Customer Reviews


24 Reviews
5 star:
 (10)
4 star:
 (7)
3 star:
 (1)
2 star:
 (1)
1 star:
 (5)
 
 
 
 
 
Average Customer Review
Share your thoughts with other customers
Create your own review
 
 

The most helpful favourable review
The most helpful critical review


68 of 71 people found the following review helpful
4.0 out of 5 stars Atheism - a very short introduction
Julian Baggini's 'very short introduction' is timely. In a world which - commendably - is increasingly multicultural and respectful of diversity (including religious diversity), atheism finds itself out on a limb and needing to defend itself.
Perhaps (and I am one of the already converted) this shouldn't be necessary. J Baggini invokes an analogy whereby 'Nessies'-...
Published on 30 Jun 2003 by Jan Woodhouse

versus
4 of 5 people found the following review helpful
3.0 out of 5 stars Good yet Unbalanced Introduction
Let me lay my cards down: I'm a Christian and disagree with Mr. Baggini's philosophy entirely.
However, I found this to be a very useful introduction to the topic of atheism, following the good quality works of the rest of this series.
For a start, it maintains a neutral tone, attempting to show why atheism is the best explanation for life rather than...
Published 14 months ago by Mr. T. E. Rochester


‹ Previous | 1 2 3 | Next ›
Most Helpful First | Newest First

68 of 71 people found the following review helpful
4.0 out of 5 stars Atheism - a very short introduction, 30 Jun 2003
By 
Jan Woodhouse "jan woodhouse" (Norfolk, UK) - See all my reviews
(REAL NAME)   
Verified Purchase(What is this?)
Julian Baggini's 'very short introduction' is timely. In a world which - commendably - is increasingly multicultural and respectful of diversity (including religious diversity), atheism finds itself out on a limb and needing to defend itself.
Perhaps (and I am one of the already converted) this shouldn't be necessary. J Baggini invokes an analogy whereby 'Nessies'- those who believe in a Loch Ness Monster - become the norm, so that unbelievers need to be labelled 'Annessies'. Similarly, in a world where so many people believe in a god or gods, 'atheism has come to be defined in contrast to theism'.
J Baggini sets out to do several important things. Firstly, he promotes a positive case for atheism, making clear that it is not to be equated with negativity and denial. Secondly, he separates morality and ethics from both theism and atheism, shifting responsibility on to individual choice. Thirdly, he dispels the notion that without religion life becomes meaningless and purposeless, and suggests that sufficient purpose can be gained from living in the world we know rather than in some nebulous hereafter. Fourthly, he shows that atheism is part of a historic progression from superstition to rational explanation. Finally - and importantly - he advocates the 'quiet voice of reason', rather than dogmatic and table-thumping atheism. Militancy from any point of view, he recognises, begets increased defensiveness and entrenchment.
I hope that this little book, with its quiet voice of reason, gives food for thought, and even reasurrance, to those who may be hovering on the brink of atheism and, for whatever reason, feel hesitation in coming out.
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews 
Was this review helpful to you? Yes No


10 of 10 people found the following review helpful
4.0 out of 5 stars A tour of atheism - quicker and gentler than usual!, 24 Sep 2009
For the most part, this Very Short Introduction is a lively and enjoyable little guide which sets out to counter various myths about atheism and to make it more palatable to the non-atheist. Author Baggini breezes through a handful of key areas - ethics, purpose, history, and so on - bringing his admirable philosophical knowledge to bear on each contending argument, and presenting it in a down-to-earth and amiable style.

One pivotal area of contention in the theist-atheist debate is how to define atheism. Here, Baggini chooses to define it as "a positive belief system" rather than as a term of negation. Personally, I've always felt more comfortable with the latter approach (a-theism = 'lack of' theism) and wondered if perhaps Baggini, in his eagerness to counter the impression that atheists are "lacking" meaning, morality, happiness, etc, had let this concern drive his decision to turn it into a positive.

To his credit, he develops his argument well and, in an extended discussion about evidence, counters the common charges, such as the one about atheism being a faith position. Still, it's hard not to feel that his approach just serves to introduce a layer of unnecessary confusion to the distinction between theist and atheist, and I have to admit I remain unconvinced that it's strictly necessary. (Incidentally, on this issue, I highly recommend George H Smith's Atheism: The Case against God.)

Just a couple of gripes to mention: The photos throughout are seriously superfluous, particularly given how space is at such a premium. (Did we really need a stock photo of a man looking thoughtful while sipping coffee to illustrate the discussion on acts of faith?) Also I wasn't entirely comfortable with his categorisation of 'militant atheism'. More productive to stick to tackling the beliefs and approaches themselves, I think, rather than stating what is and isn't militant.

He does however make plenty of fine points, particularly on morality and life after death. The three big arguments - cosmological, teleological and ontological - are dealt with swiftly but cogently. On the whole then, this is an enjoyable and quite different read from many of the current crop of atheist titles. Pacy. Modest. Less combative. Despite my issue with how he has defined atheism, I found this to be a genuinely stimulating read, and a worthy addition to the sceptic's canon.
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews 
Was this review helpful to you? Yes No


26 of 29 people found the following review helpful
5.0 out of 5 stars A great small book - powerful but not militant, 5 Oct 2005
By 
Michael Murauer "mmurauer" (Deggendorf; Niederbayern) - See all my reviews
(REAL NAME)   
Let me just tell what I like especially about this concentrated presentation of arguments for atheism. Baggini always keeps a realistic sight on psychological und social facts. He starts off describing how religious education - though experienced in a moderate and relatively little indoctrinating form - nevertheless succeeded in embedding in his mind a connection of atheism and moral inferiority to stay for ever at least on a half-conscious, emotional level. An experience probably not to unusual and - apart from this - pointing to the general limits of changing convictions by rational argument. Later he demonstrates very convincingly why we shouldn't consider theism and atheism to be just intellectually equal types of faith: "The atheist believes in what she has good reason to believe in and doesn't believe in supernatural entities that there are few reasons to believe in, none of them strong. If this is a faith position then the amount of faith required is extremely small." In chapters on "Atheist ethics" and "Meaning and purpose" the author does away with the prejudice that atheism is just or predominantly negative. Very rewarding in the historical section on atheism is the discussion how far atheism might to be blamed for the crimes of totalitarian leaders and ideologies in the 20th century. Just read the book. It fits in your pocket to be taken everywhere!
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews 
Was this review helpful to you? Yes No


22 of 25 people found the following review helpful
5.0 out of 5 stars "Why I Am Not a Christian...", 13 May 2007
By 
... and neither a follower of whatsoever other faiths else.

This book is about a strange thing, a non-belief that has got its own name. We do not have words for people who do not believe in unicorns, or not in astrology, but people who do not believe in gods are called atheists. Only the disbelief in gods seems important that westerners coined a special term for it.

Though persecution of nonbelievers has gone out of fashion in most parts of the civilized world, prejudices about atheism and atheists are still abundant - even among the more liberal believers.

Philosopher Julian Baggini explains in plain and clear terms what atheism is, and what it is not, how individual atheists' positions differ, and which reasons atheists give for their nonbeliefs. He discusses why atheism isn't a faith in itself (though a few atheists are strong believers in something else), if being religious is necessary for moral behaviour, and other basic concepts and misconceptions.

Baggini does not try to convert anyone, but presents a very balanced perspective on atheism. Religions are mainly discussed as sets of beliefs, not as social or psychological phenomena. Understanding why people believe would probably shed some crucial light on why others don't.

To be fair, the question why people believe is an open and delicate one, and it is clearly one beyond the book's scope and intentions. Those interested in such questions, believers and non-believers alike, should probably consult P. Boyer's "Religion Explained" or D. C. Dennett's "Breaking the Spell". - The same is true for those who'd like a more thorough and rigid discussion of the philosophical arguments; B. Russell's writings might provide accessible starting points, as do many of the books from Baggini's "further reading" list.

I would recommend Baggini's well-written book to anyone who wants to get a general picture of atheism, or to any atheist who liked to explain or even justify his "unfaith" to others. Those looking for a critique of religion(s), or an explanation why people believe in them, or sociological facts on atheists and theists, should look someplace else.

This very short introduction does exactly what one could expect - nothing more, but also nothing less, and in a very readable and clear way.
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews 
Was this review helpful to you? Yes No


21 of 24 people found the following review helpful
5.0 out of 5 stars Required reading for anybody considering calling themselves an Atheist., 18 Dec 2006
By 
M. J. Bridges (Newcastle upon Tyne) - See all my reviews
(REAL NAME)   
Verified Purchase(What is this?)
I think one of the main problems Atheism faces is not only misunderstanding from those who are theistic, but a lack effort to understand what Atheism really is by the secular, and even some who would consider themselves to be Atheistic. I've always considered the notion of God and the following of Religion to be self evidently preposterous, but until recently I didn't have more of an explanation for my own beliefs than that negative explanation. This book gives a very readable, very practical, and yes, very short explanation of what Atheism positively involves, rather than just what it rejects.

The quote on the back of the book reads "The best short explanation of the best explanation", which is the best short review of this book.
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews 
Was this review helpful to you? Yes No


2 of 2 people found the following review helpful
4.0 out of 5 stars A philosophical introduction, 25 April 2011
By 
Peter Reeve (Thousand Oaks, CA USA) - See all my reviews
(VINE VOICE)    (REAL NAME)   
This entry in the OUP's A Very Short Introduction series is by Julian Baggini, a philosopher and the author of several philosophical works written for a general readership. He is co-founder and editor-in-chief of The Philosophers' Magazine, and also has quite an interesting website.

I was happily working my way through this series when I discovered the A Brief Insight series. They have the same texts, but the print is larger, they are hardcover, and they have many more illustrations, many in colour. So unless you want a very small book that you can slip into a pocket, the Brief Insight versions are better.

Baggini defines atheism as a belief that deities do not exist, but falling short of a dogmatic assertion that they do not. He distances himself from militant atheism. He presents a positive view of atheism rather than a negative view of religion. Perhaps more controversially, he associates atheism with naturalism (the belief that there is only the natural world and not a supernatural one) but the more extreme view, eliminative materialism, he strongly rejects.

The approach throughout is very much that of an academic philosopher. Social and sociobiological approaches are neglected. This is most apparent in Chapter 3, on Atheist Ethics. Baggini gives quite a technical account of a philosophical basis for atheistic ethics, reaching back to Plato, Aristotle and others to make his case. It is interesting, but completely overlooks the simpler and more obvious point that morality is evolutionarily adaptive. Natural selection has produced a moral animal. Baggini is more interested in the details of the various moral codes that philosophers have devised rather than the empirical fact that most of us implicitly follow some sort of moral code by nature.

If, like me, you are working your way through the VSI (or BI) series, then you can be assured that this is a worthy entry. If you want a philosophical insight into the subject, this is an excellent choice. If you would welcome more historical, social and psychological insights, then there are better books out there.
[PeterReeve]
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews 
Was this review helpful to you? Yes No


48 of 57 people found the following review helpful
5.0 out of 5 stars An excellent introduction, but not for everyone, 21 Oct 2003
By A Customer
If you're atheist or that side of agnostism, this is an excellent little book. It presents a positive and rational case for atheism, based on a naturalistic (or humanistic) approach. Of particular interest are the sketched arguments for why atheists can be moral, good, purposeful and productive (and not twisted and evil), without the need for otherwordly guidance. I found it a heartening book as I feel it presents a pithy case for why not all atheists are dogmatic religion bashers. Atheists simply don't believe in supernatural explanation -- just natural ones. But they can have these beliefs with their morallity, rationality and dignity intact.
But this book isn't for everyone. For people who do have faith (of whatever type) in the supernatural, the arguments and comments presented will simply be either offensive or blatantly and barkingly wrong! To the atheist they will be rational and well argued.
Overall, an excellent contribution to the VSI series.
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews 
Was this review helpful to you? Yes No


12 of 14 people found the following review helpful
4.0 out of 5 stars Short - and sharp, 4 Feb 2007
In "Atheism: A Very Short Introduction" Julian Baggini has done his job with impressive efficiency. There is neat and clear coverage of the critical topics: morality and purpose with and without God, the nature of knowledge, and the relationship of atheism and science, amongst others. More technical philosophical concepts (defeasibility, consequentialism) aren't avoided but are brought in with a minimum of fuss and crisp explanation.

While the book is principally aiming to describe and explain some venerable arguments, Baggini also introduces his own perspective. There is a heartening emphasis throughout on the positive nature of atheism; on living a reflective life based on best evidence, rationality, and an ethics rooted in human realities. Some excellent material argues why agnosticism is unsatisfactory. This centres on the notion of abduction, or "argument to the best explanation": there are no knock-down reasons for or against belief in God; the case against is not absolute, but it is absolutely overwhelming for anyone whose standards are evidence and rational argument.

This lack of an absolute case against the existence of God leads Baggini to reject what he terms militant atheism - that is an active hostility to even moderate religion. He thinks religion is false and has the potential, at least, for harm, but takes the principled stance that in the absence of absolute evidence, an aggressive assertion of the truth of atheism is dogmatic, and contrary to the spirit of open enquiry. This is impressive, right and can make some of his text a bit timid. However, it is a well-made definition of a recognisable position, especially as it is contrasted with "fundamentalist atheism", the latter being restricted to violence against the religious. This is a useful separation given the increasingly frequent rhetorical move to call any atheism asserting its better claim to truth "fundamentalist".
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews 
Was this review helpful to you? Yes No


1 of 1 people found the following review helpful
4.0 out of 5 stars A useful overview suggesting some new interpretations, 25 July 2012
By 
Geoff Crocker (Bristol UK) - See all my reviews
(REAL NAME)   
Julian Baggini presents a rather moderated case for atheism, based on the argument that naturalism is the best explanation of existence. His chapter 2 on the case for atheism focuses more on questions of intellectual methodology. He could have made a stronger, more conclusive case by including more on issues such as the moral failure of religion in history, the challenge to belief of two terrible continental wars, the massive challenge of evolution to creationist belief, etc. It's not in fact entirely clear whether the book is a short academic study on atheism, or an argument for atheism, and this uncertainty may account for its understatement of the case for atheism. He does highlight the role of the Enlightenment in celebrating rationality and thereby forcing an atheist conclusion, although not all Enlightenment philosophers were in fact atheist (d'Holbach, La Mettrie, Spinoza and Hume were, but Locke, Vico, Voltaire and Rousseau were deists).

It's strange that he doesn't anywhere mention Darwin and the huge impact of the contemporary Darwin/Mendel/Hamilton synthesis in biology, which certainly underpins much contemporary academic atheism. Dawkins gets one fleeting reference in his refutation of the watchmaker argument in William Paley's `Natural Theology'. One suspects that this is due to Baggini's opposition to dogmatic atheist positions which he terms `militant', which is a welcome open minded approach, but thereby leaves the coverage incomplete.

He is entirely correct in pointing out that religion offers no advantage in defining morality, since positing God as the source of ethics makes morality arbitrary, but also because this approach fatally removes any human moral agency. The same goes for meaning and purpose in life where, contrary to popular assumption, religion adds nothing.

Baggini rightly critiques physicalism for its lack of an account of metaphysical phenomena such as intellectual ideas and emotional feeling. It specifically has no account either of truth or of virtue. He remains sympathetic to religion, mainly out of tolerance. He cites the alternative paradigm of religion advanced by Don Cupitt, but without explicating it. These observations would benefit from further development, even within the confines of this short introduction. Human spirituality does exist, even for an atheist world view. Physicalism can only drive us further into consumerism. If we care about what sort of people we are, and what sort of society we live in, then atheism needs a spirituality. Religion interpreted as doctrine and truth statements has failed, but freshly interpreted as myth, may well have a significant contribution to make to atheism. The virtues celebrated by the French atheist philosopher André Comte-Sponville in his `A Short Treatise on the Great Virtues' become the new divine.

Geoff Crocker
Author `An Enlightened Philosophy - Can an Atheist Believe Anything?'
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews 
Was this review helpful to you? Yes No


5 of 6 people found the following review helpful
5.0 out of 5 stars Atheism - The Only Proposition Supported By The Evidence, 7 Aug 2008
By 
Fred "The Book Adder" (Auckland, New Zealand) - See all my reviews
Verified Purchase(What is this?)
If you've ever wondered what an atheist really thinks then this book is a pretty accurate account. If you are an atheist then this book summarises the main philosophical and evidential stances that makes atheism such a strong position.

The book shows how tough it is to deny the evidence for the universe lacking a 'father figure' like any of the gods proposed by various religions throughout the ages. An atheist is simply someone who has looked at the evidence, perused the holy books and found the claims to be severley wanting. Atheism is a view that is well supported by the evidence and is a claim that there are no supernatural forces at work in the universe. Many of the usual arguments for God's existence simply violate the rules of rationality that we all adopt in other areas of our life. Atheism is simply applying those same standards of evidence to the proposition of the existence of Gods. For instance, the absence of evidence isn't absence of evidence argument is often wheeled out as some form of proof of God's existence. However, this same stance could be applied to the Loch Ness monster - a beast that has been thoroughly searched for yet no reliable or credible evidence has been found. The absence of evidence for such an entity following a thorough search can be seen as clear evidence of absence.

Baggini also clears up the agnostic-atheism debate quite nicely by saying that we can never reliably know anything with 100% certainty (except for maybe 1+1=2). since we cannot know 100% doesn't necessarily mean the evidence leaves a 50/50 probability of a proposition or its opposite being true. This is something we apply in real life... I don't know if there is or isn't a china teapot orbiting the Earth, but is it really wise to be agnostic about such a proposition. We don't believe in anything in life (rationally) without evidence for it. The is no evidence for God and hence no reason to believe. In fact the evidence is strongly in favour of naturalistic forces and therefore the proposition of Atheism.

The book discusses nicely how morality is separate from God and that both theists and non-theists are still responsible for their moral choices.

What of the meaning of life? Do we need God to find meaning in life? The notion that we survive our death, while flying in the face of the evidence that consciousness dies with the brain, rather detracts from the meaning of life. When one faces life face on as the only life they will get then meaning takes on a new dimension.

Theists can deny the profound arguments based in this book but they must do so in opposition to the evidence. Atheists do not have the luxury as their beliefs by definition are constrained to natural evidence... as the natural world is all we can actually know anything about.
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews 
Was this review helpful to you? Yes No


‹ Previous | 1 2 3 | Next ›
Most Helpful First | Newest First

This product

Only search this product's reviews