Amazon.com: God and the New Atheism: A Critical Response to Dawkins, Harris, and Hitchens: John F. Haught: Books

Frequently Bought Together

Customers Who Bought This Item Also Bought

The God Delusion

by Richard Dawkins

3.8 out of 5 stars (1,424)

Christianity and Science: Toward a Theology of Nature (Theology in Global Perspective Series)

by John F. Haught

5.0 out of 5 stars (2) $16.50

Letter to a Christian Nation (Vintage)

by Sam Harris

4.1 out of 5 stars (654) $8.62

Answering the New Atheism: Dismantling Dawkins' Case Against God

by Scott Hahn

3.8 out of 5 stars (31) $10.15

God Is Not Great: How Religion Poisons Everything

by Christopher Hitchens

3.7 out of 5 stars (865) $10.19

› Explore similar items

Editorial Reviews

From Publishers Weekly
The recent spate of books from atheists such as Richard Dawkins, Sam Harris and (most stridently) Christopher Hitchens has prompted many pundits and scholars to label the trend the New Atheism. Haught uses the term, but argues that there is nothing really new about the New Atheism; it is instead a rehashing of antireligious arguments that are as old as the Enlightenment. In fact, Haught criticizes the New Atheism as being theologically unchallenging, its all-or-nothing thinking representing about the same level of reflection on faith that one can find in contemporary creationist and fundamentalist literature. Haught draws upon theologians such as Tillich, Bultmann, Ricoeur, McFague and Pannenberg to refute some of the New Atheists' most common contentions. Through most of Haught's book, his approach is straight theism, with the exclusively or specifically Christian arguments coming near the end. Although this book is more accessible than some of Haught's earlier theological work (e.g., Is Nature Enough?), it is still challenging and serious; readers will need to follow scientific, theological, philosophical and logical threads to keep up. The reward is worth it, however, as Haught lays out the fundamental issues clearly and without the vitriol that has characterized Hitchens et al. as well as many of their interlocutors. (Feb.)
Copyright © Reed Business Information, a division of Reed Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Product Description
In God and the New Atheism a world expert on science and theology gives clear, concise, and compelling answers to the charges against religion laid out in recent bestselling books by Richard Dawkins (The God Delusion), Sam Harris (The End of Faith), and Christopher Hitchens (God Is not Great). For some, these new atheists appear to say extremely well what they believe to be wrong with religion. But, as John Haught shows, the treatment of religion in these books is riddled with logical inconsistencies, shallow misconceptions, and crude generalizations. Can God really be dismissed as a mere delusion? Is faith really the enemy of reason? And does religion really poison everything? God and the New Atheism offers a much-needed antidote to the extremist claims of scientific fundamentalism. This provocative and accessible little book will enable readers to see through the rhetorical fog of this recent phenomenon and come to a clearer understanding of the issues at stake in this crucial debate.

See all Editorial Reviews

Inside This Book (learn more)

Key Phrases - Statistically Improbable Phrases (SIPs): (learn more)
new atheists, new atheism, explanatory monism, gene survival, scientific naturalists, theistic faiths, scientific naturalism

Key Phrases - Capitalized Phrases (CAPs): (learn more)
Sam Harris, The God Delusion, Charles Darwin, Karl Barth, The Problem of God, Paul Tillich

Tags Customers Associate with This Product

(What's this?)

Click on a tag to find related items, discussions, and people.

christianity(6)

god(5)

atheist(4)

religion(4)

christopher hitchens(3)

contemporary theology(3)

daniel dennett(3)

keeping america stupid(3)

richard dawkins(3)

turd sandwhich(3)

new atheism(2)

See all 29 tags...

Help others find this product — tag it for Amazon search

No one has tagged this product for Amazon search yet. Why not be the first to suggest a search for which it should appear?

Sell a Digital Version of This Book in the Kindle Store

If you are a publisher or author and hold the digital rights to a book, you can sell a digital version of it in our Kindle Store. Learn more

Customer Reviews

18 Reviews

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

Average Customer Review

3.4 out of 5 stars (18 customer reviews)

Share your thoughts with other customers:

Create your own review

Most Helpful Customer Reviews

73 of 102 people found the following review helpful:

5.0 out of 5 stars Some people just don't get it..., April 27, 2008

By	Max Johnson "Neo-Whiteheadian Doctoral Student" (Claremont, CA) - See all my reviews (REAL NAME)

Many of the negative reviewers of this book so clearly have their OWN agendas in mind that they simply miss the THREE POINTS Haught was trying to make in this concise little critical tome: 1) that the "New Atheists" aren't really so "new"; 2) that the "old" atheists were more insightful and much more consistent (in other words, the NA's are not very "good" atheists); and 3) That the New Atheists rely on "straw God" arguments and certain presuppositions about both the nature of religion and the nature of reality that are not THEMSELVES "scientific," and thus, are more akin to "religious faith' than they are to genuine scientific inquiry.

To those ends, Haught makes his case eloquently and definitively. The negative reviewers need to realize that this book does NOT attempt or CLAIM to be exhaustive (it's only 107 pages, people!), nor does it attempt to "answer" the new atheists with (what for Haught would be) a more "adequate" worldview (for that, you actually have to READ his systematic works on Evolutionary Theology: "God After Darwin," "Deeper Than Darwin," and "Christianity and Science: Toward a Theology of Nature." Only after reading these cogently argued works is one in a proper position to "critique" Haught.

The "personal" nature of some of the negative reviews is quite astonishing, and reveals more about the reviewers' LACK of familiarity with Haught's reputation and his rather extensive body of work than they do about Haught himself.

For example, reviewer Ross' suggestion that Haught doesn't really "understand" the New Atheists, or the Old ones (like Nietzsche) is laughable when you consider that (in the case of Dawkins) Haught is WIDELY considered to be one of the FOREMOST experts in the science and religion dialogue (equally notable Darwinian Philosopher Michael Ruse calls him, "Our most distinguished writer today on the science and religion relationship"), and (in the case of Nietzsche) has written EXTENSIVELY on the impact of existentialism on religious thought (see Haught's "What is Religion?" for starters). Also, he's been teaching this stuff for 20+ years, and I think some smart-aleck graduate student would have "corrected" his "misinterpretation" of Nietzsche long ago, don't you?

Ross also apparently doesn't understand the difference between the way science SHOULD be practiced, and the way that it's ACTUALLY practiced. His idealistic view of "Big science" is quaint and kinda charming. Aside from Kuhn's famous analysis,"Structures," Mary Midgley's classic, "Evolution as a Religion," and Richard C. Lewontin's "Biology as Ideology," two recent books by other "real" scientists, Lee Smolin's "The Trouble with Physics," and Robert Laughlin's "A Different Universe" clearly reveal just how political, cliquish, and NON-OBJECTIVE the "business of science" can really be. When Haught says that scientists have "faith" in the "intelligibility of the universe," and that that NAs like Daniel Dennett has "faith" in the truth of the Dogma of "scientific naturalism" (the view that 1) only nature is real, 2)that God does not exist, and 3)that science alone can give us complete and reliable knowledge of reality), he most certainly knows of what he speaks. The "presumption" of scientific naturalism is just that - a presumption. It's a statement of belief, NOT a demonstrated, OBJECTIVE, scientific "fact."

Ross goes on to suggest that Haught might be WRONG when he argues that Richard Dawkins is unfamiliar with the work of thoughtful, systematic theologians like Paul Tillich and Sallie McFague. REALLY??? You want to tell me with a straight face that anyone familiar with the "theology lite" of "The God Delusion" really believes that Mr. "Devil's Chaplin" has seriously worked his way through ALL-THREE volumes of Tillich's uber-dense "Systematic Theology" (about which dozens and dozens of scholarly books have been written), and McFague's eco-feminist explorations of "Metaphorical Theology," and "The World as God's Body," especially since he believes that "Theology is a vacuous, nonsensical enterprise," since "its subject matter is non-existent"? Why would he put himself through that "torture?" Unlike Ross in Haught's case, I HAVE read ALL of Dawkins' books, and I can tell you there is NO indication that he is even FAMILIAR with likes of a Tillich, McFague, Clayton, Griffin, Peacocke, Polkinghorne, Barbour, Hefner, Peters, Cobb, Murphy, Keller, Kaufman, Wilber, or a Haught, much less that he (or Ross) has actually STUDIED any of their work. GIVE ME A BREAK!!!

Another reviewer claims that Haught "despises naturalism", is a "bad" scholar, doesn't understand Intelligent design theory, is a "poor" philosopher of religion and that he (for example) "doesn't understand the 'difference' between 'faith' and 'religion,' and between 'morals' and 'ethics.'

Again, Is the reviewers' "knowledge" of Haught's "poor" academic skills the result of his/her having studied all FOURTEEN or so of Haught's books and dozens of academic papers? How many Peer-reviewed journal articles has THE REVIEWER written, I wonder? In what circles is he/she acclaimed?

For one thing, since Haught is an "Evolutionary theologian" who believes that the divine works in and through the world's NATURAL, CAUSAL PROCESSES (primarily at the level of "novel information patterns"), to say that he "despises" naturalism is BEYOND a colossal MISUNDERSTANDING of his work. As suggested by the title of Haught's companion book to this one, "Is Nature Enough?" his problem with "scientific naturalism" is that it is for him an INADEQUATE way of explaining the full DEPTH of reality. He's no "supernaturalist," and he has no problem with evolutionary-theory-as-such; just the NAs VERSION of it!

For another thing, as one intimately involved in the academic study of religion, I can tell you that "faith" is OFTEN used as a SYNONYM for "religion," as in, "The Catholic Faith," or "The Jewish Faith." This is a DIFFERENT but quite COMMON use of the word than, say, "faith" as "trust in the truth of something despite not yet having any proof of it." Haught's not "confused"; apparently the REVIEWER is.

Similarly, many well-known moral theorists, such as Peter Singer, make no REAL distinctions between the words "Morals" and "Ethics," in practical usage, although, yes, some theorists do. Does this mean that Singer "doesn't know what he's talking about," either?"

When I was in my first year of seminary, one of my professors used to always tell us that one could only critique a theologian or philosopher when one was familiar enough with their BODY of work to make an INFORMED criticism. Otherwise, we were just embarrassing ourselves. Too bad many of the negative reviewers didn't heed that advice!

If you are truly interested in discovering the utter lack of depth and insight in the writings of the "New Atheists," then I highly recommend reading Haught's little surgical blade of a book (along with Alister McGrath's "Dawkins God," and Keith Ward's, "Pascal's Fire: Scientific Faith and Religious Understanding"). If you love the NAs, and want to continue believing that "all" religious folks (and all the great western philosophers, like Kant, Hegel, Schelling, Newton, Descartes, and Whitehead) are uneducated, anti-scientific, superstitious simpletons, then, hey, don't let ME rain on your parade!

Comment Comments (12) | Permalink | Was this review helpful to you? Yes No (Report this)

140 of 197 people found the following review helpful:

2.0 out of 5 stars Nice try, March 21, 2008

By	Franklin D. Ross (Anaheim, CA USA) - See all my reviews (REAL NAME)

In his new book God and the New Atheism John Haught does not directly refute any of the claims of what he is pleased to call "the new atheists" ie Dawkins, Harris and Hitchens. Instead he brings up several old, tired truth claims for religion. To wit;

1. "Science requires as much `faith' as religion does." Haught obviously doesn't understand science when he says something like that. There is zero `faith' in science. Every thing in science is held tentatively, even the scientific method. If a demonstrably better system comes along, scientists will adopt it long before theologians do. Until that happens the scientific method is the best way that we have of assessing the truth of claims. No scientist has `faith' in science. On the contrary, skepticism is the engine that drives science. There is only one assumption underlying science and that that the universe is `knowable' and even this basic assumption is constantly being tested. So far that assumption is holding up but if it can be shown to be false then theologians are in more trouble than scientists are.
2. "The new atheists are intolerant and want to destroy religion." When you turn on a light do you destroy darkness? When you teach a person to read do you destroy illiteracy? When you point out that superstition doesn't work are you destroying `faith'? I suppose that in a sense, Haught is right. The new atheists do seem to be intolerant of darkness, illiteracy and superstition.
3. "The new atheists have not studied the classical religious apologists such as Tillich, Bultmann, Ricoeur, McFague and Pannenberg." This may or may not be true. I suspect that it is not true but the new atheists don't spend much time on these scholars. Tillich, Bultmann, et al start with the assumption that gods exist and then go on from there to fill volume after volume with descriptions of the properties of these hypothesized gods. P. Z. Meyers answered this claim very well with the courtier's response which says (if I may be allowed to paraphrase) it is not necessary to spend years studying the finer nuances of high fashion in order to see that the emperor has no clothes.
4. "Atheism leads inexorably to nihilism". Haught's understanding of Nietzsche is as poor as his understanding of science. Nietzsche was horrified by the void that would be created upon the death of God. However Nietzsche worked through this frightening realization and came up with the saying "say yes to life". Subsequent existentialist thinkers expanded upon this theme to show that giving up superstition is actually quite liberating once you give it a try.

To his credit, Haught admits that it is possible to be moral even without belief in gods but in doing so he destroys the last justification for that belief. So the book is not totally without merit. If I were Dawkins et al I would insist that Haught's book be bundled with mine as a concrete example of just how weak and tired the best of the apologists are.

Comment Comments (8) | Permalink | Was this review helpful to you? Yes No (Report this)

100 of 141 people found the following review helpful:

1.0 out of 5 stars Sound and fury signifying nothing., April 26, 2008

By	Charles Gidley Wheeler (Kempsford, United Kingdom) - See all my reviews

Haught's principal target in this wordy, boring polemic is Richard Dawkins. But he is not a very good shot. Indeed, at times he seems to shoot himself in the foot, as many of his quotations appear to be far more convincing than his refutations of them. To a degree, he acts as a publicity agent for the naturalism, humanism, and atheism which he so obviously despises.

A few examples:

'Even though many theorists may agree with Dawkins that morality is the main point of Biblical religion, it is not. The main point is to have faith, trust, and hope in God. Morality is secondary, and the principle underlying Biblical ethics is that our conduct should be shaped with respect to others by the trust that God's promise of ultimate liberation will eventually come to pass.'

'Because he is wrong on the first claim in his argument, Dawkins cannot defend his second and third points either. Having acquired his most striking theological comments from the likes of comedian George Carlin, humourist writer Douglas Adams, and The Skeptic Magazine, Dawkins' discussion of morality and the Bible is a remarkable display of ignorance and foolish sarcasm. I do not enjoy speaking in such a blunt manner about any writer, though not to do so here would be evasive. What is most lamentable about Dawkins's discussion is that it completely misses the moral core of Judaism and Christianity, the emphasis on justice, and what has come to be known as God's preferential option for the poor and disadvantaged. To maintain that we can understand modern and contemporary social justice, civil rights, and liberation movements without any reference to Amos, Hosea, Isaiah, Micah, Jesus and other biblical prophets makes Dawkins is his treatment of morality and faith almost unworthy of comment.'

'Dawkins seems quite certain that the modern biological synthesis of Darwin's notion of selection with the more recent field of genetics can demonstrate that human morality, no less than the behaviour of animals, is the product of impersonal evolutionary intervention rather than a free human response to an eternal goodness. Briefly, his argument is that we humans are moral beings at this time in natural history not because of any direct or indirect revelation by God of moral absolutes, but because our genes long ago fashioned human organisms whose virtuous behaviour increased the probability that their genes could survive on to future generations.'

'Biology indicates that we are moral because being good has contributed to human gene survival. Thus, no need for theological accounts exist. According to major religious traditions, altruism is the high point of moral existence, and selfless love especially convinces believers of the divine origin of human ethics.'

'Dawkins realises, of course, that moral life is much more complicated than animal behaviour and the cultural factors are also important in shaping ethical life. Still, he remains adamant that morality is ultimately natural rather than divine in origin.'

'By this point in Dawkins's argument natural selection has become about as explanatory of human virtue as the chemical laws that bond ink to paper explain what I am writing on this page. In order for you to read this page the chemical laws relating inks bonding with paper have to keep on working reliably and predictably, but the actual content of what I'm writing is not determined or explained by the science of chemistry. Likewise, in the transmission of moral values from one generation to another, the biological laws of genetic inheritance are at work shaping organisms capable of moral behaviour.'

For one who has lectured in theology, Haught has a woefully weak grasp of moral theory and the philosophy of religion. He doesn't understand the difference between ethics and morals or between faith and religion, his treatment of intelligent design is decidedly woolly, and he displays a lack of scholarship on almost every page.

This is yet another book by an author whose cage has been rattled by the likes of Dawkins, Harris and Hitchens. He would have done better to preserve a lofty silence.

Basic Flying Instruction: A Comprehensive Introduction to Western Philosophy
A Good Boy Tomorrow: Memoirs of A Fundamentalist Upbringing
The Believer Iota: God as Nature, Nature as God

Comment Comments (3) | Permalink | Was this review helpful to you? Yes No (Report this)

Share your thoughts with other customers: Create your own review

› See all 18 customer reviews...

Most Recent Customer Reviews

2.0 out of 5 stars A Catholic theologian's CONFUSED "critical response" to the New Atheism
XXXXX

"All three of our soft-core atheists [see below] are absolutely certain that the creeds, ideals, and practises of religion are essentially evil. Read more

Published 2 months ago by Stephen Pletko

4.0 out of 5 stars A Thoughtful Commentary
This book is a scholarly yet readable rebuttal to several recently-published mainstream books by prominent Darwinian scholars, and is written to the intelligent layperson. Read more

Published 3 months ago by Amy Deardon

5.0 out of 5 stars On the Nose
It is clear that, like Dawkins and the other self-proclaimed "new atheists" who are the target of Haught's book, most of the the critics of this book here on Amazon know little or... Read more

Published 5 months ago by Sick of Spin

4.0 out of 5 stars Ollie's Take
The Author makes a reasoned argument which I dispute.
The product, itself, was just as described by the seller.

Published 6 months ago by Elliott M. Feigenbaum

3.0 out of 5 stars Disappointing
When Haught criticizes new atheists for arguing that faith is not supported by credible evidence, that implies that Haught has evidence that DOES support faith. Read more

Published 7 months ago by Panda Bear

4.0 out of 5 stars Thoughtful analysis...
One legacy of 9/11 is a spate of books decrying religious extremism and heralding science and reason over faith. Read more

Published 8 months ago by M. Nichols

5.0 out of 5 stars Merits Consideration as the Liberal Response to the New Atheists
In the Introduction Haught argues that a proper understanding of God, faith, and theology is something these critics are woefully lacking in, and as such their critique of... Read more

Published 8 months ago by John W. Loftus

5.0 out of 5 stars New Atheism is based on faith
Professor Haught exposes the shallowness of the"New Atheism"in a cogent and readable style. He shows that Scientific Materialism is the foundation for their position which... Read more

Published 9 months ago by Jim Mac

1.0 out of 5 stars Old Straw Man's Hat
Simply re-labeling standard atheism and calling it "New Atheism" and then attacking it for being old-fashioned doesn't make for a good book. Read more

Published 13 months ago by Anthony Konrath

4.0 out of 5 stars CAW
I felt the book was an excellent critical review of the works of the three authors.

Published 13 months ago by DGW

› See all 18 customer reviews...

Product Information from the Amapedia Community

Beta (What's this?)

Be the first person to add an article about this item at Amapedia.com.

› See featured Amapedia.com articles

Look for Similar Items by Category

Books > New & Used Textbooks > Humanities > Religious Studies > Christianity
Books > Religion & Spirituality > Christianity > Theology > Apologetics
Books > Religion & Spirituality > Religious Studies > Science & Religion
Books > Religion & Spirituality > Religious Studies > Theology
Books > Religion & Spirituality > Spirituality > Atheism

Discover Oregon

You'll find that on the trail, the new Garmin Oregons exchange waypoints, tracks, and geocaches with other Oregon and Colorado units.

›Shop all Garmin

Best Books of 2008

Find our top 100 editors' picks as well as customers' favorites in dozens of categories in our Best Books of 2008 Store.

Buy Three Books, Get a Fourth Free

Order any four eligible books under $10 and get the lowest-price book free in our 4-for-3 Books Store. See more details.

Be Prepared for a Deep Freeze

Keep pipes safe during the cold season with a freeze alarm. Avoid bursting pipes and pricey cleanup.

›Shop for freeze alarms

	76% buy the item featured on this page: God and the New Atheism: A Critical Response to Dawkins, Harris, and Hitchens 3.4 out of 5 stars (18) $11.53
	10% buy God Is Not Great: How Religion Poisons Everything 3.7 out of 5 stars (865) $10.19
	5% buy The God Delusion 3.8 out of 5 stars (1,424)
	5% buy God After Darwin: A Theology of Evolution 3.5 out of 5 stars (20) $27.90

God and the New Atheism: A Critical Response to Dawkins, Harris, and Hitchens (Paperback)

Frequently Bought Together

Customers Who Bought This Item Also Bought

Editorial Reviews

Product Details

What Do Customers Ultimately Buy After Viewing This Item?

Tags Customers Associate with This Product

Sell a Digital Version of This Book in the Kindle Store

Customer Reviews

Customer Discussions

Ask questions, Share opinions, Gain insight

Start a new discussion

Product Information from the Amapedia Community

Listmania!

Look for Similar Items by Category

Discover Oregon

Best Books of 2008

Buy Three Books, Get a Fourth Free

Be Prepared for a Deep Freeze

Feedback

Where's My Stuff?

Shipping & Returns

Need Help?

Your Recent History