A positive case for atheism, an assault on faith
Written: Mar 13 '02 (Updated Mar 14 '02)
|
Product Rating:
|
|
|
Pros: Unflinching look at the atheism/theism debate, piercing clarity.
Cons: style belabored, a little raw.
The Bottom Line: Harbour takes a refreshing approach to a threadbare subject. A clear, positive argument for atheism. His style is clear and easy to read, though sometimes unpolished.
|
|
|
| jaseroque's Full Review: Daniel Harbour - An Intelligent Persons Guide to A... |
A few months ago, I was intrigued by a positive review in the Economist magazine of a book entitled “An Intelligent Person’s Guide to Atheism,” by Daniel Harbour. On my most recent order from Amazon.com, I picked it up. The book arrived over the weekend, and I read it in three days -- it was an intriguing, challenging read.
I was particularly delighted by the angle adopted by the author. It is easy, when debating the merits of atheism vs. theism, to fall into a stale, endless debate. These debates have been recycled for hundreds of years, every generation grapples with the identical questions. I am far more interested in the worldviews of the two groups: how they go about pursuing truth, of answering their questions about the world around them.
Brief Summary
Daniel Harbour addresses the worldview question head on. He explains why he thinks these two camps, atheist and the theist, cannot see eye to eye: it is because they espouse two radically different and contradictory worldviews. Specifically, they acquire knowledge in vastly different ways.
Daniel Harbour names the first worldview the “Spartan meritocracy.” In this worldview, a person starts on her quest for knowledge with as few assumptions about the world as possible (this is the Spartan part). Each belief must then stand up to the test of evidence, and is never beyond question (that’s the meritocracy part). Ideas that do not match reality are discarded. Rational inquiry, philosophy, and science are instances of the Spartan meritocracy. So, argues Harbour, is atheism -- not because the Spartan meritocratic worldview refuses to consider the idea of God, but because no theory that posits the existence of God has ever worked. To quote the author, “God ... has never proved Himself a viable cog, nut, or bolt in any theory of how the world is.”
The second worldview Harbor describes is the “Baroque monarchy.” With this approach, a person starts on his quest for knowledge with many elaborate, "Baroque" assumptions that he is never allowed to revise, even in the light of contradictory evidence from the real world. The "monarchy" part of the Baroque monarchic worldview refers to this fixity -- these assumptions and ideas cannot be challenged any more than the authority of a monarch in a traditional monarchy. Dogmatic, totalitarian regimes are examples of Baroque monarchies. So is theism -- Christianity, Islam, Judaism, Hinduism, new age sprituality, and so forth. Theists start their quest for knowledge with all sorts of unfounded and unchallenged assumptions (e.g. god exists, heaven exists, reincarnation exists, sin exists etc.) Revision of these assumptions is forbidden. To quote the author: "if one's experience or commonsense or intuition or logic contradicts the creed, then the fault lies, not with the privileged beliefs, but with experience, commonsense, intuition, and logic." In other words, if reality contradicts one's beliefs, then reality must be wrong. Therefore, those who subscribe to a religion will never be able to discover the truth about the world as it is.
Harbour argues that the Spartan meritocracy (rational unbelief) is the superior approach to the world, because it answers questions about how the world works with far more accuracy and predictive power than the Baroque monarchy (religious belief) ever does. This is the most important point, the crux of the book -- Harbour makes a clear, positive case for atheism. Instead of defining atheists by what they do not believe, Harbour outlines a set of arguments in favor of atheism on its own merits.
He proceeds to explore countless different issues (practical, moral, ethical, political etc.) raised by these two worldviews. He defends the charges leveled against atheism with thoroughness and skill. He draws on mathematics, physics, astronomy, biology, history, and philosophy to explore and illustrate his views. I won’t go in to them all here -- but rest assured that if you are interested in this topic, you won’t be able to put the book down.
Readability
This book is quite readable and approachable. It is, in fact, a quick read -- it took me only a few days to read it cover to cover.
Style
Harbour’s style is rather belabored: he tells you what he’s going to say, he says it, then he tells you what he just said. He restates his points whenever he refers to them, instead of assuming you’ll remember what he said two pages before. Clarity is obviously his top priority, and it takes precedence over any storytelling techniques, artful turns of phrase, or beautiful prose. He is not eloquent.
This meticulous clarity need not be seen as a flaw, however, though doubtless Harbour will gain more skills as a writer as he matures. Harbour covers a lot of complicated ideas in a very short amount of space, so it would be very easy to get lost with a less organized author. Instead, the reader is right on his heels. In only one instance (in the chapter on political implications) does he become confusing.
Tone
Harbour’s tone is extremely forceful and outspoken. He states his conclusions bluntly and right away: that the Spartan meritocratic worldview is superior to the Baroque monarchic view, and therefore that atheism is superior to theism.
It is refreshing to read someone so blunt, unflinching, and willing to pursue his arguments to their logical endpoints in a rational, controlled, relentless manner.
Conclusion
I highly recommend this book to those interested in a new, insightful look at the atheism/theism question. Harbour takes a refreshing approach to a very threadbare subject: he lays out a clear, positive case for atheism. This book is not for the faint of heart, however. It is an outright assault on faith. Harbour is blunt, outspoken and opinionated, and conducts his arguments and draws his conclusions with relentless logic and care.
Recommended:
Yes
|
|
|
|
Epinions.com ID:
jaseroque
|
 - Top 1000 |
|
Location: California
Reviews written: 250
Trusted by: 113 members
|
|
|
- Add to My Yahoo!: 
- Add to Google Homepage: 
© 1999-2009 Shopping.com, Inc.