Shop now Shop now Shop now  Up to 50% Off Fashion  Shop all Amazon Fashion Cloud Drive Photos Shop now Learn More Shop now Shop now Shop Fire Shop Kindle Listen in Prime Shop now

Your rating(Clear)Rate this item


There was a problem filtering reviews right now. Please try again later.

on 27 April 2015
Excellent and provocative. Thought provoking
0Comment|Was this review helpful to you?YesNoReport abuse
on 23 April 2012
Perhaps I should have read the reviews first, but I was so delighted by Alister McGrath's 'Surprised By Reason', and seeing a few references to this book, promptly bought it.

But be warned, this book takes a very liberal view of the Bible, and in my opinion is more grounded in the author's whim than any justifiable argument. I was very disappointed and quite disturbed by this rant, and recommend reading a sample before buying.
0Comment|3 people found this helpful. Was this review helpful to you?YesNoReport abuse
on 22 March 2010
Eagleton clearly sees Dawkins and Hitchens as irritants which he scratches relentlessly (shades of the sort of Trotskyism that gives it a bad name). Hitchens has fallen from the grace of the Internationalist Socialists of which I was also a member and don't recall Eagleton being active within that organisation as he implies. Dawkins is consigned to the stereotype of the ivory tower Oxford don who knows nothing of the real world. A bit rich given Eagleton's own academic background being so similar. The review by Geoff Crocker makes many of the points that I would make - for example Eagleton's use of simile is obsessive and becomes entirely counterproductive. My central criticism is that he simply assumes that there is a God - as so many (all) theists do. They, including Eagleton,speak much of rationality in religious belief but exhibit none of it in their writing. Rational argument is argument that is logical and flows from clear assumptions. In that way arguments can be shared with others - nowhere does Eagleton identify his assumption(s). Mainly because they boil down to "I believe in the God of love". If you don't accept this hidden assumption then his argument falls down. This fatal weakness applies to more heavy weight theists such as my namesake Alister McGrath - also an Oxford don! All in all an ill tempered rant the language of which is both clotted and often grammatically incompetent - which from a Professor of English Literature is a bit rich.
44 comments|13 people found this helpful. Was this review helpful to you?YesNoReport abuse
on 11 June 2010
For Eagleton to claim to understand, never mind critique, a real scientist like Dawkins is laughable.
As often happens, Eagleton just reveals his pretentions and ignorance.
That he has reverted to his childhood religion is pathetic.
For fools to think they can dismiss a real scientist like Dawkins is massive hubris.
2727 comments|10 people found this helpful. Was this review helpful to you?YesNoReport abuse
on 30 May 2009
Imagine someone holding forth on biology whose only knowledge of the subject is the Book of British Birds, and you have a rough idea of what it feels like to read Terry Eagleton on Richard Dawkins.
1414 comments|21 people found this helpful. Was this review helpful to you?YesNoReport abuse
on 24 January 2010
Item is a new book, published 2009.

This represented a good value purchase, which arrived fairly promptly and in excellent condition.

I would purchase from this seller again.
11 comment|Was this review helpful to you?YesNoReport abuse

Send us feedback

How can we make Amazon Customer Reviews better for you?
Let us know here.

Sponsored Links

  (What is this?)