About.com Rating



Debates over atheism and theism have occupied many of the greatest thinkers, philosophers and theologians through history. Unfortunately, we don?t see many such debates today ? but that doesn?t mean that the question is no longer important. Which really is superior, belief or disbelief in the existence of a god?

Summary

Title: An Intelligent Person's Guide to Atheism
Author: Daniel Harbour
Publisher: Duckworth
ISBN: 0715629158


Pro:
?  Relatively easy to read
?  Very good arguments support atheism and skepticism

Con:
?  A fair amount of repetition of some points

Description:
?  Advocates atheism over theism
?  Explains why a skeptical perspective is better than a more religious one
?  Argues for a more scientific worldview

 

Book Review

Daniel Harbour?s book, An Intelligent Person?s Guide to Atheism, is meant to reinvigorate that debate and bring such fundamental questions back to center stage. Some people might think from the title that this is a guide to the history of atheism or something similar, but that is not the case. It is, rather, a guide to why atheism is superior to theism and why the discussion about such issues is important.

According to Harbour, atheism is correct, theism is incorrect, and anyone who cares about the truth should be an atheist. This isn?t an argument you see made publicly too often; many atheists tend to be accommodating and operate under the assumption that atheism and theism are logically equivalent.

Criticizing theism is simply considered ?rude? or unwarranted, and if they express any opinion at all, it tends to be among other atheists.

Harbour, however, believes that this way of going about things is mistaken and makes his case on the basis of two types worldviews which he labels the Spartan meritocracy and the Baroque monarchy. Worldviews are the ways in which we look at and try to explain the world around us; as a result, the validity of our worldviews is extremely important because that will determine the validity and reasonableness of our beliefs.

A Spartan meritocracy makes minimal assumptions when trying to explain the world, focusing more on a proper method of inquiry than on reaching any particular or prejudicial conclusions. A Baroque monarchy, however, relies upon dogmatic assumptions in the absence of any real evidence ? assumptions which tend to be placed beyond question, critique or revision.

Harbour does not spend a lot of time directly comparing atheism and theism; rather, he compares these two different types of worldviews and argues that the Spartan meritocracy is more plausible, more reasonable, helps make the world a better place to live, and generally superior ? thus, anyone who cares about the truth should be inclined to adopt it rather than a Baroque monarchy.

He does not, however, argue that there is a direct and necessary connection between these worldviews and either atheism or theism ? on the contrary, he readily acknowledges that it is possible for an atheist to adopt a Baroque monarchy and for a theist to adopt a Spartan meritocracy. Strictly speaking, then, even though he asserts at the beginning of the book that atheism is correct, theism is incorrect, and anyone who cares about the truth should be an atheist, his actual arguments are directed at the idea that a Spartan meritocracy is correct and anyone who cares about the truth should adopt that type of worldview. Nevertheless, he also makes it clear that the it is not very likely that theism will occur within a Spartan meritocracy; thus, anyone who adopts a Spartan meritocracy is much more likely to be an atheist and, in practice if not in theory, his original assertions are supported.

» Continue...