Malaysia-based online bookstore - 15 million titles - quick local delivery with tracking number
The central contention of the New Atheism of Richard Dawkins, Daniel Dennett, Sam Harris, and Christopher Hitchens is that there has for several centuries been a war between science and religion, that religion has been steadily losing that war, and that at this point in human history a completely secular scientific account of the world has been worked out in such thorough and convincing detail that there is no longer any reason why a rational and educated person should find the claims of any religion the least bit worthy of attention.
But as Edward Feser argues inThe Last Superstition, in fact there is not, and never has been, any war between science and religion at all. There has instead been a conflict between two entirely philosophical conceptions of the natural order: on the one hand, the classical teleological vision of Plato, Aristotle, Augustine, and Aquinas, on which purpose or goal-directedness is as inherent a feature of the physical world as mass or electric charge; and the modern mechanical vision of Descartes, Hobbes, Locke, and Hume, according to which the physical world is comprised of nothing more than purposeless, meaningless particles in motion. As it happens, on the classical teleological picture, the existence of God, the immortality of the soul, and the natural-law conception of morality are rationally unavoidable. Modern atheism and secularism have thus always crucially depended for their rational credentials on the insinuation that the modern, mechanical picture of the world has somehow been established by science. Yet this modern mechanical picture has never been established by science, and cannot be, for it is not a scientific theory in the first place but merely a philosophical interpretation of science. Moreover, as Feser shows, the philosophical arguments in its favor given by the early modern philosophers were notable only for being surprisingly weak. The true reasons for its popularity were then, and are now, primarily political: It was a tool by which the intellectual foundations of ecclesiastical authority could be undermined and the way opened toward a new secular and liberal social order oriented toward commerce and technology. So as to further these political ends, it was simply stipulated, by fiat as it were, that no theory inconsistent with the mechanical picture of the world would be allowed to count as scientific. As the centuries have worn on and historical memory has dimmed, this act of dogmatic stipulation has falsely come to be remembered as a discovery.
However, not only is this modern philosophical picture rationally unfounded, it is demonstrably false. For the mechanical conception of the natural world, when worked out consistently, absurdly entails that rationality, and indeed the human mind itself, are illusory. The so-called scientific worldview championed by the New Atheists thus inevitably undermines its own rational foundations; and into the bargain (and contrary to the moralistic posturing of the New Atheists) it undermines the foundations of any possible morality as well. By contrast, and as The Last Superstition demonstrates, the classical teleological picture of nature can be seen to find powerful confirmation in developments from contemporary philosophy, biology, and physics; moreover, morality and reason itself cannot possibly be made sense of apart from it. The teleological vision of the ancients and medievals is thereby rationally vindicated - and with it the religious worldview they based upon it.
Every human culture has evolved religious practices. Clearly, there is something inherent in humanity about religiosity: it must fulfill certain needs that evolved with us as our modern brains developed.
ATHEOPAGANISM explores how the evolution of proceeding brain systems contributed to the belief systems, value sets and religious practices that characterize cultures all over the world. And then it implements this understanding of the nature of religion in a science-consistent religious practice that fulfills the human need for meaning, connectedness, inspiration and purpose.
There is but one form of human enslavement more villainous and more detestable than the chains of the tyrant or the shackles of the despot, and that is the enslavement of the human mind under ecclesiastical tyranny, whose cowering and crouching victims at the crack of the priestly lash are driven from the cultivation of their own intelligence, from the custody of their own thoughts, from the guardianship of their own souls, and who, like whipt dogs, trembling and whining in abject submission at the feet of the oppressor, lick the very hand that wields the lash. I'm well aware what a thankless task it is to attack the established order of things, theological, political or ethical, for in my long life I have often heard raised the old cry in different form: Great is Diana of the Ephesians but I make no excuse or apology for my little book.
If it shall turn a single man or woman away from the old path of Superstition, for so many centuries beaten hard and smooth by the tread of millions of poor tired human feet pressing forward in the dust of outworn ecclesiastical props that line the way in search of something they never can find, I will be satisfied.
I owe this dear country something for my enjoyment all these years of the priceless privilege of liberty and the pursuit of happiness, and this be my gift to my countrymen, for I set no copyright upon it; it belongs to anybody who can use it, and if the clerics, theologs, sacerdotes, et id omne genus, can't bless it - which I should hardly expect, let them use it as a remedy for torpid liver and heartily curse it.
I have only one favor to ask of any man or woman who may pick it up, and that is: Read it through before you pass judgment upon it.
I'm entitled to that much consideration anyway. If monarchs only had the time to read the petitions tremblingly handed up to them, there would be more justice done in the world.
--Ingersoll Lockwood
It's an inspiring book that will--hopefully--push us toward a larger cultural conversation in which 'atheism' isn't seen as a dirty word.--The Humanist
America doesn't need more God. It needs more atheists. Here's an impassioned call for nonbelievers to be honest with themselves and their families about their lack of belief--and help change the American cultural conversation.
Even though a growing number of Americans don't believe in god, many remain reluctant to say so out loud. Kate Cohen argues that not only is it rewarding for those of little faith to announce themselves, it's crucial to our country's future. As she details the challenges and joys of fully embracing atheism--especially as a parent--Washington Post contributing columnist Kate Cohen does not dismiss religion as dangerous or silly. Instead, she investigates religion's appeal in order to explain the ways we can thrive without it. Americans who don't believe in god call themselves atheists, agnostics, humanists, skeptics, and freethinkers. Sometimes they are called nones, based on the box they checked on a survey identifying their religion. And sometimes they call themselves Jewish, Christian, Muslim, or Buddhist. Whatever you call yourself, if you don't believe there's a supernatural being in charge of the universe, it's time to join the chorus of We of Little Faith.
Editors Denis Alexander and Alister McGrath gather other intelligent minds from around the world to share their startling commonality: Richard Dawkins and his fellow New Atheists were instrumental in their conversions to Christianity.
Despite a wide range of backgrounds and cultures, all are united in the fact that they were first enthusiasts for the claims and writings of the New Atheists. But each became disillusioned by the arguments and conclusions of Dawkins, causing them to look deeper and with more objectivity at religious faith. The fallacies of Christianity Dawkins warns of simply don't exist.
Spending time in this fascinating and powerful book is like being invited to the most interesting dinner party you've ever attended. Listen as twelve men and women from five different countries across a variety of professions--philosophers, artists, historians, engineers, scientists, and more--explain their journeys from atheism to faith. In the end, you may come away having reached the same conclusion: authentic Christian faith is in fact more intellectually convincing and rational than New Atheism.
Lucid as well as exhilarating and wide-ranging.
Sometimes generally referred to as the nones, agnostics, atheists, humanists, freethinkers, secularists and skeptics compose one of the fastest growing faith categories in the United States. Because they are treated as nones, some people face discrimination as nonbelievers, despite their varied and strong beliefs, values and morals. This basic guide, 100 Questions and Answers About the Religiously Unaffiliated, describes the differences, explains why discrimination and laws force some to hide their beliefs and why they would like to shed the label of nones. Religious freedom and the First Amendment's establishment clause come up frequently.
The key issue for many is whether the First Amendment's guarantee of religious freedom also guarantees the right to be free from religion.
Legal issues include school prayer, the obligation to support tax-exempt religious properties and requirements that people profess belief in God to be allowed to vote or hold office.
Life magazine called Madalyn Murray O'Hair, whose lawsuit ended mandatory prayer in public schools, the most hated woman in America. The Secular Coalition for America's website directory withheld the name of its communications consultant because unwarranted prejudices and discriminatory practices ... affect atheists and humanists. Consequently, s/he felt it was best to be incognito for now, since working for an organization that protects the rights of nontheists might result in lost opportunities with other clients.
In this guide's forward, Dr. Phil Zuckerman writes, Understanding secular people is important for many reasons. For one thing, secular movements, leaders, values and ideals play significant roles in the political landscapes of the world. From the first sentence of the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, to Article 20 of Japan's Constitution, from France's laïcité to Vietnam's atheistic dictatorship, and from the founding of the Mexican Republic to India's current political struggles, in many countries secularism is a central pillar of both stability as well as conflict.
Additionally, secular men and women are often unjustly stigmatized as immoral scoundrels or angry curmudgeons - negative stereotypes that don't actually accord with reality yet prove to be both persistent and pernicious. For instance, in some societies, such as Saudi Arabia, Pakistan and Malaysia, hatred and fear of the secular is so strong that those who don't believe in God can be imprisoned, tortured or even executed. Here in the United States, many state constitutions - such as those of Tennessee, Texas and Mississippi - currently outlaw anyone who doesn't believe in God from holding any publicly elected office.
Dr. Morgan Shipley's introduction says, For the more than 85 million Americans who identify as nonreligious, we witness a turn to secularization as both an explanation for the lack of belief and a source for fulfilling the areas of life commonly associated with religion, such as morality, togetherness and agency. For the nonreligious, then, we find more than a rejection of God and faith. Instead, we uncover various ways humans highlight virtue, pursue a sense of belongingness, celebrate progress and rely on rational discourse to construct meaningful and morally driven lives.
Questions include:
An unabridged edition to include original scripture and footnotes, with quotes by the author at book's end, 'There are many prayers that it would not be right to pray in public, but they are very dear to God's ear in private.'
What if religions are neither all true nor all nonsense? Alain de Botton's bold and provocative book argues that we can benefit from the wisdom and power of religion--without having to believe in any of it.
He suggests that rather than mocking religion, agnostics and atheists should instead steal from it--because the world's religions are packed with good ideas on how we might live and arrange our societies. De Botton looks to religion for insights into how to build a sense of community, make relationships last, overcome feelings of envy and inadequacy, inspire travel, get more out of art, and reconnect with the natural world. For too long non-believers have faced a stark choice between swallowing lots of peculiar doctrines or doing away with a range of consoling and beautiful rituals and ideas. Religion for Atheists offers a far more interesting and truly helpful alternative.