Customer Reviews

Atheism Explained: From Folly to Philosophy (Ideas Explained)

5 star:		(17)
4 star:		(5)
3 star:		(2)
2 star:		(1)
1 star:		(0)

 

 

This book is a marketing nightmare. The title, the subtitle, and the cover art are all uninspired. But this is one of the best books outlining a case for atheism that I've read. It is clear, user-friendly, and logical. The logical evidence against classical theism is treated in a comprehensive presentation that does not feel labored, and manages to dodge some of the excesses of books by Dawkins and Hitchens. If I were told that a Christian friend were experiencing doubts about her faith and she was asking for recommendations for three books explaining atheism as a rational, satisfying alternative, this book might well be among the three. After years of having very few readable books on atheism, the last couple of years have witnessed an explosion of fine, readable texts. Put "Atheism Explained" on the shelf next to "Irreligion," "The Little Book of Atheist Spirituality," "Godless Philosophy," and other such books. The place for "God is Not Great" and "The God Delusion" is important, because they have opened a window. I would argue that what they have opened that window for is gentler, wiser books such as this one.

One of the best contributions the book makes is in an appendix about arguments NOT to use for atheism. Every atheist who feels compelled to convert the religious to atheism should read it. I think reducing the toxic effects of fundamentalism is a noble, necessary aim. But sinking to the tactics that fundamentalists use should play no part in our strategy to combat fanaticism. This appendix outlines "arguments" that toe that line and cautions against their use.

Dozens of books for and against atheism are now coming out, and the quality is very mixed on both sides of the debate. Among books of a general and popular nature, Steele's book is by far the best pro-atheist statement.

He covers all the arguments, and the most committed believer would have to agree that he does so with complete fairness. His exposition is crystal clear: he makes the most complex issues easy to understand. The book is so fair-minded and such an easy read that a beginning Christian theology student could read it in a weekend, simply to get a quick outline of philosophy of religion. Steele is also quite critical of some ideas commonly held by atheists: for example he refutes the claim that belief in God leads to atrocities.

Although the author is often witty and ironic, he is sympathetic and without malice. The reader feels that if Steele could find a decent argument for the existence of God, he would gladly accept it, and he actually mentions one such argument that might be developed in the future. Meanwhile, he destroys all the standard arguments quite convincingly. The author is extremely polite, but without mercy when it comes to muddled thinking.

Here are some of the notable features of this book: the clearest discussion I have encountered of Darwinism in relation to Christianity; a fresh and entertaining treatment of the claim that morality comes from God; the author's thorough knowledge of the Bible and the Quran (he is as much at home with Aquinas as with Darwin); a devastating scrutiny of the historical reliability of the New Testament; historical evidence showing that atheism has always been prevalent; an illuminating discussion of the theory that we are born with a "God gene" that makes us thirst for a God; an original explanation of why most people today say that they believe in God; and a persuasive analysis of the Problem of Evil, bringing up many relevant points that are usually ignored.

One thing you might not get from all I have said above is that the book really says quite a lot that is controversial, even shocking. For instance, it claims that belief in God always withers on the vine when exposed to modern capitalism (and that American attitudes to religion will now speedily become more like European ones); it attacks the media theory that religion motivates suicide bombings; it debunks the popular view that "you can't prove a negative" and also the common misconception that one side or another has "the burden of proof"; and it concludes that both theism and atheism have little practical importance since they don't tell us how to live our lives.

Christians, Muslims, and Jews who read Atheism Explained will probably become atheists; atheists who read it will have some of their comfortable preconceptions unexpectedly shaken up.

Jeffrey A. Schaler
schaler@american.edu
www.schaler.net

I have read well over a hundred books on religious criticism; and this book is one of the very best general single volume assessments of the rational merit of Theism and Atheism. The book solely deals with the rational merit of atheism versus theism, not with the social merit or demerit of religion, which many other popular atheist books deal with. The author is skilled at making very complex issues accessible to a general audience. The book covers a surprising amount of ground and deals with a wide variety of subjects; including many issues that other books of this nature often leave out, such as ND E's and even the Koran. The author was especially strong when dealing with the Anthropic Principle and the problem of evil. The author has a way of pinpointing the central issues that underlie many of the issues involved. He is a skilled philosopher and is more adapt then many other popular authors when it comes to analyzing the rational merit of key arguments. I highly recommend this book.

There are two kinds of atheist books--the kind that make atheists say "Right on!" and the kind that turn believers or doubters into atheists. This book is in the latter category, and it's hard to imagine any sincere and open-minded theist who could read it and not be converted. It's easy to see why such outstanding thinkers as Victor Stenger and Susan Blackmore have given the book such fulsome praise. (And is this the first ever atheist book to have a cover blurb from a Jesuit priest?) Steele keeps his promise of dealing with every important argument for God's existence, and also presents some surprising arguments against. His discussion is amazingly clear, as well as being witty and thoroughly entertaining. I particularly enjoyed his discussion of "Why is there something instead of nothing?" and of the argument from "religious experience." Unlike some well-known atheists, he doesn't make crude mistakes about Christian theology. He concedes points to theists where he thinks they have a strong argument, and he obviously agrees with Christians on such issues as free will. It's difficult to imagine a better book on atheism than this one. And by the way, I just love the cover!

This is by far the best of the recent books defending atheism. Steele has a keen philosophical intelligence and writes in a clear and forceful style. The book includes an original criticism of the ontological argument. Another highlight is the discussion of objections to the theory of evolution.

...this book converts.

I am currently an undergraduate philosophy student that was looking for a book that truly gave solid, adequate, epistemological, metaphysical, cosmological, and psychological arguments for the case for atheism. This book was precisely that. After reading Dawkins' "The God Delusion" in its entirety and skimming through Hitchens' "Portable Atheist", I was disappointed to find that these authors are more interested in pointing out the dangers of religion than really rolling up their sleeves and making strong arguments against theism (Dawkins' attempt to point out the "fallacies" in the uncaused cause is insulting to most modern educated theologians; he gives no recognition to transcendentalist theory at all). Don't get me wrong, these are brilliant men, but David Ramsay Steele, I think, puts their efforts to shame.

I can honestly say that because of Steele, I am no longer a theist. His arguments are so exhaustive and thorough that you couldn't ask for more. He really satisfies the readers that want explanation in extensive detail while still managing not to bore them. He is quite the gifted scientist, philosopher, and persuasive writer.

So, If you're scanning through the atheist books and wondering which to read, put Dawkins, Hitchens, Harris, and Dennett back on the shelf for now and pick up this overlooked and underappreciated gem.

Steele does a very thorough job of laying out all the arguments for and against belief in God. In general, he presents these arguments quite fairly - sometimes even criticizing the atheist position and granting theists certain points.

The book focuses its critique on what he calls "classical theism", the belief in an all knowing, all powerful, infallible deity. Steele does a workmanlike job of dismantling this concept. While he also examines other theistic beliefs such as pantheism and deism, he offers a much less thorough critique of these alternatives.

So the reader who has abandoned the church, synagogue or mosque, yet clings to some conception of God, can find an escape hatch in Steele's argument. But, while the theistic reader may finish the book unconverted, he will definitely find a strong challenge to his faith and may need to modify his concept of God if he wishes to remain intellectually honest.

Not just a book about atheism, but an engaging primer on philosophy and how to reason on these matters.
This book is really categorically different than the typical atheist books out there that have gotten some notoriety. This is really a fun, readable, analysis of the position of theism and atheism.

A good and fair accounting of the arguments undergirding the beliefs.

I met Dr. Steele about 10 years ago and he seemed the most knowledgeable guy in a pretty smart room. He continues this impression with this book. Recommended to balance those other atheist polemics.

Discussion of atheism has been hi-jacked these days by the likes of Dawkins, Harris, and Hitchens, all of whom have produced bestselling polemics that, while enraging opponents and tickling fans, generate much more heat than light. David Ramsey Steele's Atheism Explained is a defense of atheism that takes seriously the need for rigorous and fair-minded analysis in sorting out the conflicting claims of believers and nonbelievers. The careful reader will find some arguments less convincing than others. But none of them are ill-framed or polemical. And some of them are very good indeed.

Steele focuses most of his attention on examining the strongest arguments for God's existence. He tells us from the outset (p. xii) that he's bypassing obviously weak ones or ones that have been defended by popular apologists (it's also interesting that he barely mentions the New Atheist troika, reserving his only sustained comment on them to a couple of paragraphs [p. 259] in a chapter entitled "Bad or Feeble Arguments Against God") in favor of the strongest theistic defenses he can find. So he takes a look, for example, at contemporary anthropic revisions of the design argument (chpts 3-5), kalam revisions of the cosmological argument (chpt 6), the ontological argument (chpt 7), and the problem of evil (chpts 14-15). Steele is especially strong in his analysis of design arguments, and weakest in his treatment of the ontological argument (he ignores, for example, Hartshorne's and Plantinga's modal models). Although I think his criticisms of the kalam cosmological argument cogent, I suspect that readers new to the argument will find Steele's description of it confusing.

Steele's analysis of the problem of evil's objection to God's existence is also quite strong (possibly the book's highmark), particularly his teasing out of the different scenarios in which human free will wouldn't necessarily inhibit God from alleviating suffering in the world (pp.187-213). Steele also takes a look at arguments against God's existence based on impossibility or incoherence of qualities such as omnipotence and omniscience attributed to God (chpts 16 and 17). Curiously, however, he only mentions in passing indexical arguments. But this could be because appreciating such arguments requires a pretty good grasp of symbolic logic.

All in all, a very good book. I give it a rating of 4.5 stars.

I am a newly de-converted Christian. This is my forth book I've read on Atheism, and I still found a lot in it I haven't read before. I particularly appreciated his intellectual honesty in owning up to the fact that Atheism has killed more people than either Christianity or Islam. He didn't try to baffle us with B.S. on this point as Dawkins and Harris did. He just acknowledged it and moved on. He reminded me here of what I enjoyed most about my academic experience at college.

The only point I vigorously disagreed with him on is his statement in chapter 18, Is There a Spirit World? He writes; "Today theists or generic believers in a spirit world appeal to near-death experiences as evidence, . . . We can collect anecdotes . . . This kind of thing is being done all the time, and is obviously worthless. The problem is that anecdotes get better with retelling and remembering. There is an inbuilt tendency to turn an account into a `good story', by emphasizing confirming aspects and overlooking awkward aspects."

I think he's being lazy dismissing the miraculous so quickly. Anecdotal evidence is usually about all we have to go on in NDE's and miracles. Sure there are a lot of instances that confirm his skepticism, like Betty Eddie's infamous book, "Embraced by the Light." But there's also a lot where the person is being scrupulously honest. And it's up to the investigator to use their intuition, gut feeling and common sense to sort out which is which. This task reminds me of the skills the critical Biblical scholars use to get at the truth about the Bible, which he endorses. Both are messy, but necessary tasks.