About book The God Argument: The Case Against Religion And For Humanism (2013)
The first part of the book (against religion) has a major flaw in that it only takes aim at the Abrahamic religions, categorizing Buddhism, Confucianism etc.. as "philosophies" with the argument that these do not believe in supernatural deities. Like a lot of the neo-atheist movement, the straw man is too easy to take down.However, the second of part of the book I found excellent - the distinction between ethics and morality, and showing that we can have ethical precepts without religion. Recognizing Grayling as a bit of a heavyweight in a discussion of humanism (or perhaps better positioned as secular humanism), I picked up the God Argument hoping for some decent dialogue to engage with. I was disappointed with this work. It is as predictable as it is lacking in its attempts to position itself as a more attainable, intellectual and integral approach to life and ethics than a religious based approach. Perhaps most unfortunate is the methodology of his arguments. He utilizes colorful language and simple well sounding reasoning to position his own ideology where he believes it deserves to be, but he does this by subtly disguising the fact that he has created convenient straw men for the opposing arguments that allow his own to sound positively reasonable. He sidesteps the most obvious step of deciphering between two completely different approaches to world view, which conveniently forces the opposition to reason from his own playing field. And it is unfortunate that he does this while misrepresenting (and worse criticizing) religious motivations (most glaringly in his supposedly enlightened comments regarding the afterlife and in his emphatic statements that suggest religious motivation to be less than authentic). Scholarship and academic studies of religion and religious ideas (particularly when it comes to Christianity) have long recognized the necessity of recognizing the motivations and context of its writers and history, especially when dealing with scripture itself. To approach it from any other way is to force the source material we are dealing with to speak from our own assumptions. Grayling would do well to recognize his own assumptions (something his reasoning tends to conveniently sidestep), as his reasoning moves forward dependent on those assumptions being firmly in place. His reasoning comes across as nice, convenient and complete when in fact there are many questions left to wrestle with (something he acknowledges but does not follow through with). Religion recognizes the same thing. He would also do well to recognize that the motivation of religion and secular humanism are not as far apart as he seems to feel they are.
Do You like book The God Argument: The Case Against Religion And For Humanism (2013)?
Very insightful and well-written. A brilliant book to read and one that should be read.
—cscoggins
An absolutely poor representation of theism and the arguments for it.
—msdancer16
Section 2 - For Humanism should be obligatory reading!
—luvmycats
