Just Finished Reading: The New Atheism – Taking a Stand for Science and Reason by Victor J Stenger

I actually don’t read much atheist literature. This may seem odd to some of my regulars as they know me as a life-long and often outspoken atheist. In the not too distant past I’d spend a significant part of my blogging time debating the existence of God with a number of people on both sides of the divide. I enjoyed it too until I realised that I was completely wasting my time. For one thing it became obvious that my theist opponents could not be swayed or persuaded by arguments – presumably because they didn’t become Christians through the arguments presented to them. Our world views were just too different and it felt, more than once, that we were talking in completely different languages despite the fact that they sounded the same and seemingly used the same words.

Just like those earlier debates I found this book to be largely pointless. For one thing the author was preaching very much to the choir. I for one certainly don’t need my atheism explained to me or my arguments for it bolstered. I have given the subject a great deal of thought over the years and have arrived at what I consider to be a well reasoned position that I am more than happy with – so much so that I no longer give it much thought at all. This book is very definitely aimed at an American audience – which came as no great surprise to me. The battle the author is clearly taking part in is very much an American affair. Europe, I believe, moved on from this debate decades ago. The few books written by British authors – notably Dawkins and Hitchens – are similarly and squarely aimed at the US market. Despite the fact that their books sold well over here I believe that was prompted more by curiosity than by actual soul-searching.

Despite the fact that I agreed with virtually every word in this book (and because of that becoming increasingly bored with the whole thing) I became increasingly irritated with the authors attitude to his critics and those believers who had either failed to understand his position or where actively hostile to it. I agree with the author that the religious beliefs under discussion are foolish and without foundation. But it does not follow that the people who hold those beliefs are irredeemable fools. Unfortunately this seemed to be the attitude of the author which is rather self-defeating when you consider it. Anyone ‘of-faith’ reading this book would immediately take umbrage with the tone of the work and because of that completely miss the actual content which, despite the fact that I’ve heard it all before, was pretty good and generally well argued (if rather ‘thin’, that is without any real depth). Treating at least part of your target audience as complete idiots is not really conducive to getting them to actually consider your arguments at face value. This doesn’t mean that you have to bend over backwards to accommodate your opponents. You just have to treat them as, at least potentially, reasonable human beings and pitch your arguments accordingly. This the book singularly fails to do starting as it does from a position that Atheism is the obviously correct way of seeing the world (I agree) which needs little further exposition (which it does to those with radically different world views).

Finally it seems that the author is another of those Atheists who want their cake and eat it. A whole chapter was given over – plus references elsewhere – to a secular form of spirituality that can be gleaned from various Eastern religions and especially from Buddhism. Now I’m as interested in that sort of thing as much as the next Atheist but I don’t need it as a faux substitute for religion that the author seems to suggest it can be used as. I’ve come across the idea before that we, being without God, need to bolt on some kind of sanitised religious feelings (not called religious of course!) in order to feel complete rather than at the mercy of an indifferent and purely materialistic universe. I for one reject that cop-out of an idea. It’s like calling yourself a vegetarian and still eating fish or even chicken and thinking it’s OK as long as you don’t actually eat red meat. People like that amuse me to death – they really do.

So you can probably tell from the above that I didn’t quite enjoy this book as much as I might have done. That would be very true. I think it’s fundamentally aimed at the wrong audience – as both believers and non-believers will find it unsatisfying. What it should have been was a well thought out, reasonably argued and sober demolition of the religious world view rounding off with the case for Atheism. I’m confident that the author could have written such a book if only he hadn’t let his prejudice and, dare I say, arrogance get in the way of a good argument. Religious arguments for the existence of God are deeply flawed and have been repeatedly and comprehensively defeated time and again. Likewise the arguments for a Godless universe are on very solid ground. It’s just such a shame that the author didn’t use the opportunity to make his case more strongly. Obviously not recommended.