- Paperback: 176 pages
- Publisher: Temple DPS Ltd (29 May 2009)
- Language English
- ISBN-10: 0954395662
- ISBN-13: 978-0954395667
- Product Dimensions: 19.3 x 13 x 1.5 cm
- Average Customer Review: 2.5 out of 5 stars See all reviews (4 customer reviews)
- Amazon Bestsellers Rank: 816,720 in Books (See Top 100 in Books)
| ||||||||||||
Did you know you can trade in your old books for an Amazon.co.uk Gift Card to spend on the things you want? Plus, get an extra £5 Gift Certificate when you trade in books worth £10 or more before June 30, 2012. Visit the Books Trade-In Store for more details. |
Product details |
More About the Author
Tags Customers Associate with This Product(What's this?)Click on a tag to find related items, discussions, and people.
|
Sell a Digital Version of This Book in the Kindle Store
If you are a publisher or author and hold the digital rights to a book, you can sell a digital version of it in our Kindle Store.
Learn more
What Other Items Do Customers Buy After Viewing This Item?
Customer Reviews
Most Helpful Customer Reviews
2 of 2 people found the following review helpful
Format:Paperback
It would be nice if some clever atheist could come up with a proof of the non-existence of God. It would have to be good enough to convince all the religious people as otherwise noone would actually be changing their minds. Or at least it would have to be full of erudite information about what was written in the past on the subject. Sadly this book has only a few nods to discussions of the past and is quite frankly a boring and repetitive read. Still that could be forgiven it really was a convincing logical disproof of God's existence.
If I were attempting such an argument I guess I would start by writing down some assumptions about God that are believed by all monotheists and argue from that point. Indeed the author does attempt to do that. However he seems to throw in an unstated and implicit assumption that God exists within our universe rather than outside of space-time. Most monotheists seem to believe the latter - and usually explicitly. It is also a concept the author ought to have been aware of since it is the perspective one needs to take at least some of the time to understand the theories of relativity. Several of his arguments crumble fairly quickly once you spot this error.
It would also presumably help to not make the evangelist's point for them. The author tries to argue that God needs to be supremely "good". He points out that the concept of "good" incorporates the concepts both of "mercy" and "justice" and that you cannot be supremely merciful and just. However the Christian would argue that God did just that in the person of Jesus.
There is another facile argument implying that in order to be saved one has to get every single aspect of ones doctrine correct. Religion, or at least the mainstream bits of it, do not work like that.
This book is a brave and valiant sortie into the battle against irrationality. Just too bad it is firing blanks.
If I were attempting such an argument I guess I would start by writing down some assumptions about God that are believed by all monotheists and argue from that point. Indeed the author does attempt to do that. However he seems to throw in an unstated and implicit assumption that God exists within our universe rather than outside of space-time. Most monotheists seem to believe the latter - and usually explicitly. It is also a concept the author ought to have been aware of since it is the perspective one needs to take at least some of the time to understand the theories of relativity. Several of his arguments crumble fairly quickly once you spot this error.
It would also presumably help to not make the evangelist's point for them. The author tries to argue that God needs to be supremely "good". He points out that the concept of "good" incorporates the concepts both of "mercy" and "justice" and that you cannot be supremely merciful and just. However the Christian would argue that God did just that in the person of Jesus.
There is another facile argument implying that in order to be saved one has to get every single aspect of ones doctrine correct. Religion, or at least the mainstream bits of it, do not work like that.
This book is a brave and valiant sortie into the battle against irrationality. Just too bad it is firing blanks.
5 of 6 people found the following review helpful
Format:Paperback
This book begins by making some very bold claims, and in a way this is admirable. The author, subtly listed as "a graduate of the university of Cambridge, England" tries to account for his obscurity by claiming that it is simply because of intellectual snobbery that books from people such as him don't get widely recognised. This is a clever but unconvincing disclaimer; the movers and shakers in philosophy are widely known and ridiculously qualified for a reason - and this has nothing to do with snobbery.
The ambitious claims in the introduction soon turn into arrogance. The arguments Berg puts forward are unconvincing, and no new ground is broken as the book claims it would. There is constant misuse of the words 'logical' and 'entity' among many others; and it is written in an infuriating quasi-philosophical manner which isn't in the least bit convincing and is bordering on the self-indulgent. The arguments themselves are nothing new, really - anybody with a little bit of common sense could reason them out, so claims of two of them being 'entirely original' are unfounded. The arguments themselves constantly invoke 'logic' to gloss over centuries of valid theological argument - even though nothing about the arguments is logical (they're just set out in a mock-Aquinas style).
Berg's concept of God and philosophy, and the often irrelevant name-checks of famous thinkers, are primitive and fundamentally have the essence of a naive student - furthermore, the book is riddled with typos, breaks in flow, clumsy sentences and irrelevant exclamation marks. Why Blackwells priced this at £10 (or even sell it) is beyond me.
Even if the very same arguments were presented in a less snotty, more reasonable style and actually WERE acceptable, they would not provide any basis for a belief in atheism. As an atheist and theology student myself I am a little disconcerted that such arguments are branded under the title '...ways of atheism'. A fundamental tenet of the nonbelief system is that the burden of proof lies elsewhere, within the theism camp. This book ignores this, and so ends up looking rather like an idealistic apology - rather like a great number of irrelevant Christian books.
The ambitious claims in the introduction soon turn into arrogance. The arguments Berg puts forward are unconvincing, and no new ground is broken as the book claims it would. There is constant misuse of the words 'logical' and 'entity' among many others; and it is written in an infuriating quasi-philosophical manner which isn't in the least bit convincing and is bordering on the self-indulgent. The arguments themselves are nothing new, really - anybody with a little bit of common sense could reason them out, so claims of two of them being 'entirely original' are unfounded. The arguments themselves constantly invoke 'logic' to gloss over centuries of valid theological argument - even though nothing about the arguments is logical (they're just set out in a mock-Aquinas style).
Berg's concept of God and philosophy, and the often irrelevant name-checks of famous thinkers, are primitive and fundamentally have the essence of a naive student - furthermore, the book is riddled with typos, breaks in flow, clumsy sentences and irrelevant exclamation marks. Why Blackwells priced this at £10 (or even sell it) is beyond me.
Even if the very same arguments were presented in a less snotty, more reasonable style and actually WERE acceptable, they would not provide any basis for a belief in atheism. As an atheist and theology student myself I am a little disconcerted that such arguments are branded under the title '...ways of atheism'. A fundamental tenet of the nonbelief system is that the burden of proof lies elsewhere, within the theism camp. This book ignores this, and so ends up looking rather like an idealistic apology - rather like a great number of irrelevant Christian books.
4 of 5 people found the following review helpful
Format:Paperback
Geoffrey Berg has written a book providing six succinct but profound arguments for the view that belief in god is contrary to logic.
The six arguments are as follows:
1) The aggregate of qualities argument
2) The man and god comprehension gulf argument
3) The 'god has no explanatory value' argument
4) The 'this is not the best possible world' argument
5) The universal uncertainty argument
6) The 'some of god's defining qualities cannot exist' argument
The arguments put forward are logical and all contain at least some elements are original.
An important and welcome addition to the atheism debate.
The six arguments are as follows:
1) The aggregate of qualities argument
2) The man and god comprehension gulf argument
3) The 'god has no explanatory value' argument
4) The 'this is not the best possible world' argument
5) The universal uncertainty argument
6) The 'some of god's defining qualities cannot exist' argument
The arguments put forward are logical and all contain at least some elements are original.
An important and welcome addition to the atheism debate.
Would you like to see more reviews about this item?
Were these reviews helpful?
Let us know
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.
|
