Skepticism

  (out of 5 stars)

Many critics of Victor Stenger's writing have accused him of taking one basic set of arguments and writing a dozen different books using them. While there is undoubtedly some overlap between his books (and some with more commonalities than with others), I can understand where this critique comes from. I felt that way, somewhat, after reading Quantum Gods after having read God: The Failed Hypothesis. This book, just released this month, falls somewhere in between those two in my view. Not as good as Failed Hypothesis, not as mediocre as Quantum Gods.

Stenger kicks off this book with a look a the current state of New Atheism, and specifically, he discusses the recent success of new atheist books by Harris, Dawkins and others. He reviews a few points, counterpoints, and rebuttals to some of these arguments, leaving this first section as a nice overview of the state of popular bibliographic atheist/theist discourse.

The middle parts of the book are more a scattershot look at some of the key arguments made by New Atheists, with chapters on evolution, suffering, and evil. Many of these arguments have been made countless times elsewhere, and while I've personally read better treatments, Stenger brings a reasonable summation of his views and those of others, such as Bart Ehrman.

The rest of the book falls off track for me. Stenger launches into a large section which loses the narrative of the earlier chapters. While I love science and religion being brought together, Stenger seems to drift off to one of his lectures and forgets to keep the reader engaged.

From there, the shift into a study of Eastern philosophy (as suggested in Sam Harris's book The End of Faith) drags the book into territory best left out. Stenger examines various philosophical ideas and ideals and finds that many of the non-dogmatic, less-theologically based philosophies, such as Buddhism, can offer a great deal of 'spiritual guidance' without the dangerous burdens of dogmatic religion.

As in Harris's book, I feel this mushy, metaphysical subject matter is best left out. Stenger should have returned to a more in depth look at the current dialogue between atheists and theists. This for me is an excellent area of study which as been largely underrepresented. Stenger does leave a 'what is to come' chapter for last, but by that time, he's lost the plot.

Stenger is always an engaging writer, although his direction can sometimes leave the reader feeling a bit confused. What starts off as a strong look at niche of current public discourse devolves into a rehashed science-religion argument which then re-devolves into a feel-good look at Eastern philosophy. To repeat, for me, it was better than the plodding Quantum Gods but not as focused and successful as Failed Hypothesis. Three and one-half stars.

  (out of 5 stars)

Richard Dawkins has a knack for writing popular science books which offer poetic descriptions of the grand expanses and microscopic details. In Unweaving the Rainbow, Dawkins takes on the notion that science can be quite literally poetic. The book's title comes from the notion put forward by poet John Keats that Isaac Newton destroyed the beauty of rainbows by explaining its form. Dawkins turns that notion around and shows that the beauty and poetry of nature are greatly enhanced by explaining the details.

This wide-ranging book includes a strong mix of popular science (including biology, chemistry, astronomy, anatomy, and zoology) as well as Dawkins' characteristic philosophical thoughts. Unweaving demonstrates to the reader that the wonder of science is not that it destroys the beauty of nature, but that it allows us to gain an even greater appreciation for that beauty. From the nature of starlight and genetics to the ways in which humans are deceived by those claiming supernatural 'facts', Dawkins constantly expresses his awe of the natural world.

The latter parts of the book are centered on genetics and philosophy of mind. Here, of course, Dawkins is in his comfort zone, and the reader who has not read the authors' biology-centered books such as The Selfish Gene will explore some of the amazing characteristics of evolution and DNA. Experienced readers of Dawkins' works won't find much new information in this section, but should read it anyway since Dawkins incorporates a philosophy of science that is often skipped in the more clinical studies.

Unweaving the Rainbow is simply one of the very best widely-accessible popular science books out there. The discussion of coincidence is fantastic and should open the eyes of a reader who had never considered probabilities in this way. While it would help to have some exposure to science writing prior to picking up this book, Dawkins is very careful to introduce the nature of science softely and with much poetic contemplation. One of the best introductions to a wide-range of scientific thought and philosophy and very highly recommended to science readers at all levels. Four and one-half stars.

  (out of 5 stars)

Brooke Allen presents a quick history of six of the primary Founding Fathers of the USA and their views towards religion and government. Allen lets each featured statesman speak largely for himself, with excellect excerpts taken in context, conveying the undoubtable position that Franklin, Washington, Adams, Jefferson, Madison, and Hamilton were absolutely determined to create a nation which maintained walls between church and state.

Each of the first six chapters features a different statesmen. Throughout, Allen largely excerpts topical writings from letters, speeches, and other documents which offer keen insight into the thoughts and opinions of each man. Allen points out that many modern Christians try to argue that these men were likewise Christian, founding the nation on primarily Christian beliefs and values. By reading the thoughts of these men, that argument could not be any more wrong.

Although none of these men were atheist or agnostic (in modern terms, though Franklin may have been despite a few of his public statements), most were Deists who specifically denied the very Christian beliefs of the divinity of Jesus, revelation, atonement, and the historical value of the Bible. Each man argued prodigiously against mingling church and state.

Latter parts of the book give the reader a nice history of Enlightenment thought which greatly influenced these men. The ideals of natural law and personal freedoms come not from Biblical interpretations and implementations, but instead from enlighted thinkers such as Locke, Paine, Voltaire, and Smith. Allen's history is brief but covers the subject very nicely. Jefferson himself shows that he understood the concepts of natural law to come early Saxons prior to their exposure to Christianity, contrary to the breathless claims made by modern evangelicals and apologists.

Moral Minority is a great book to offer any reader willing to consider the words of the Founders themselves rather than simply accept the modern-day evangelical propaganda regarding our 'Christian' heritage. While there is no doubt that Christianity played a large role in the development of our nation, as did many practicing, devout Christians, the most commonly cited statesment responsible for leading the Revolution and early US govenrment were, without a doubt, against any co-mingling of church and state. It could not be more clear, and it makes the secular-religious struggle over church and state issues today blatantly one of revisionist history by those on the religious side, a deceptive tactic that launched during the lifetimes of these statesmen.

One of the interesting side effects noted by Allen is that the drive for a truly secular government rather than a tolerant one (the tolerant government has an official state religion but offers 'toleration' to other religions) was the development of a more religious population. Had a specific Christian denomination been given sanction, argues Allen, it is very likely that the resulting population would have been less able to develop the wide variety of denominations we now find. By refusing to allow a single sanction, the founders in effect allowed a great diversity of religious varieties to thrive. Though not quite the effect these men were after, all would clearly favor their decision even to this day.

Reading this book should make one angry over the blatant lies and revisionist history taking place by Christians in this nation. Madison, Adams, and Jefferson are doing flips in their respective graves. Take this opportunity to join the Freedom From Religion Foundation, which is leading the fight to keep religion out of state affairs. I highly recommend this book to anyone wanting a quick history of the opinions of our most important founding statesment concerning religion and church/state matters. Four and one-half stars.

  (out of 5 stars)

Mathematician John Paulos offers a very brief book full of very brief responses to common modern arguments for the existence of God. Each short chapter offers a basic argument made for God, and Paulos presents his logical refutation. This book is so short, I had finished it in one sitting. Paulos muddles at times, makes strange excursions, ends explanations well short of full, and offers an amazing amount of choppiness in a book of such short length.

Overall, Paulos argues familiar lines to skeptical readers, and most of his presentation is not approachable to the novice or less-well read reader. While he works in some mathematical logic without many actual equations, some of his references are to subjects most readers won't understand. This work is mostly effective in shooting down the for-God arguments, but many of Paulos's explanations are meandering, muddled, and sometimes end abruptly. There is even one case where he states the argument could be fleshed out more, and then walks away from it. WTF?

Anyway, not a bad overview of the refutations, but not a very clean treatment. For a better and more comprehensive version of this same theme (with better mathematics and science content), see Victor Stenger's God: The Failed Hypothesis: How Science Shows that God Does Not Exist. Not specifically recommended for anyone and not one of the better offerings I've read on the subject. Two and one-half stars.

  (out of 5 stars)

This most recent book published in Sagan's name is a compilation his Gifford Lectures presentations, along with many of the followup questions and answers, compiled from transcripts by his last wife Ann Druyan. From the beginning, for any reader who has had the pleasure of hearing Sagan speak, Carl's voice will quickly focus on the issues at hand. This set of lectures offers a unique view into Carl's own search for God and his belief that science and reason present our best tools for exploring and explaining our world.

Each lecture offers a segment of his thoughts, each bringing the reader gently through the discussion. Sagan avoids terribly difficult discussions in order to present his listeners (and now, his readers) a clear insight into his mindset. He asks us to think calmly about the subjects at hand, to probe the details with the scientific method and with reason. Religion, in Sagan's view, is not the right answer, if there is indeed a right answer at all.

I enjoyed this book, which at times felt a bit metaphysical some of the injections of slides and descriptions of the beauty in nature and the cosmos. I loved listening to Sagan talk on most any subject, so this book was a neat view of the man and his mind. Four stars.

  (out of 5 stars)

Bart Ehrman is one of the most thoughtful and prolific Biblical scholars of the modern age. A former Christian turned skeptic and agnostic, Ehrman's years of study and teaching have gained him a unique view from which to analyze many assertions and controversies surrounding the roots of Christianity and the Bible. God's Problem takes an in-depth look at the central concept of suffering, looking closely at what various Biblical prophets and stories have to say on the subject.

Ehrman jumps into his argument that the Bible is inconsistent in how it presents suffering, and it is clear from reading various scriptures that the authors of the Bible had major disagreements on just why humans suffer. From basic reasons, such as punishment for sin, to the more extrapolated views that suffering is ultimately redemptive, Ehrman uses easy-to-follow logic to surmise that all of the reasons given in the Bible are ultimately and utterly unsatisfying and cannot possibly provide reasonable answers to the questions of suffering.

The entire book is a strong argument in favor of agnosticism toward the Judeo-Christian version of God, and to me, the strongest part of the work is the discussion of the Book of Job. Ehrman maintains that this book, where Job is an innocent tested by God (after being challenged by Satan), was written by at least two different authors with widely diverging views on why Job suffered and how he should handle himself (meek and humble versus angry and defiant). The ironic part of the story is that God himself was apparently incapable of being tempted by Satan to harm Job (Satan, here one of God's inner circle of advisors, talks God into letting Satan kill Job's children and otherwise perform evil on Job in order to prove to God that Job would denounce his Lord. God gives in, which begs the question of why God would allow Satan to talk him into allowing the murdering of Job's children to prove a point. If God cannot resist Satan, what chance do mortals have?).

The latter parts of the book take on the apocalyptic pronouncements that came later in the development of Christianity, including those attributed to Jesus, proffering the idea of an afterlife that was clearly absent through most of the Bible.

Ehrman is a master of his craft, and I doubt there are many in the World who have as firm a grasp of the subject. God's Problem is a focused and deeply introspective look at the concept of suffering and the Biblical discussions about why we suffer. This is a must-read for anyone who thinks about this issue, regardless of religion or irreligion. Four and one-half stars.