The Devil's Delusion: Atheism and its Scientific Pretensions
and over one million other books are available for Amazon Kindle .
Learn more
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||
 Trade In this Item for up to £1.10
Get an extra £5 when you trade in books worth £10 or more until June 30, 2012. Trade in The Devil's Delusion: Atheism and Its Scientific Pretensions for an Amazon.co.uk gift card of up to £1.10, which you can then spend on millions of items across the site. Trade-in values may vary (terms apply). Find more products eligible for trade-in.
|
Frequently Bought Together
Product details
|
More About the Author
Product Description
Review
"Berlinski knows his science and wields his rapier deftly. He makes great sport with his opponents, and his readers will surely enjoy it."
--Tom Bethell, bestselling author of "The Politically Incorrect Guide to Science
"
"A powerful riposte to atheist mockery and cocksure science, and to the sort of philosophy that surrenders to them. David Berlinski proceeds reasonably and calmly to challenge recent scientific theorizing and to expose the unreason from which it presumes to criticize religion."
--Harvey Mansfield, Professor of Government, Harvard University
"Berlinski's book is everything desirable: it is idiomatic, profound, brilliantly polemical, amusing, and of course vastly learned. I congratulate him."
--William F. Buckley Jr.
"With high style and light-hearted disdain, David Berlinski deflates the intellectual pretensions of the scientific atheist crowd. Maybe they can recite the Periodic Table by heart, but the secular Berlinski shows that this doesn't get them very far in reasoning about much weightier matters."
--Michael J. Behe, Professor of Biological Sciences, Lehigh University, bestselling author of "Darwin's Black Box "and "The Edge of Evolution"
"David Berlinski plus any topic equals an extraordinary book."
--Chicago Tribune
--Tom Bethell, bestselling author of "The Politically Incorrect Guide to Science
"
"A powerful riposte to atheist mockery and cocksure science, and to the sort of philosophy that surrenders to them. David Berlinski proceeds reasonably and calmly to challenge recent scientific theorizing and to expose the unreason from which it presumes to criticize religion."
--Harvey Mansfield, Professor of Government, Harvard University
"Berlinski's book is everything desirable: it is idiomatic, profound, brilliantly polemical, amusing, and of course vastly learned. I congratulate him."
--William F. Buckley Jr.
"With high style and light-hearted disdain, David Berlinski deflates the intellectual pretensions of the scientific atheist crowd. Maybe they can recite the Periodic Table by heart, but the secular Berlinski shows that this doesn't get them very far in reasoning about much weightier matters."
--Michael J. Behe, Professor of Biological Sciences, Lehigh University, bestselling author of "Darwin's Black Box "and "The Edge of Evolution"
"David Berlinski plus any topic equals an extraordinary book."
--Chicago Tribune
"From the Hardcover edition."
Product Description
Militant atheism is on the rise. In recent years Richard Dawkins, Sam Harris, Daniel Dennett, and Christopher Hitchens have produced a steady stream of best-selling books denigrating religious belief. These authors are merely the leading edge of a larger movement that includes much of the scientific community.
In response, mathematician David Berlinski, himself a secular Jew, delivers a biting defense of religious thought. The Devil’s Delusion is a brilliant, incisive, and funny book that explores the limits of science and the pretensions of those who insist it is the ultimate touchstone for understanding our world.
Inside This Book
(Learn More)
Tags Customers Associate with This Product(What's this?)Click on a tag to find related items, discussions, and people.
|
What Other Items Do Customers Buy After Viewing This Item?
Customer Reviews
Most Helpful Customer Reviews
18 of 23 people found the following review helpful
Format:Paperback
As a Christian and a Science Teacher I enjoyed this book. The style is forthright and eminently readable, though the tone can be a little too pugilistic for my taste in places and sometimes a little hectoring. Also, when Berlinski is on slightly weaker ground he does seem to compensate with the same kind of bluster he identifies in those whose writings he criticises.
That said, he makes a number of highly valid and important points. He is, of course, right in pointing out that Science is not purely logical, rational and detached - nor should we imagine that it is or could be; it is an activity carried out by human beings who are not purely logical, rational and detached. He is also right in taking to task the suggestion - implied, usually, rather than baldly stated - that we are a hairsbreadth away from a complete naturalistic scientific understanding of everything and in suggesting that a determination to forbid God from "getting a toe in the door" lies behind such hubris.
He makes some valid points about the evidence (or its lack) for the theory of evolution by natural selection - as against the bald fact of evolution. I disagree with him, but am aware that the elegance and simplicity of Darwin's theory are contributory factors in its acceptance (which I share). Where I strongly agree with Berlinski is that there should be no question of attempting to stifle debate on this issue or any other in Science. That there have been such attempts - for purely dogmatic reasons - is clear from the examples he provides; indeed I recall a few years ago Scientific American magazine campaigned for students from schools that taught Intelligent Design to have that held against them in their application for university places.
And that brings me to the nub of my concerns, concerns which Berlinski highlights. As a Science Teacher I have noted an increasing disenchantment with Science. Part of that disenchantment springs from a perception that Science is dogmatic and claims certainty where certainty is not possible. It is hard enough to get children interested in Science without people like Dawkins and Dennett suggesting that they have to hold a particular viewpoint on religion to do Science "properly". As a Christian and a Science Teacher I am clear that militant atheism has done neither religion nor Science any good - but that more harm has been done to Science. Berlinski explains why this is with great lucidity
That said, he makes a number of highly valid and important points. He is, of course, right in pointing out that Science is not purely logical, rational and detached - nor should we imagine that it is or could be; it is an activity carried out by human beings who are not purely logical, rational and detached. He is also right in taking to task the suggestion - implied, usually, rather than baldly stated - that we are a hairsbreadth away from a complete naturalistic scientific understanding of everything and in suggesting that a determination to forbid God from "getting a toe in the door" lies behind such hubris.
He makes some valid points about the evidence (or its lack) for the theory of evolution by natural selection - as against the bald fact of evolution. I disagree with him, but am aware that the elegance and simplicity of Darwin's theory are contributory factors in its acceptance (which I share). Where I strongly agree with Berlinski is that there should be no question of attempting to stifle debate on this issue or any other in Science. That there have been such attempts - for purely dogmatic reasons - is clear from the examples he provides; indeed I recall a few years ago Scientific American magazine campaigned for students from schools that taught Intelligent Design to have that held against them in their application for university places.
And that brings me to the nub of my concerns, concerns which Berlinski highlights. As a Science Teacher I have noted an increasing disenchantment with Science. Part of that disenchantment springs from a perception that Science is dogmatic and claims certainty where certainty is not possible. It is hard enough to get children interested in Science without people like Dawkins and Dennett suggesting that they have to hold a particular viewpoint on religion to do Science "properly". As a Christian and a Science Teacher I am clear that militant atheism has done neither religion nor Science any good - but that more harm has been done to Science. Berlinski explains why this is with great lucidity
95 of 124 people found the following review helpful
Format:Hardcover|Amazon Verified Purchase
There were certain lecturers at university - Hans Kornberg springs to mind - whose lectures nobody would miss. It wasn't because they were necessarily the crucially important courses. It was because there was something about the style of the lecturer - his or her humour, perhaps, or delivery - which captivated the undergraduate audience and held it until the end of the course.
Reading this book by Berlinski reminded me of some of those lecturers. Various things about it were captivating. The layers of meaning that can be found in so many of the sentences; the deft way in which opposing opinions are dismantled; the shocking mild political incorrectnesses; the carefully-measured putdowns; the rhetorical interaction with opponents and readers.
Berlinski is writing a book in defence of belief in a god. Nothing unusual about that - Dawkins' book "The God Delusion", and similar ones, have sparked a whole publishing industry in response, many of which I've already reviewed on Amazon. What is most unusual about this book is that Berlinski is not a religious believer - and yet he is quite adamant that belief in God is not unreasonable. Furthermore, he is substantially better informed - biblically, philosophically, scientifically - than Dawkins, Hitchens or Harris.
He makes his case persuasively. For example, in response to the insistence that "miracles don't happen" by anti-theists, he points out that whilst we can understand the chemical process by which the eye "sees" something, we don't have a clue about what perception really is, and just because it is part of our everyday experience doesn't mean that it is inappropriate to describe it as a miracle. In response to the dogmatic insistence that we are no more than animals, he points out the fact that if that is what we are in biological terms, then it simply demonstrates that biology is telling us nothing useful about what it means to be human at all. He demonstrates that the theories that supposedly prove that God isn't necessary rarely do what they set out to, and say more about the presuppositions of the proponent than about the nature of the universe.
As I read the book, I found myself increasingly puzzled as to why, given his dissatisfaction with arguments against the existence of God, he should not believe in God himself. The dedication - to his father, who was lost in Auschwitz - perhaps provides one clue, and another big clue is provided in the last chapter - "The Cardinal and his Cathedral." Here he writes movingly of his life in science, and his hope - perhaps a little forlorn now - that despite its failures, science will one day provide a coherent means of understanding the world.
Two quibbles. The first is that the book could really have done with footnotes or endnotes for the many references. The second is that the odd provocative piece of political incorrectness could have been avoided - not because it does any harm in itself, but because it provides his opponents with a red herring card to play against him (to mix metaphors). But the bottom line is that this is an excellent, highly quotable book, which I intend to pass on to many other thoughtful people.
Reading this book by Berlinski reminded me of some of those lecturers. Various things about it were captivating. The layers of meaning that can be found in so many of the sentences; the deft way in which opposing opinions are dismantled; the shocking mild political incorrectnesses; the carefully-measured putdowns; the rhetorical interaction with opponents and readers.
Berlinski is writing a book in defence of belief in a god. Nothing unusual about that - Dawkins' book "The God Delusion", and similar ones, have sparked a whole publishing industry in response, many of which I've already reviewed on Amazon. What is most unusual about this book is that Berlinski is not a religious believer - and yet he is quite adamant that belief in God is not unreasonable. Furthermore, he is substantially better informed - biblically, philosophically, scientifically - than Dawkins, Hitchens or Harris.
He makes his case persuasively. For example, in response to the insistence that "miracles don't happen" by anti-theists, he points out that whilst we can understand the chemical process by which the eye "sees" something, we don't have a clue about what perception really is, and just because it is part of our everyday experience doesn't mean that it is inappropriate to describe it as a miracle. In response to the dogmatic insistence that we are no more than animals, he points out the fact that if that is what we are in biological terms, then it simply demonstrates that biology is telling us nothing useful about what it means to be human at all. He demonstrates that the theories that supposedly prove that God isn't necessary rarely do what they set out to, and say more about the presuppositions of the proponent than about the nature of the universe.
As I read the book, I found myself increasingly puzzled as to why, given his dissatisfaction with arguments against the existence of God, he should not believe in God himself. The dedication - to his father, who was lost in Auschwitz - perhaps provides one clue, and another big clue is provided in the last chapter - "The Cardinal and his Cathedral." Here he writes movingly of his life in science, and his hope - perhaps a little forlorn now - that despite its failures, science will one day provide a coherent means of understanding the world.
Two quibbles. The first is that the book could really have done with footnotes or endnotes for the many references. The second is that the odd provocative piece of political incorrectness could have been avoided - not because it does any harm in itself, but because it provides his opponents with a red herring card to play against him (to mix metaphors). But the bottom line is that this is an excellent, highly quotable book, which I intend to pass on to many other thoughtful people.
Format:Paperback|Amazon Verified Purchase
The author of "The Devil's Delusion", David Berlinski, is a secular Jew and agnostic who co-operates with conservative Christians. Indeed, he is a member of the Discovery Institute, the Intelligent Design (or creationist) think tank in Seattle. Berlinski's book comes with positive blurbs written by Michael Behe and William Buckley. Inside the book, the author thanks Ann Coulter (!) for inspiration.
One wonders why a secular Jew who apparently doesn't believe in God, would ally himself with what many people would consider Christian fundamentalists. Perhaps Berlinski is a "Straussian" cynic who believes that religion, although probably false, is nevertheless necessary. Otherwise the common people might get into their heads that anything goes, and moral breakdown (or revolution?) follows. Berlinski certainly suggests this at one point in the book, where he says that brute force is necessary to tame the evil impulses in man, but since brute force cannot reach everyone everywhere, people need to control themselves with a bit of divine morality. Why the author himself doesn't need to be restrained in this way, we are never told.
I admit that I didn't like this book. It's confused, delusional and quite simply bad. What struck me most, were the constant contradictions. Berlinski seems to have an extreme anti-realist attitude towards scientific theories...except sometimes. When it suits his purposes, he switches to a de facto realist position. Thus, he treats the Big Bang theory as proven, beyond reproach and quite true. Why? Because it suggests that the universe had a beginning, and therefore... (Clue: God may have done it after all.) He also loves the Copenhagen interpretation of quantum physics, which is perhaps understandable from an anti-realist standpoint, but Berlinski seems to love it for very different reasons. Since the Copenhagen interpretation is ontologically weird, the Trinity and Incarnation might be true as well!
In one chapter, Berlinski points out that there is a qualitative difference between humans and animals. But if there is, why does he want the state to treat people as irrational cattle? His friend Buckley, notoriously, wanted a totalitarian bureaucracy to win the Cold War!
Berlinski has crucified his reason, and in return gotten what amounts to a bizarre mixture of anti-realism, al-Ghazali and Intelligent Design creationism. Sounds like a bad trade-off! And what's all this stuff about being an agnostic? Frankly, the guy would be more honest if he simply converted, say to Conservative Judaism.
The best diagnosis I can offer of this strange author is that he is a very consistent methodological agnostic. If scientific theories are strongly anti-realist, if the universe is irrational and incomprehensible, then there is nothing left for us to do, except to survive, and keep law and order in the meantime. Hence the need for pretending that God exists.
If, on the other hand, realism is true, and if our brains can formulate even a "theory of everything", we are at bottom rational creatures, and might one day really start to understand both the universe and ourselves...
But according to Berlinski, we are all doomed to remain delusional devils.
Not recommended.
One wonders why a secular Jew who apparently doesn't believe in God, would ally himself with what many people would consider Christian fundamentalists. Perhaps Berlinski is a "Straussian" cynic who believes that religion, although probably false, is nevertheless necessary. Otherwise the common people might get into their heads that anything goes, and moral breakdown (or revolution?) follows. Berlinski certainly suggests this at one point in the book, where he says that brute force is necessary to tame the evil impulses in man, but since brute force cannot reach everyone everywhere, people need to control themselves with a bit of divine morality. Why the author himself doesn't need to be restrained in this way, we are never told.
I admit that I didn't like this book. It's confused, delusional and quite simply bad. What struck me most, were the constant contradictions. Berlinski seems to have an extreme anti-realist attitude towards scientific theories...except sometimes. When it suits his purposes, he switches to a de facto realist position. Thus, he treats the Big Bang theory as proven, beyond reproach and quite true. Why? Because it suggests that the universe had a beginning, and therefore... (Clue: God may have done it after all.) He also loves the Copenhagen interpretation of quantum physics, which is perhaps understandable from an anti-realist standpoint, but Berlinski seems to love it for very different reasons. Since the Copenhagen interpretation is ontologically weird, the Trinity and Incarnation might be true as well!
In one chapter, Berlinski points out that there is a qualitative difference between humans and animals. But if there is, why does he want the state to treat people as irrational cattle? His friend Buckley, notoriously, wanted a totalitarian bureaucracy to win the Cold War!
Berlinski has crucified his reason, and in return gotten what amounts to a bizarre mixture of anti-realism, al-Ghazali and Intelligent Design creationism. Sounds like a bad trade-off! And what's all this stuff about being an agnostic? Frankly, the guy would be more honest if he simply converted, say to Conservative Judaism.
The best diagnosis I can offer of this strange author is that he is a very consistent methodological agnostic. If scientific theories are strongly anti-realist, if the universe is irrational and incomprehensible, then there is nothing left for us to do, except to survive, and keep law and order in the meantime. Hence the need for pretending that God exists.
If, on the other hand, realism is true, and if our brains can formulate even a "theory of everything", we are at bottom rational creatures, and might one day really start to understand both the universe and ourselves...
But according to Berlinski, we are all doomed to remain delusional devils.
Not recommended.
Would you like to see more reviews about this item?
Were these reviews helpful?
Let us know
Most Recent Customer Reviews
A robust and intelligent response to "new atheism"
From reading the other reviews, I can understand why this book has upset so many atheists/naturalists as they are used to living in a world that is vehemently secular which... Read more
Published 5 months ago by Gary
Arrogant, poorly argued, sarcastic
Sadly I found this book a great disappointment. I was hoping for something well reasoned and courteous, informing the debate about science and religion in an intelligent way. Read more
Published 17 months ago by philor
Truly atheism and its scientific pretensions
This is an unusual book. Written by a non-religious mathematician with a PhD from Princeton it demolishes the pretensions of militant atheists to having exclusive monopoly to truth... Read more
Published 18 months ago by E. Danielyan
Charlatan
Anyone with a logical mind can follow an argument. In this book, there is no logic, just argument. Berlinski is a chartlatan, a pseudo-scientist. Read more
Published 19 months ago by mr s fuster burnett
For those who like to think
This book would be a real turn off for those who just like sound bite philosophy. The arguments presented are sometimes hard to follow but nonetheless worth pursuing. Read more
Published 22 months ago by Reader
hints at a response, but ends up being an arrogant dysfunctional...
Sorry this is not the intellectual, reasoned and importantly researched and evidence based response that will satisfy those wanting to understand the issues without prejudice. Read more
Published 23 months ago by thewinter
Cats all the way down
I had to read this book twice,to be sure it was a good as I thought it was.
It was better,not probably but absolutley.
It was better,not probably but absolutley.
Published 23 months ago by Mr. S. Somerton
As atheist as i am christian
I'm not so sure berlinski isn't a closet theist. I've heard precisely the same language used by other apologists who start out by proclaiming their agnosticism or atheism - their... Read more
Published on 20 April 2010 by Alexander White
Just can't give it 5 stars...
This is a book that will be immensely divisive. At the moment, any book about God/religion/atheism/New Atheism will be hugely divisive, but a book written by a secular Jew,... Read more
Published on 6 Feb 2010 by Anna
NEWSFLASH: DON QUIXOTE TILTS AT WINDMILL AND WINS
David Berlinski, mathematician, philosopher, and novelist, has produced a book of great value. He presents, in literate format, ideas from problems in evolutionary biology and many... Read more
Published on 28 Oct 2009 by Michael JR Jose
Customer Discussions
|
This product's forum
Active discussions in related forums
Search Customer Discussions
|
Related forums
|
Listmania!
|
|
Look for similar items by category
Look for similar items by subject
Feedback
- Would you like to update product info or give feedback on images?
- I am the Author, and I want to comment on my book.
- I am the Publisher, and I want to comment on this book.
|
