn toward the big 'so what' conclusion. If that's your bag, by all means. But for me, the conclusion - where de Botton feels compelled to explain why his proposals don't constitute a deranged personality cult - speaks volumes.
jpbradt's review
5.0
I registered a book at BookCrossing.com! http://www.BookCrossing.com/journal/14068971
iggymcmuffin's review
1.0
There is so much wrong with this book that I scarcely know where to begin.
*Editing*
Let's start with the poor editing. I've never seen a book so poorly edited in my entire life. Double spaced, large fonts, thick margins and a picture every second or third page all seem to deliberately inflate the page count. Sometimes the pictures have nothing to do with the text, rarely to they have captions, and never do they actually illustrate a point or add anything to the text being presented. For example at one point it de Botton talks about how education isn't very engaging and then puts a picture of a student sleeping at a desk. Later he has a bar graph titled "Millions of Pounds Spent Annually in the U.K. on" and showing 67m Pringles, 6.5m Poetry Books. The caption for this graph reads "Only religions have been able to turn the needs of the soul into large quantities of money." What do either Pringles of Poetry Books have to do with religions feeding the soul or making lots of money? It's just downright obtuse. To make matters even worse each chapter (most under 20 pages already) is further broken down into both major headings and numbered sections under those headings. The numbered sections are rarely more then a couple of pages and are frequently less then a page. They also don't correspond to any sort of natural breaking point, so it feels like they were just thrown in arbitrarily.
*Lack of Argument*
Never once does de Botton stay with a single subject long enough to form a cogent argument. He just assumes that he is correct and plays walk-a-mole jumping from subject to subject inside of a chapter with no real rhyme or reason. There are no citations. There are no sources. It's like he was just bull*&^%ting for 300 pages. There's so little to what he says and he jumped around so much that I can't possibly argue against most of it because I can't even tell what point he was trying to make most of the time.
*Overly Broad Generalizations and Strawmen*
For a self-identified atheist Alain de Botton doesn't seem to have any idea what atheists really are. Frequently he spends time filling pages with tired old tropes about how atheists can't live fulfilling lives or are some how deficient to their religious counterparts. this leads to absolute howlers like "one of the most difficult aspects of renouncing religion is having to give up on ecclesiastical art and all the beauty and emotion therein." Really? Says who? I never signed anything that says I have to stop appreciating religious art just because I'm not religious myself.
Additionally he frequently rails against modernity and modernism but at the same time conflates that with atheism as if they were one and the same package, when it reality they don't go hand in hand at all.
He also has a habit of making great and overly broad generalizations of Christians, Buddhists, Atheists, the Religious, Art Aficionados, and basically any other identifiable group mentioned in the book. It makes for a very unconvincing argument.
*Inane and Insane Solutions*
At the end of each chapter he present a solution to whatever problem he's trying to solve. Usually these are just back ideas but often they're ridiculous bordering on bizarre.
In the chapter on community he suggests that restaurants should not be a place to eat, but rather a place to meet people. It's as if de Botton has never heard of a pub or bar. Even worse his second solution is that we should have an orgy once a year with fart jokes. I'll let that settle in for a moment. Yes his solution is that we should annually have an sex with anyone we want all day and make fart jokes to blow off steam. There's even a picture of a hypothetical orgy (interestingly taking place in the same restaurant where he wants you to meet new people... ewww).
In the section on Education, while admitting his paternalistic view of things, he argues that we should not teach students how to think, but rather what to think. In section on Architecture de Botton suggests that travel agents should start psychoanalyzing their clients and sending them on trips to shrines that suit their state of mind or problems.
It's just bizarre as bizarre can be.
*TLDR*
On the cover The Washington Post is quoted as saying "Quirk, often hilarious...". I'd rephrase that to read "Crackpot, often ridiculous..."
*Editing*
Let's start with the poor editing. I've never seen a book so poorly edited in my entire life. Double spaced, large fonts, thick margins and a picture every second or third page all seem to deliberately inflate the page count. Sometimes the pictures have nothing to do with the text, rarely to they have captions, and never do they actually illustrate a point or add anything to the text being presented. For example at one point it de Botton talks about how education isn't very engaging and then puts a picture of a student sleeping at a desk. Later he has a bar graph titled "Millions of Pounds Spent Annually in the U.K. on" and showing 67m Pringles, 6.5m Poetry Books. The caption for this graph reads "Only religions have been able to turn the needs of the soul into large quantities of money." What do either Pringles of Poetry Books have to do with religions feeding the soul or making lots of money? It's just downright obtuse. To make matters even worse each chapter (most under 20 pages already) is further broken down into both major headings and numbered sections under those headings. The numbered sections are rarely more then a couple of pages and are frequently less then a page. They also don't correspond to any sort of natural breaking point, so it feels like they were just thrown in arbitrarily.
*Lack of Argument*
Never once does de Botton stay with a single subject long enough to form a cogent argument. He just assumes that he is correct and plays walk-a-mole jumping from subject to subject inside of a chapter with no real rhyme or reason. There are no citations. There are no sources. It's like he was just bull*&^%ting for 300 pages. There's so little to what he says and he jumped around so much that I can't possibly argue against most of it because I can't even tell what point he was trying to make most of the time.
*Overly Broad Generalizations and Strawmen*
For a self-identified atheist Alain de Botton doesn't seem to have any idea what atheists really are. Frequently he spends time filling pages with tired old tropes about how atheists can't live fulfilling lives or are some how deficient to their religious counterparts. this leads to absolute howlers like "one of the most difficult aspects of renouncing religion is having to give up on ecclesiastical art and all the beauty and emotion therein." Really? Says who? I never signed anything that says I have to stop appreciating religious art just because I'm not religious myself.
Additionally he frequently rails against modernity and modernism but at the same time conflates that with atheism as if they were one and the same package, when it reality they don't go hand in hand at all.
He also has a habit of making great and overly broad generalizations of Christians, Buddhists, Atheists, the Religious, Art Aficionados, and basically any other identifiable group mentioned in the book. It makes for a very unconvincing argument.
*Inane and Insane Solutions*
At the end of each chapter he present a solution to whatever problem he's trying to solve. Usually these are just back ideas but often they're ridiculous bordering on bizarre.
In the chapter on community he suggests that restaurants should not be a place to eat, but rather a place to meet people. It's as if de Botton has never heard of a pub or bar. Even worse his second solution is that we should have an orgy once a year with fart jokes. I'll let that settle in for a moment. Yes his solution is that we should annually have an sex with anyone we want all day and make fart jokes to blow off steam. There's even a picture of a hypothetical orgy (interestingly taking place in the same restaurant where he wants you to meet new people... ewww).
In the section on Education, while admitting his paternalistic view of things, he argues that we should not teach students how to think, but rather what to think. In section on Architecture de Botton suggests that travel agents should start psychoanalyzing their clients and sending them on trips to shrines that suit their state of mind or problems.
It's just bizarre as bizarre can be.
*TLDR*
On the cover The Washington Post is quoted as saying "Quirk, often hilarious...". I'd rephrase that to read "Crackpot, often ridiculous..."
lazygal's review
5.0
Having a Kindle is dangerous: I saw the author on After Words and immediately bought the book.
The premise is that there are things that religion (mostly Christianity, but others are discussed) does really well, particularly instilling a sense of ethics, morality, caring and community, that secular institutions would do well to emulate. The difference in education, for example, as the university model has taken over, shows less emphasis on ethics or morals and more emphasis on literature as part of a school. Another example? Why are there no secular versions of the Stations of the Cross, like a Stations of Aging or Stations of Grief? Towards the end he mentions Comte's Religion of Humanity. It would have been interesting had this idea been given more credence.
The premise is that there are things that religion (mostly Christianity, but others are discussed) does really well, particularly instilling a sense of ethics, morality, caring and community, that secular institutions would do well to emulate. The difference in education, for example, as the university model has taken over, shows less emphasis on ethics or morals and more emphasis on literature as part of a school. Another example? Why are there no secular versions of the Stations of the Cross, like a Stations of Aging or Stations of Grief? Towards the end he mentions Comte's Religion of Humanity. It would have been interesting had this idea been given more credence.
karimiztan's review
3.0
Half the book was absolutely incredible, the later half just bored me to death.
agnesceciliajuliane's review against another edition
informative
inspiring
reflective
medium-paced
3.0
keepingupwiththepenguins's review
4.0
My full review of Religion For Atheists is up on Keeping Up With The Penguins.
Religion For Atheists is straight-forward in its layout, too: de Botton takes a problem in society, discusses how various religions have attempted to solve it, and then proposes a secular version that we might implement to better our lives. These problems are as varied as “Education”, “Pessimism”, “Community”, and so on. I’d heartily recommend it to anyone who’s curious about how stuff works, in general, and society/religion in particular.
Religion For Atheists is straight-forward in its layout, too: de Botton takes a problem in society, discusses how various religions have attempted to solve it, and then proposes a secular version that we might implement to better our lives. These problems are as varied as “Education”, “Pessimism”, “Community”, and so on. I’d heartily recommend it to anyone who’s curious about how stuff works, in general, and society/religion in particular.
greeniezona's review
4.0
I have put off writing this review for quite some time as I've been resisting outing the thoughts I have in my head regarding religion. I know, I was pretty candid when reviewing The Varieties of Scientific Experience, and very outspoken when reviewing Butler's Parables. But something about how I felt about this book just seemed much more personal.
The premise of this book is simple (if emotionally loaded). Atheists, when rejecting religion, tend to reject all the trappings and buildings and holidays and ceremonies as well. But de Botton urges us to take another look. Very few of these things have a direct relationship to the miraculous supernatural that atheists turn their noses up at. And those ceremonies have evolved over hundreds, maybe thousands of years of human history, to appeal to parts of our psyche, to make us feel less alone, to encourage community, humility, giving us ways to acknowledge our shortcomings... Why should we give all those things up? And how can we recreate them without appealing to gods to do the heavy lifting?
As always, I enjoy de Botton's writing style, thought it seems like there is a section in every book that makes me grind my teeth. In this book it was a section on the useful applications of the doctrine of original sin. But overall, I am very sympathetic to his position. I want shrines to generosity, altars of loneliness. I want the experience of singing hymns together without having to sing theology that I don't believe in. But then, even de Botton admires the function of congregations to create community between people from different walks of life. What if we could somehow transform the nature of those congregations so that they could unite people of different faiths as well? So that Christians, Jews, atheists, Buddhists, etc., could come together, learn more about each other, and be united by their common humanity?
Yes, this is Nikki Giovanni's vision from "Quilting the Black-Eyed Pea," and I am well aware of the theological objections to "cafeteria spirituality." At this moment, though, after reading this book, the idea makes me happy.
The premise of this book is simple (if emotionally loaded). Atheists, when rejecting religion, tend to reject all the trappings and buildings and holidays and ceremonies as well. But de Botton urges us to take another look. Very few of these things have a direct relationship to the miraculous supernatural that atheists turn their noses up at. And those ceremonies have evolved over hundreds, maybe thousands of years of human history, to appeal to parts of our psyche, to make us feel less alone, to encourage community, humility, giving us ways to acknowledge our shortcomings... Why should we give all those things up? And how can we recreate them without appealing to gods to do the heavy lifting?
As always, I enjoy de Botton's writing style, thought it seems like there is a section in every book that makes me grind my teeth. In this book it was a section on the useful applications of the doctrine of original sin. But overall, I am very sympathetic to his position. I want shrines to generosity, altars of loneliness. I want the experience of singing hymns together without having to sing theology that I don't believe in. But then, even de Botton admires the function of congregations to create community between people from different walks of life. What if we could somehow transform the nature of those congregations so that they could unite people of different faiths as well? So that Christians, Jews, atheists, Buddhists, etc., could come together, learn more about each other, and be united by their common humanity?
Yes, this is Nikki Giovanni's vision from "Quilting the Black-Eyed Pea," and I am well aware of the theological objections to "cafeteria spirituality." At this moment, though, after reading this book, the idea makes me happy.
pioocampo's review
3.0
"Museums must be more than places for displaying beautiful objects. They should be places that use beautiful objects in order to make us good and wise." This quote alone on how art can impact us as much as the Catholic Church did for centuries on end encapsulates the essence of this book: how our secular society neglects our utmost self-actualization needs. Overall, I appreciated this intent yet I'm left craving every time a section ends. While Alain de Botton points out his thoughts in constructive, structured ways, his narrative seems to cut short when it reaches its supposed fruition. Despite being called a "guide", there are missed opportunities for him to develop his claims.
More...