Enter your mobile number or email address below and we'll send you a link to download the free Kindle App. Then you can start reading Kindle books on your smartphone, tablet, or computer - no Kindle device required.
To get the free app, enter your mobile phone number.
Irreligion: A Mathematician Explains Why the Arguments for God Just Don't Add Up Paperback – June 9, 2009
|New from||Used from|
All Books, All the Time
Read author interviews, book reviews, editors picks, and more at the Amazon Book Review. Read it now
Frequently bought together
Customers who bought this item also bought
From Publishers Weekly
After his advance calculations, math professor Paulos concludes that religion and, in particular, God just don't compute. In challenging the precepts of religion and religious thought through the application of logical arguments and sometimes not so analogous comparisons, Paulos's arguments prove quite compelling for those who are spiritually doubtful. However, the devoted are not likely to be persuaded by this sleight of hand with words. Dick Hill's wavering tone creates a manic mood, as his pitch, speed and intensity tilt back and forth with the text's various points. Generally, nonfiction narrators need a good deal of energy in their delivery, but Hill's performance borders on the overdramatic. While Paulos's discussion is intriguing, Hill narrates with an edge in his voice that is sure to increase the heartbeat of even the most sedate reader. While one doesn't need to be a mathematician to understand Paulos's arguments, sometimes his equations can be extremely challenging for listeners to fully visualize. Simultaneous release with the Hill & Wang hardcover (Reviews, Dec. 3).
Copyright © Reed Business Information, a division of Reed Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved. --This text refers to an out of print or unavailable edition of this title.
“Reasoned, cool and concise--a good-natured primer for infidels.” ―Kirkus Reviews
“[Paulos] is as sure-footed as a tiger as he prowls through the theocratic landscape, pouncing on sloppy thinking. To a large extent he succeeds in demolishing the arguments of believers.” ―Phillip Manning, The News & Observer (Raleigh)
“[Paulos] knocks the props from under the classic arguments for the existence of God . . . The book is written with a charming skepticism that is not off-putting or arrogant.” ―Chuck Warnock, Amicus Dei blog
“Few of the recent books on atheism have been worth reading just for wit and style, but this is one of them: Paulos is truly funny.” ―Publishers Weekly
“Irreligion will, I'm confident, take a distinguished place in what one might call the canonical literature of the New Atheism.” ―Norman Levitt, eSkeptic
Top customer reviews
I was delighted to find the author is not only funny but brilliantly laconic, explaining how he sees most of the more common arguments seen today for the existence of a god or gods. For those who have taken multi variate, advanced calculus, advanced physics (anything where you are working with "proofs") you will immediately feel right at home. Paulus commonly begins by taking the reader through what he sees as the logical proof an apologist is submitting and then finds the cracks with turn-of-phrase which is as clever as it is humorous.
There is one section where he has a "dreamy instant message conversation with God" that I don't particularly care for but I could see how someone could take some value from it.
This book is not brilliance encapsulated as some may describe a Hitchens, Dennett, or Grayling. But instead it's someone explaining why he is not a theist, rather than why you should not be a theist.
He ends the book with a slightly outdated argument, which I'm sure at the time looked as though it was going to be a bigger deal than it was (the "bright" movement), but I have re-read this book several times and have found the contents enlightening every time.
I would suggest it to anyone. Cheers!
The book would not convince religious people whose minds are closed, even if they read it. It will not convince people who deny the role of reason in the question of God's existence. And it is not a polemic with ivory tower theologians.
This is a gentle book. Paulos does not bring up the horrific facts of the criminal history of religion that Dawkins, Hitchens and others have explored in recent books. He concentrates on a few common arguments for God's existence, and shows how an intelligent person would find them wanting.