Scan barcode
mattycakesbooks's review
4.0
Ugh. I wrote an entire review and then it got deleted before I could save it.
Okay, quick points then:
First: This volume and a lot of the other work of the "new" atheists are extremely useful to those who are halfway between belief and unbelief. This books has the dissections of scripture - the contradictions, the immoralities, the absurdities - which, for someone who hasn't been convinced to leave religion behind, would be eye-opening. But for confirmed atheists, the fight should not be specifically against religion. As plenty of people have noted, it's hard to build a life around a lack of belief.
This isn't to say atheists don't have belief systems: it's just that they're varied and lack elements of the supernatural. Atheism is a very wide field, and you can have anti-theists like Hitchens, libertarians like Penn Jillette, or socialist humanists like Vonnegut all in the same category. What atheists should be doing, alongside deconstructing the absurdities of religion, is developing a rational belief system for people to come to. Otherwise, atheists are just tearing homes and then requesting a thanks for making the residents homeless.
The new home has to be built. Atheists can no longer focus all their attacks on destroying faith. They have to be constructive as well. There are a few prominent unbelievers who have done this pretty well: Carl Sagan, Neil deGrasse Tyson, Kurt Vonnegut. But these guys don't get as much attention as they probably should. Instead, it's on the firebrands like Hitchens, Dawkins, and Harris.
And yes, I realize the irony of an atheist complaining that the loudest, most extreme voices are the ones getting the most attention.
Second, we need to start recognizing that a fight against religion is a fight against a symptom, not a disease. Economic, racial, and social injustices in the form of lack of access to education, or adequate social support are often at the core of religious belief. It's no coincidence that countries with higher social safety nets and higher levels of education have larger proportions of unbelievers. To fix these social issues is to do half the job.
I had more, but I lost it because I clicked outside of this damn box. I might add more later.
Okay, quick points then:
First: This volume and a lot of the other work of the "new" atheists are extremely useful to those who are halfway between belief and unbelief. This books has the dissections of scripture - the contradictions, the immoralities, the absurdities - which, for someone who hasn't been convinced to leave religion behind, would be eye-opening. But for confirmed atheists, the fight should not be specifically against religion. As plenty of people have noted, it's hard to build a life around a lack of belief.
This isn't to say atheists don't have belief systems: it's just that they're varied and lack elements of the supernatural. Atheism is a very wide field, and you can have anti-theists like Hitchens, libertarians like Penn Jillette, or socialist humanists like Vonnegut all in the same category. What atheists should be doing, alongside deconstructing the absurdities of religion, is developing a rational belief system for people to come to. Otherwise, atheists are just tearing homes and then requesting a thanks for making the residents homeless.
The new home has to be built. Atheists can no longer focus all their attacks on destroying faith. They have to be constructive as well. There are a few prominent unbelievers who have done this pretty well: Carl Sagan, Neil deGrasse Tyson, Kurt Vonnegut. But these guys don't get as much attention as they probably should. Instead, it's on the firebrands like Hitchens, Dawkins, and Harris.
And yes, I realize the irony of an atheist complaining that the loudest, most extreme voices are the ones getting the most attention.
Second, we need to start recognizing that a fight against religion is a fight against a symptom, not a disease. Economic, racial, and social injustices in the form of lack of access to education, or adequate social support are often at the core of religious belief. It's no coincidence that countries with higher social safety nets and higher levels of education have larger proportions of unbelievers. To fix these social issues is to do half the job.
I had more, but I lost it because I clicked outside of this damn box. I might add more later.
kelamity_reads's review
informative
reflective
medium-paced
3.0
The collection of writings included in this book are very interesting and well worth the read.
Many of Hitchens' insights are thought-provoking, but I've never been a fan of mocking other people for their beliefs, no matter how illogical I find them.
Hitchens clearly has a chip on their shoulder regarding religion, and it clearly comes through in their language.
Many of Hitchens' insights are thought-provoking, but I've never been a fan of mocking other people for their beliefs, no matter how illogical I find them.
Hitchens clearly has a chip on their shoulder regarding religion, and it clearly comes through in their language.
rgo's review
4.0
On the one hand, it’s the same ideas regurgitated in eleventeen different ways. On the other, the essays are all excellent and give the reader insight into the minds of a bevy of wonderful thinkers through history. And the introductions to each essay add just enough color to make the whole book cogent.
One idea that seems to have fallen out of favor but is especially prevalent in this book: the impossibility of miracles. Seems to almost be an ontological argument – if a miracle happened it was naturally possible and thus wasn’t a miracle! But interesting nonetheless.
One idea that seems to have fallen out of favor but is especially prevalent in this book: the impossibility of miracles. Seems to almost be an ontological argument – if a miracle happened it was naturally possible and thus wasn’t a miracle! But interesting nonetheless.
al_majisti's review
challenging
informative
inspiring
reflective
medium-paced
4.5
This book, an anthology, is hard to rate as the quality, tone and content of each part varies a lot. Some texts in here are incredible, others are just kind of there. In general, I think it's a great book and a great collection on the relevant topic, the texts are well selected. I would like to recommend the ones I liked best:
4.Baruch Spinoza
5. David Hume
7. Percy Bysshe Shelley
9. Karl Marx
10. George Eliot
12. Leslie Stephen
21. Sigmund Freud
22. Albert Einstein
23. Bertrand Russel
29. Carl Sagan
33. A. J. Ayer
36. Richard Dawkins
38. Daniel C. Dennett
39. Elizabeth Anderson
42. Steven Weinberg
46. A. C. Grayling
47. Ayaan Hirsi Ali
4.Baruch Spinoza
5. David Hume
7. Percy Bysshe Shelley
9. Karl Marx
10. George Eliot
12. Leslie Stephen
21. Sigmund Freud
22. Albert Einstein
23. Bertrand Russel
29. Carl Sagan
33. A. J. Ayer
36. Richard Dawkins
38. Daniel C. Dennett
39. Elizabeth Anderson
42. Steven Weinberg
46. A. C. Grayling
47. Ayaan Hirsi Ali
kriticalkai's review against another edition
not really introducing anything you can’t think of yourself.
akhuseby's review
4.0
This is WELL worth the read. I loved that the essays were fairly brief. You can read one or two and mull them over. I always think it's a wise thing to explore all the sides of a debate. Many of my closest friends are atheists, and I wanted to understand that. I qualify myself as agnostic and there were just as many fascinating thoughts here to satisfy and agree with conclusions I've reached. Plus, it might just blow your mind how many famous folks and writers held this viewpoint. I didn't know Mark Twain was an atheist. I love George Eliot's fiction and had no clue she was a militant (and hilarious) opponent of religion. I actually found this book so worthwhile that I might use it in a class on comparative religion some day as the text. The only reason I didn't give it a five is that I haven't finished reading the entire thing yet.