What do you think?
Rate this book
50 Reasons People Give for Believing in a God
Many books that challenge religious belief from a skeptical point of view take a combative tone that is almost guaranteed to alienate believers or they present complex philosophical or scientific arguments that fail to reach the average reader. This is undoubtably an ineffective way of encouraging people to develop critical thinking about religion. This unique approach to skepticism presents fifty commonly heard reasons people often give for believing in a God and then raises legitimate questions regarding these reasons, showing in each case that there is much room for doubt. Whether you're a believer, a complete skeptic, or somewhere in between, you'll find this review of traditional and more recent arguments for the existence of God refreshing, approachable, and enlightening.From religion as the foundation of morality to the authority of sacred books, the compelling religious testimony of influential people, near-death experiences, arguments from Intelligent Design, and much more, Harrison respectfully describes each rationale for belief and then politely shows the deficiencies that any good skeptic would point out. As a journalist who has traveled widely and interviewed many highly accomplished people, quite a number of whom are believers, the author appreciates the variety of belief and the ways in which people seek to make religion compatible with scientific thought. Nonetheless, he shows that, despite the prevalence of belief in God or religious belief in intelligent people, in the end there are no unassailable reasons for believing in a God.For skeptics looking for appealing ways to approach their believing friends or believers who are not afraid to consider a skeptical challenge, this book makes for very stimulating reading.
354 pages, Paperback
First published June 5, 2008
132 people are currently reading
3912 people want to read
About the author
Guy P. Harrison
9 books105 followersI have a deep passion for science, history, anthropology, and nature. My mission is to inform and inspire as many people as I can about the workings and content of our world and universe. Reality is infinitely beautiful and endlessly fascinating. It's tragic that some people never quite glimpse the wonder of it all. Please don't be one of those people. I want you to be fully alive and awake as a human being.
Science is a body of knowledge and a practical tool available for everyone everywhere. Professional historians, anthropologists, and archaeologists tell the human story--your story. Listen to them. You live in exciting times because so much remains to be discovered and understood. In a sense, your home is an alien world filled with mystery and surprises. Learn, explore, dream. The more we know, the more we can imagine. The more we can imagine, the more we can do.
I am a positive and constructive skeptic. Think of me as a human who warns humans about being human. I use my imperfect brain to talk and write about the human brain's imperfections. I try to overcome my irrational beliefs and subconscious miscues so that I may better teach others about the problems of irrational belief and subconscious miscues.
I believe that our world could be much better - and a lot less crazy - if more people simply understood how science works and appreciated the protective value of scientific thinking in everyday life.
I've held numerous positions in the news industry, including editorial writer, world news editor, sports editor, photographer, page designer, and columnist. I've traveled extensively, having visited 30 countries on six continents. I have also had some very rewarding jobs teaching history and science to bright kids. My degree is in history and anthropology (University of South Florida). I've won some nice international awards for my writing and photography, including the WHO (World Health Organization) Award for Health Reporting and the Commonwealth Media Award for Excellence in Journalism.
What I am most proud of in relation to my work is that my writing has touched and helped many people. I consistently receive messages from around the world and it's always rewarding to learn that my words have inspired one more person to think in new and better ways.
When I'm not staring at a blank computer screen hoping my subconscious will deliver the next word, I'm likely running, hiking, reading, or teaching critical life lessons to my children via repeated viewings of Star Trek. When normal people are consumed with thoughts of politics, economics, or the Kardashians, there's a good chance I'll be daydreaming about time travel, the Singularity, ancient Greece, microbial life, the possibility of extraterrestrial life, World War II, robots, interstellar space travel, viruses, Homo erectus, the Apollo Moon landings . . .
Science is a body of knowledge and a practical tool available for everyone everywhere. Professional historians, anthropologists, and archaeologists tell the human story--your story. Listen to them. You live in exciting times because so much remains to be discovered and understood. In a sense, your home is an alien world filled with mystery and surprises. Learn, explore, dream. The more we know, the more we can imagine. The more we can imagine, the more we can do.
I am a positive and constructive skeptic. Think of me as a human who warns humans about being human. I use my imperfect brain to talk and write about the human brain's imperfections. I try to overcome my irrational beliefs and subconscious miscues so that I may better teach others about the problems of irrational belief and subconscious miscues.
I believe that our world could be much better - and a lot less crazy - if more people simply understood how science works and appreciated the protective value of scientific thinking in everyday life.
I've held numerous positions in the news industry, including editorial writer, world news editor, sports editor, photographer, page designer, and columnist. I've traveled extensively, having visited 30 countries on six continents. I have also had some very rewarding jobs teaching history and science to bright kids. My degree is in history and anthropology (University of South Florida). I've won some nice international awards for my writing and photography, including the WHO (World Health Organization) Award for Health Reporting and the Commonwealth Media Award for Excellence in Journalism.
What I am most proud of in relation to my work is that my writing has touched and helped many people. I consistently receive messages from around the world and it's always rewarding to learn that my words have inspired one more person to think in new and better ways.
When I'm not staring at a blank computer screen hoping my subconscious will deliver the next word, I'm likely running, hiking, reading, or teaching critical life lessons to my children via repeated viewings of Star Trek. When normal people are consumed with thoughts of politics, economics, or the Kardashians, there's a good chance I'll be daydreaming about time travel, the Singularity, ancient Greece, microbial life, the possibility of extraterrestrial life, World War II, robots, interstellar space travel, viruses, Homo erectus, the Apollo Moon landings . . .
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 105 reviews
October 27, 2008
When I heard the author (Guy Harrison) interviewed on the Point of Inquiry podcast, he felt that the main audience for the book is believers. Frankly, I think he's deluding himself. People (religious and nonreligious alike) generally read books that confirm their beliefs, not books seeking to dissuade them. I just don't see a religious person reading this book through unless he/she wanted to refute it. Perhaps it would be read by a believer who is starting to doubt his/her religion.
That said, it's a remarkable book. Guy Harrison is correct IMO that most books for atheists are too militant. 50 Reasons offers a softer, conversational approach. It's a nice manual for athiests and secular humanists to use in conversation with their religious friends and family members. Points raised in this book can be used to encourage believers to think critically about their religion. Chapter 20 in particular ("Athiests are jerks who think they know everything") really gets at how to dialogue best with believers. Harrison suggests questioning the believer rather than badgering them with arguments.
Harrison systematically and gently exposes the logical fallacy behind each reason for believing in a god. He offers tons of useful arguments for the athiest or secular humanist to use when discussing religion with believers. The nice thing is, the arguments aren't necessarily argumentative. An athiest and believer could enjoy a nice meal together while discussing any of these reasons.
I sincerely hope that this books gets into wide circulation among athiests, secular humanists, and the skeptical community at large. It's very useful and will open many more minds than The God Delusion ever could.
The book is consisely organized with one chapter per reason, a brief introduction and no afterward. A bibliography and recommended reading list follow each reason. The language is for the layperson and very easy to read.
Edited to add: As I read more of the 50 Reasons, it seems like a lot of the atheist's comebacks revolve around the multiplicity of religions. How do you know which holy book is true? Must be none of them. How do you rectify a Christian who has heard words directly from Jesus and a Muslim who has heard Allah speak to him? Both experiences can't be real. And so it goes. A good argument, but don't expect a new and different comeback for each of the 50 Reasons that Harrison lists.
That said, it's a remarkable book. Guy Harrison is correct IMO that most books for atheists are too militant. 50 Reasons offers a softer, conversational approach. It's a nice manual for athiests and secular humanists to use in conversation with their religious friends and family members. Points raised in this book can be used to encourage believers to think critically about their religion. Chapter 20 in particular ("Athiests are jerks who think they know everything") really gets at how to dialogue best with believers. Harrison suggests questioning the believer rather than badgering them with arguments.
Harrison systematically and gently exposes the logical fallacy behind each reason for believing in a god. He offers tons of useful arguments for the athiest or secular humanist to use when discussing religion with believers. The nice thing is, the arguments aren't necessarily argumentative. An athiest and believer could enjoy a nice meal together while discussing any of these reasons.
I sincerely hope that this books gets into wide circulation among athiests, secular humanists, and the skeptical community at large. It's very useful and will open many more minds than The God Delusion ever could.
The book is consisely organized with one chapter per reason, a brief introduction and no afterward. A bibliography and recommended reading list follow each reason. The language is for the layperson and very easy to read.
Edited to add: As I read more of the 50 Reasons, it seems like a lot of the atheist's comebacks revolve around the multiplicity of religions. How do you know which holy book is true? Must be none of them. How do you rectify a Christian who has heard words directly from Jesus and a Muslim who has heard Allah speak to him? Both experiences can't be real. And so it goes. A good argument, but don't expect a new and different comeback for each of the 50 Reasons that Harrison lists.
October 1, 2010
I read Harrison's book for an online book club some time ago, and found it to be, for the most part, exactly what I was expecting. Admittedly, I am a Christian (in an very, very heterodox, liberal sense), but I don't think that renders me a "biased" reader.
There's one major problem with Harrison's approach. He writes with a wrong-headed attitude - he expects to be convinced definitively one way or another of the existance of God with scientific evidence. Any intellectually honest Christian will admit to you that God is not something you reach by reasoning or logic; rather, it is the process of an existential, Kierkegaardian leap of faith in something beyond and above one's self. Therefore, all he really refutes is the religion of the fundamentalist, which isn't really religion at all - it's just a set of unquestioned dogma.
I get the firm impression that Mr. Harrison isn't familiar with more intellectually complex and honest forms of religion and their various theologies. Nowhere does he discuss Paul Tillich or Reinhold Niebuhr or Dietrich Bonhoeffer or any other theologians who appreciate the complexity and ecumenical natures of their faith. Harrison doesn't try to appreciate any of this. He wants scientific proof, when any one of the above would have told you flat out that science cannot prove the basic tenets of Christianity. So it seems that this entire book was written attempting to get an answer that he already had. Essentially, both writing it and reading it were a waste of time.
There's one major problem with Harrison's approach. He writes with a wrong-headed attitude - he expects to be convinced definitively one way or another of the existance of God with scientific evidence. Any intellectually honest Christian will admit to you that God is not something you reach by reasoning or logic; rather, it is the process of an existential, Kierkegaardian leap of faith in something beyond and above one's self. Therefore, all he really refutes is the religion of the fundamentalist, which isn't really religion at all - it's just a set of unquestioned dogma.
I get the firm impression that Mr. Harrison isn't familiar with more intellectually complex and honest forms of religion and their various theologies. Nowhere does he discuss Paul Tillich or Reinhold Niebuhr or Dietrich Bonhoeffer or any other theologians who appreciate the complexity and ecumenical natures of their faith. Harrison doesn't try to appreciate any of this. He wants scientific proof, when any one of the above would have told you flat out that science cannot prove the basic tenets of Christianity. So it seems that this entire book was written attempting to get an answer that he already had. Essentially, both writing it and reading it were a waste of time.
October 22, 2010
This is the atheism book many have been waiting for! Much as I admire the vigour and meticulous logic of Dawkins, Hitchens and co, much as I share their frustration that religion has for too long been too elevated from challenge, I have to concede one criticism: their books will most likely appear off-putting to 'the average believer'. Despite the laudable aim of encouraging people to think critically for themselves, a combative tone (scoffing at 'faith heads' and 'failed fundamentalists') ultimately blunts their power to convince. Essentially these are books for atheists, or people halfway there. They are not really books for the average believer.
This book is different. Unashamedly polite (but not nauseatingly so) and shorn of the convoluted scientific and philosophical terminology that can sometimes alienate more than it can enlighten, '50 reasons' succeeds in making a courteous yet thoroughly convincing case against religious belief. Harrison understands that if you are serious about wanting to convince a believer, then you absolutely cannot afford to neglect the task of connecting with them. People often forget that religious faith has pay-offs beyond the simple matter of truth. Merely hitting them over the head with reason and ridicule is doomed to fail.
Taking the form of short (6-8 page) answers to the 50 common reasons for believing in a god, each counter-argument is concise yet thorough. The reasons are well-chosen, and will be familiar to those of us who have ever debated religion - from the authenticity of scripture, to the question of how so many people can possibly be wrong about something for so long. Interestingly, Harrison also includes several less commonly heard reasons ("I am afraid of not believing" ... "Someone I trust told me that my god is real") which go some way to showing that his interest lies more broadly in offering fellow humans a hand up from irrational beliefs rather than just point-scoring and winning arguments.
Splitting the book into 50 digestible chapters makes each argument easy to pinpoint and turns the book into a valuable resource. However it is the tone that really marks this book out from the rest: sharp, effective reasoning delivered with a clear, conversational style. He bends over backwards to be respectful, but never so far that he becomes intellectually dishonest. This is no in-depth philsophical examination, but it is by far the most appropriate atheism book I've come across for recommending to a believer. Worth reading for the atheist too, not only as a well-organised resource, but also as an example of a different - and potentially more productive - approach to debating with believers.
This book is different. Unashamedly polite (but not nauseatingly so) and shorn of the convoluted scientific and philosophical terminology that can sometimes alienate more than it can enlighten, '50 reasons' succeeds in making a courteous yet thoroughly convincing case against religious belief. Harrison understands that if you are serious about wanting to convince a believer, then you absolutely cannot afford to neglect the task of connecting with them. People often forget that religious faith has pay-offs beyond the simple matter of truth. Merely hitting them over the head with reason and ridicule is doomed to fail.
Taking the form of short (6-8 page) answers to the 50 common reasons for believing in a god, each counter-argument is concise yet thorough. The reasons are well-chosen, and will be familiar to those of us who have ever debated religion - from the authenticity of scripture, to the question of how so many people can possibly be wrong about something for so long. Interestingly, Harrison also includes several less commonly heard reasons ("I am afraid of not believing" ... "Someone I trust told me that my god is real") which go some way to showing that his interest lies more broadly in offering fellow humans a hand up from irrational beliefs rather than just point-scoring and winning arguments.
Splitting the book into 50 digestible chapters makes each argument easy to pinpoint and turns the book into a valuable resource. However it is the tone that really marks this book out from the rest: sharp, effective reasoning delivered with a clear, conversational style. He bends over backwards to be respectful, but never so far that he becomes intellectually dishonest. This is no in-depth philsophical examination, but it is by far the most appropriate atheism book I've come across for recommending to a believer. Worth reading for the atheist too, not only as a well-organised resource, but also as an example of a different - and potentially more productive - approach to debating with believers.
November 21, 2020
Guy Harrison takes fifty reasons people believe in a god (are there more? I can't think of any!) and in a calm, rational, and conversational manner debunks them using evidence-based reasoning and common sense. Oh, how I wish I would've had access to a book like this in my younger years as a believer. While Guy is preaching to the choir with this reader, I would find it interesting to hear what a religious person thinks of the arguments made in this book. To a former believer, it all makes perfect sense.
The book is only 354 pages long so each of the fifty chapters are short and to the point. Guy manages to keep the book entertaining and mood light and approachable with humor and a number of interesting anecdotes. He draws from his experiences in world travel and as a journalist to add depth and illustration to his points. He's been everywhere: Israel, Egypt, Syria, India, Africa, Ecuador, New Guinea, Greece, diving in the Caribbean, climbing mountains in Nepal, and other exotic locations; and he utilizes his experiences and interviews in these travels to support the points used to debunk the fifty reasons listed in the book. It sometimes reads like an exciting travelogue.
As a journalist, Guy interviewed a number of notable figures, including astronaut Gene Cernan and Anne Frank's friend, Barbara Rodbell, and uses their insights to support his points as well and / or give us a different point of view. Interesting.
One of my favorite anecdotes in the book was while Guy was on an Africa safari he took a walk away from camp and ended up blacking out in tall grass due to dehydration. He woke up in the middle of the night to find a fearsome looking Masai warrior standing over him with a spear. He was terrified so he got up, inflated his chest, and backed away while keeping an eye on the warrior. The warrior maintained eye contact but there was no confrontation and he ended up making it back to the campsite. The next day the warrior showed up at the camp and told his safari guide that he found a tourist lying in the grass and protected him during the night as there were a number of lions prowling in the area!
Guy also uses quotes to help make his points; many of which are from well known atheists such as Dawkins, Harris, Dennett, Barker, Hitchens, Kurtz, Sagan, and others, and each chapter concludes with a bibliography and a recommended reading list, many of the works listed are already familiar to the average atheist / agnostic reader.
Overall, I found his friendly tone and logical arguments very appealing. He leaves no stone unturned in his effort to dispel the reasons for believing in a supernatural entity. I'm looking forward to reading more of his books.
The book is only 354 pages long so each of the fifty chapters are short and to the point. Guy manages to keep the book entertaining and mood light and approachable with humor and a number of interesting anecdotes. He draws from his experiences in world travel and as a journalist to add depth and illustration to his points. He's been everywhere: Israel, Egypt, Syria, India, Africa, Ecuador, New Guinea, Greece, diving in the Caribbean, climbing mountains in Nepal, and other exotic locations; and he utilizes his experiences and interviews in these travels to support the points used to debunk the fifty reasons listed in the book. It sometimes reads like an exciting travelogue.
As a journalist, Guy interviewed a number of notable figures, including astronaut Gene Cernan and Anne Frank's friend, Barbara Rodbell, and uses their insights to support his points as well and / or give us a different point of view. Interesting.
One of my favorite anecdotes in the book was while Guy was on an Africa safari he took a walk away from camp and ended up blacking out in tall grass due to dehydration. He woke up in the middle of the night to find a fearsome looking Masai warrior standing over him with a spear. He was terrified so he got up, inflated his chest, and backed away while keeping an eye on the warrior. The warrior maintained eye contact but there was no confrontation and he ended up making it back to the campsite. The next day the warrior showed up at the camp and told his safari guide that he found a tourist lying in the grass and protected him during the night as there were a number of lions prowling in the area!
Guy also uses quotes to help make his points; many of which are from well known atheists such as Dawkins, Harris, Dennett, Barker, Hitchens, Kurtz, Sagan, and others, and each chapter concludes with a bibliography and a recommended reading list, many of the works listed are already familiar to the average atheist / agnostic reader.
Overall, I found his friendly tone and logical arguments very appealing. He leaves no stone unturned in his effort to dispel the reasons for believing in a supernatural entity. I'm looking forward to reading more of his books.
May 27, 2012
If you want to join the intellectual circlejerking of "I'm so much smarter than those silly theists" (and who doesn't occasionally?) go read something by Dawkins instead.
If you want a real-world, practical, helpful, nicely-toned explanation of the arguments for atheism, pick up this book.
If you want a real-world, practical, helpful, nicely-toned explanation of the arguments for atheism, pick up this book.
January 23, 2010
The Good: Harrison makes non-theism very personal. He tries to be gentle, reach out to believers, and find common ground. For example, he points out that just as Christians are not afraid of Muslim hell or the Muslim apocalypse, atheists are not afraid of Christian hell or the Christian apocalypse. I particularly enjoyed Chapter 20, "Atheists are jerks who think they know everything." It was a welcome reproof of and invitation to nonbelievers to be more compassionate and understanding. He condemns some of Richard Dawkins' writings and methods, while making it clear that he has the utmost respect for Dawkins' position and reasoning. I think that this would be a great book to give to a more moderate/liberal religious person who was seeking to understand a nonbeliever and "un-demonize" them in their mind.
The Bad: Chapter 49 is a rehash of Chapter 2, although it is a great topic. At times, Harrison can make flippant, potentially insulting comments about believers and belief. I think it would nigh impossible to not make such comments, however, and I routinely make them around believers that I love and value very much. Although many of the arguments are legitimate, they are at times so general that I can see how a believer would say, "Well, that doesn't apply to my particular belief/faith/God. Harrison obviously has no conception of how sophisticated and unique my particular theology is."
The Ugly: This isn't the most sophisticated of books. I understand that Harrison may be trying to appeal to ordinary believers on their level, but I didn't particularly enjoy the "USA Today" writing style. The grammar was wanting in some places as well. Not what I would have expected from a professional journalist.
Four stars for being a great outreach tool, despite the deficiencies in content and style.
The Bad: Chapter 49 is a rehash of Chapter 2, although it is a great topic. At times, Harrison can make flippant, potentially insulting comments about believers and belief. I think it would nigh impossible to not make such comments, however, and I routinely make them around believers that I love and value very much. Although many of the arguments are legitimate, they are at times so general that I can see how a believer would say, "Well, that doesn't apply to my particular belief/faith/God. Harrison obviously has no conception of how sophisticated and unique my particular theology is."
The Ugly: This isn't the most sophisticated of books. I understand that Harrison may be trying to appeal to ordinary believers on their level, but I didn't particularly enjoy the "USA Today" writing style. The grammar was wanting in some places as well. Not what I would have expected from a professional journalist.
Four stars for being a great outreach tool, despite the deficiencies in content and style.
July 10, 2010
This is the book I wish everybody on the planet would read. Or at least my friends and family.
The best thing about this book is that it conveys the reasoning behind atheism without being even remotely condescending toward believers. It wasn't written to convert people, or prove who's right and who's wrong. It's just trying to inform.
Not only does the book inform you about atheism and, being a book with a "western world" mindset, Christianity, but it also delves into many other world religions, some of which I've never even heard of. Harrison seems to have led a fascinating life so far, traveling the world and seeing many different types of people and cultures, and he gladly shares some of his stories and experiences while at the same time using them to illustrate the idea he's trying to convey in a given chapter.
The format of the book is ideal for this sort of topic. Each of the titular 50 reasons is given its own chapter, and each chapter can be read on its own, without having read any of the previous chapters. The chapters are, on average, about 7 pages long. This means that each chapter covers its intended topic thoroughly without going overboard with unnecessary prose or over-elaborate explanations.
No matter what you believe, this book will give you a lot to think about.
(I originally wrote this for my blog, at http://www.dubiosity.net)
The best thing about this book is that it conveys the reasoning behind atheism without being even remotely condescending toward believers. It wasn't written to convert people, or prove who's right and who's wrong. It's just trying to inform.
Not only does the book inform you about atheism and, being a book with a "western world" mindset, Christianity, but it also delves into many other world religions, some of which I've never even heard of. Harrison seems to have led a fascinating life so far, traveling the world and seeing many different types of people and cultures, and he gladly shares some of his stories and experiences while at the same time using them to illustrate the idea he's trying to convey in a given chapter.
The format of the book is ideal for this sort of topic. Each of the titular 50 reasons is given its own chapter, and each chapter can be read on its own, without having read any of the previous chapters. The chapters are, on average, about 7 pages long. This means that each chapter covers its intended topic thoroughly without going overboard with unnecessary prose or over-elaborate explanations.
No matter what you believe, this book will give you a lot to think about.
(I originally wrote this for my blog, at http://www.dubiosity.net)
August 1, 2012
Terrible logic in this book. Harrison really only brings up one actual point in his defense. That God is not scientifically provable. And he does this over 50 chapters.
He sets up straw man arguments so he can knock them down with this one point. The only thing he actually proves is that he doesn't have the first clue about what people believe and why they believe.
Add that in one chapter he brings out polls about different countries happiness level and another about belief in God or gods. And then tries to correlate them. First off, the belief in a god poll is for a lot of countries incredibly vague, 40%-80% believe as a couple of examples. He doesn't even try to figure out why those countries are or are not happy, just blames it on belief or disbelief in a god. As said from my first words, terrible terrible logic.
He also proves in his play it safe chapter that he has no real understanding of fundamentalist Christianity. Just his own preconceived notions on what believers believe and what he thinks they should believe.
I was actually looking forward to reading this as good food for thought, but I feel I've come away with nothing and even feel a little dumber for having read it. And even less faith in the intellectual prowess of atheists, especially ones that actually got a book published about it.
He sets up straw man arguments so he can knock them down with this one point. The only thing he actually proves is that he doesn't have the first clue about what people believe and why they believe.
Add that in one chapter he brings out polls about different countries happiness level and another about belief in God or gods. And then tries to correlate them. First off, the belief in a god poll is for a lot of countries incredibly vague, 40%-80% believe as a couple of examples. He doesn't even try to figure out why those countries are or are not happy, just blames it on belief or disbelief in a god. As said from my first words, terrible terrible logic.
He also proves in his play it safe chapter that he has no real understanding of fundamentalist Christianity. Just his own preconceived notions on what believers believe and what he thinks they should believe.
I was actually looking forward to reading this as good food for thought, but I feel I've come away with nothing and even feel a little dumber for having read it. And even less faith in the intellectual prowess of atheists, especially ones that actually got a book published about it.
June 25, 2011
I have read many books over the years on the topic of atheism and this was my favorite book. The book reads like a great conversation with a friend that you have known for years. Guy Harrison gets it! He presents fifty reasons why people believe and provides clear, concise points to debunk them. I enjoyed the book from cover to cover. It's the first book I use as reference to make cogent arguments against my theist friends. It's an easy book to reference and it's laid out in an easy to follow manner without compromising the rational depth needed to explain each chapter.
It's fun, it's logical and I highly recommend it.
I'm looking forward to reading Mr. Harrison's most recent book "Race and Reality: What Everyone Should Know About Our Biological Diversity." You should too.
It's fun, it's logical and I highly recommend it.
I'm looking forward to reading Mr. Harrison's most recent book "Race and Reality: What Everyone Should Know About Our Biological Diversity." You should too.
February 18, 2012
Pathetic. This is as intellectually dishonest a book on the subject as I've ever read. If you are looking for arguments against the existence of God (or gods) skip this book. Go to Harris, Hitchens or Dawkins, where they at least acknowledge the difficulty of, and attempt to address, some of the arguments for God that Harrison dismisses.
In the introduction to the book, Harrison states "Out in the real world ... believers have little interest in convoluted arguments for gods that involve imagining perfection, irreducible complexity, or the laws of thermodynamics...". In other words, before the book even begins, the author dismisses any well-thought-out (though admittedly only two of these three could be described as well-thought-out) arguments in favor of gods. In doing so, he creates a scenario where he does not feel he needs to address them. He then spends the rest of the book lambasting believers of various faiths for not having any well-thought-out arguments in favor of gods.
When he does bring up legitimate arguments, he twists definitions to make them suit him. Case in point: On page 72, quoting Charles Seife on the Big Bang, "...the beginning of the universe...begins with nothing at all. There is no space; there is no time. There is not even a void. There is nothing..." On page 73, Harrison immediately follows Seife's quote with, "Wow, so these scientists are trying to tell us that everything...was compressed into a tiny space smaller than the period at the end of this sentence." I'm sorry Mr. Harrison, that is NOT what scientists are trying to tell us (or, at least, not the quote you just related). Re-read the passage you just quoted, please. It seems small, but the difference between what Seife says, and what Harrison says has enormous implications.
As a believer, I would also encourage you to read books FOR the existence of God to balance out. But even if you don't read a balance of books, my point is this: skip this book.
In the introduction to the book, Harrison states "Out in the real world ... believers have little interest in convoluted arguments for gods that involve imagining perfection, irreducible complexity, or the laws of thermodynamics...". In other words, before the book even begins, the author dismisses any well-thought-out (though admittedly only two of these three could be described as well-thought-out) arguments in favor of gods. In doing so, he creates a scenario where he does not feel he needs to address them. He then spends the rest of the book lambasting believers of various faiths for not having any well-thought-out arguments in favor of gods.
When he does bring up legitimate arguments, he twists definitions to make them suit him. Case in point: On page 72, quoting Charles Seife on the Big Bang, "...the beginning of the universe...begins with nothing at all. There is no space; there is no time. There is not even a void. There is nothing..." On page 73, Harrison immediately follows Seife's quote with, "Wow, so these scientists are trying to tell us that everything...was compressed into a tiny space smaller than the period at the end of this sentence." I'm sorry Mr. Harrison, that is NOT what scientists are trying to tell us (or, at least, not the quote you just related). Re-read the passage you just quoted, please. It seems small, but the difference between what Seife says, and what Harrison says has enormous implications.
As a believer, I would also encourage you to read books FOR the existence of God to balance out. But even if you don't read a balance of books, my point is this: skip this book.
August 20, 2012
It does give me some insight of the lack of consistency of believer dealing with their religion and other religion (as well as atheism). This book also give a good summary of why usually atheist fails to persuade believers to rethink their religion (let alone abandon it), and I can see the author understands pretty well what makes believers stink to their belief is not logic or evidence, but emotion and attachment. The book also warns us not think non-believers are any smarter or intelligent people than believers, when usually they are just victims of their culture and society, which I think is a good reminder for those conceited atheist (including me).
Though the author's argument is not without its weakness, which is particularly apparent in the chapter of discussing the world's beauty which makes people believing God. I don't think author citing the tragedies, warfare, the "ugly" thing is an effective way to counter the argument. While the author has mentioned it is hard to crack so he has to resort to indirect method, he fails to delve deeper into the reason for human's awe towards the nature. Maybe there is some evolution explanation behind it, where it is beneficial for human to be incited with such kind of emotion.
Overall, this book is a good read for any non-believers who want to understand more why people believe in their religion
Though the author's argument is not without its weakness, which is particularly apparent in the chapter of discussing the world's beauty which makes people believing God. I don't think author citing the tragedies, warfare, the "ugly" thing is an effective way to counter the argument. While the author has mentioned it is hard to crack so he has to resort to indirect method, he fails to delve deeper into the reason for human's awe towards the nature. Maybe there is some evolution explanation behind it, where it is beneficial for human to be incited with such kind of emotion.
Overall, this book is a good read for any non-believers who want to understand more why people believe in their religion
October 26, 2008
This is a reasonably straightforward and thoughtful consideration of the reasons people give for belief in gods. The one knock here would be that after about number 23 or so, things get a bit repetitious. Also, I read this over just a few days and it probably would be best to allow a bit more time to absorb some of the material. One argument that resonates is the idea that all religious beliefs are passed down through culture and family. All of them. Meaning, if you aren’t born into a family or culture that worships the ‘right’ god, chances are good that you’ll be heading for the gates of (Muslim, Christian, or Hindu) hell.
March 20, 2010
This book was substantially disappointing. I was hoping for some serious discussion centering around why people believe in a god (as the title might lead one to think). This is not what I got. The book starts out by noting that the author, an atheist, wants to respectfully ask a few questions about each of the given reasons, in an attempt to spark some thinking. Instead, the book really was a list of the 50 reasons, each followed by why that reason is wrong. Repetitive and annoying, I didn't really need to hear why I don't to believe in a god -- I was looking for a discussion of why others do. Disappointing.
June 8, 2021
The antithesis of Hitchens and Dawkins in the sense that this is a gentle, rational, non-judgmental dismantling of the false wish-thinking endemic in religion. Harrison masterfully dismantles arguments for a god without demeaning believers. As a result, this stands as a plea for critical thinking and rationality. While this is written in a manner designed for any theist, It is enjoyable for those who are atheist, too.
Brilliant.
Brilliant.
April 1, 2016
First, I should probably say that I enjoyed the book. The following are a few criticisms, but I'm still glad I read it.
I don't want to spend much time on this, since others have covered this more thoroughly, but his explanations do tend to get repetitive and several of his "reasons" are variations on the same thing. If, for instance, a person rejects the notion that "because everyone else can be (and most people are) wrong about the religion they subscribe to, I could also be wrong", then many of his arguments fall away. In my experience, the cognitive dissonance required to reject that concept is perfectly common and once it's there, many of the arguments in the book simply lose any ability to get through to someone.
My greater issue with this book has to do with tone. While I understand what he is trying to do, I don't think it comes across the way he intends. At least, it doesn't come across that way to me. People are fond of criticizing the so-called "New Atheists" for being too harsh or too mean in their approach and that may be true, but at least it's honest. It treats people as if they are adults who are perfectly capable of defending their point of view.
The approach that Harrison takes, the "be nice about it" approach, may seem to offer a gentler, more reasonable alternative, but it comes across as entirely too patronizing for my taste. It reads like a man patting people on the head and saying "There, there. Just because the beliefs you hold most dear are stupid, it doesn't mean YOU'RE stupid." The effect of this is to infantilize people. It treats them as if they were either foolish children or else morons.
The direct approach may not pull punches, but at least it treats everyone as if they are expected, as adults, to be able to justify their position or surrender it.
Besides, when it comes to virtually every believer I've had contact with (and there have been a great many having been raised in the Bible Belt), it makes no difference. The religious folks I have known would not put this book into a different category from, say, Christopher Hitchens, even if he is nicer/patronizing about it. It has no greater chance of getting through to them just because he goes so far out of his way to pretend that he's not challenging their most basic beliefs. There are no brownie points to be had.
Then again, who knows what approach will work in the case of any one individual out there.
I don't want to spend much time on this, since others have covered this more thoroughly, but his explanations do tend to get repetitive and several of his "reasons" are variations on the same thing. If, for instance, a person rejects the notion that "because everyone else can be (and most people are) wrong about the religion they subscribe to, I could also be wrong", then many of his arguments fall away. In my experience, the cognitive dissonance required to reject that concept is perfectly common and once it's there, many of the arguments in the book simply lose any ability to get through to someone.
My greater issue with this book has to do with tone. While I understand what he is trying to do, I don't think it comes across the way he intends. At least, it doesn't come across that way to me. People are fond of criticizing the so-called "New Atheists" for being too harsh or too mean in their approach and that may be true, but at least it's honest. It treats people as if they are adults who are perfectly capable of defending their point of view.
The approach that Harrison takes, the "be nice about it" approach, may seem to offer a gentler, more reasonable alternative, but it comes across as entirely too patronizing for my taste. It reads like a man patting people on the head and saying "There, there. Just because the beliefs you hold most dear are stupid, it doesn't mean YOU'RE stupid." The effect of this is to infantilize people. It treats them as if they were either foolish children or else morons.
The direct approach may not pull punches, but at least it treats everyone as if they are expected, as adults, to be able to justify their position or surrender it.
Besides, when it comes to virtually every believer I've had contact with (and there have been a great many having been raised in the Bible Belt), it makes no difference. The religious folks I have known would not put this book into a different category from, say, Christopher Hitchens, even if he is nicer/patronizing about it. It has no greater chance of getting through to them just because he goes so far out of his way to pretend that he's not challenging their most basic beliefs. There are no brownie points to be had.
Then again, who knows what approach will work in the case of any one individual out there.
May 3, 2011
I was having a back and forth (more backward that forward)with another reviewer of this book on Goodreads who criticized the author for not addressing the more nuanced "intellectual" theologies of his pet favorites. To which I replied:
As to why Harrison doesn't specifically said theologians, you are well aware, I think, that this book was intended for more mass consumption.
"Well, that about sums it up. No serious thought, no intellectual vigor, no careful consideration. It was written for atheists with simple answers, by an atheist with simple answers. It also explains why you presumably read it with such relish - nothing excites the True Believer more than having his own beliefs continually shored up under the pretext of scientific learning or enlightenment. [It's true, nothing excites believers in the truth more than seeing reality continually confirmed via the best method we have yet derived for understanding the world: science.] You can take them and kindly cease and desist. I want people that think commenting here, not ones who mistake their snark, belittling, and posturing for genuine reflection."
- John David (kant1066)
After this reply he "took his ball and went home" without answering any of the questions I asked him. (Quid pro Quo?)
At any rate, I thought I should update my review to reflect my true thoughts about this book. I stand by my statement that is was intended for mass consumption. But not for atheists. I find nothing new or particularly exciting in the arguments Harrison puts forth. It is really a "fluff book", but that was the intent. A soft, unoffensive, merely questioning book aimed at believers.
Harrison tried his best to make his questions about belief as inoffensive as possible.
I find that really boring, not to mention futile.
It seems more and more that the mere act of questioning the reasons for belief is still offensive to even the most thoughtful, liberal and heterodox of believers.
As to why Harrison doesn't specifically said theologians, you are well aware, I think, that this book was intended for more mass consumption.
"Well, that about sums it up. No serious thought, no intellectual vigor, no careful consideration. It was written for atheists with simple answers, by an atheist with simple answers. It also explains why you presumably read it with such relish - nothing excites the True Believer more than having his own beliefs continually shored up under the pretext of scientific learning or enlightenment. [It's true, nothing excites believers in the truth more than seeing reality continually confirmed via the best method we have yet derived for understanding the world: science.] You can take them and kindly cease and desist. I want people that think commenting here, not ones who mistake their snark, belittling, and posturing for genuine reflection."
- John David (kant1066)
After this reply he "took his ball and went home" without answering any of the questions I asked him. (Quid pro Quo?)
At any rate, I thought I should update my review to reflect my true thoughts about this book. I stand by my statement that is was intended for mass consumption. But not for atheists. I find nothing new or particularly exciting in the arguments Harrison puts forth. It is really a "fluff book", but that was the intent. A soft, unoffensive, merely questioning book aimed at believers.
Harrison tried his best to make his questions about belief as inoffensive as possible.
I find that really boring, not to mention futile.
It seems more and more that the mere act of questioning the reasons for belief is still offensive to even the most thoughtful, liberal and heterodox of believers.
December 31, 2019
"Why bother?" you might wonder. You can't reason someone out of a belief that he or she didn't reason himself or herself into. Still, Guy P. Harrison went tot the trouble to give it his best shot. His response to these reasons that believers give are well thought out and often profound. If your faith can withstand this onslaught, you're so very gullible. Get the paper edition. The formatting on the Kindle version is awful.
November 22, 2013
A great read. He pretty much covered (and responded to) every reason I have heard.
June 26, 2011
very gentle, balanced
July 6, 2018
A good read for believers or non-believers. Will help each understand the thinking of the other. Recommend.
June 11, 2021
A lot of the ideas were repetitive, but there was a ton of great examples and information in here for atheists looking for rebuttals to popular reasoning or those questioning their faith.
July 5, 2020
For skeptics looking for appealing ways to approach their believing friends or believers who are not afraid to consider a skeptical challenge, this book makes for very stimulating reading. Many books that challenge religious belief from a skeptical point of view take a combative tone that is almost guaranteed to alienate believers or they present complex philosophical or scientific arguments that fail to reach the average reader.This is undoubtably an ineffective way of encouraging people to develop critical thinking about religion. This is a unique approach to skepticism regarding that presents fifty commonly heard reasons people often give for believing in a God and then he raises legitimate questions regarding these reasons, showing in each case that there is much room for doubt.Whether you're a believer, a complete skeptic, or somewhere in between, you'll find this review of traditional and more recent arguments for the existence of God refreshing, approachable, and enlightening. From religion as the foundation of morality to the authority of sacred books, the compelling religious testimony of influential people, near-death experiences, arguments from Intelligent Design, and much more, Harrison respectfully describes each rationale for belief and then politely shows the deficiencies that any good skeptic would point out. As a journalist who has traveled widely and interviewed many highly accomplished people, quite a number of whom are believers, the author appreciates the variety of belief and the ways in which people seek to make religion compatible with scientific thought. Nonetheless, he shows that, despite the prevalence of belief in gods or religious belief in intelligent people, in the end there are no unassailable reasons for believing in a god.
**
July 5, 2022
Emphasizes that arguments for God are really arguments in favor of a particular god. Takes a cue from Stephen Prothero and others who have pointed out the multiplicity of gods and their dissimilarities.
Pascal's Wager is often criticized for its crass opportunism, and it should be criticized yet more for its failure to consider all possibilities of the types of gods that could exist. The Wager purports to favor Christianity specifically, but it doesn't. Christians argue for Christ; Muslims argue for Allah; they can't both be right, and it is quite possible that no gods whatsoever exist. This argument demolishes certain theistic arguments such as Pascal's Wager. In siding with "God," you think you've successfully cast your bets in favor of heaven and as insurance against hell? Well, what if you picked the wrong god?
But 50 Reasons overstates its case. Not all theistic arguments favor a particular god. And many theists, as I understand, feel that the god to whom they pray is inclusive of other people's definitions or understandings of God. They may be ignorant of, skeptical of, or repulsed by religious practices that differ from their own, but they often recognize and respect the theism at the core of an otherwise alien practice. The theological details may be important, sometimes a matter of life and death, but there is still an underlying universal idea of God (as creator, judge, or "presence") to which theists occasionally refer without specifically referring to any particular god. Harrison acknowledges that neuroscientists have been able to stimulate "religious experiences" in laboratories, but he seems to assume that believers fail to understand the implication that "religious experience" is a universal capability of the human brain that transcends their personal religious lenses. In general, he seems to assume that one cannot acknowledge one's own religious particularities and simultaneously acknowledge that there might be an underlying truth shared with other people; instead, he seems to assume that one must cast off all theistic prejudice before being able to understand religious belief as a general category. I'm not sure that's correct. Here's an overgeneralization about believers and atheists alike: "Any given believer thinks most believers in the world today are worshipping an imaginary god while the atheist thinks they are all wasting their time." (p. 167)
Additionally, while he is aware that some people experience their god as a feeling or presence, he describes this as one of many reasons people give for believing in a god. The believer might realize it's not exactly a reason in the strictly logical sense. It's some other kind of justification or prompt. In at least one place, he notes that "the believer who did not make a rational choice to believe is unlikely to make a rational choice to stop believing. There are other things at play here. There is feeling..." (p. 157) But he seems put off by religious feeling. Referring to a woman dancing and touching a stone that allegedly had been touched by Jesus, he commented that her rejection of "truth and reality" was "not beautiful". (p. 243)
These "50 reasons people give for believing in a god" are derived from conversations the author had with believers (as illustrated by his anecdotes from his own extensive travels). I really wanted them to be grouped into overarching categories, so I did — and, 12 years later, posted the list to Medium.
The book is not perhaps as respectful of believers as the author may have hoped or intended. He writes: "'Faith head' sounds a lot like an insult. Okay, maybe some believers' heads are filled with too much of that intellectual poison called faith, but why call them 'faith heads'? It's counterproductive..." Well, "intellectual poison" isn't great either for these purposes. Generally, he avoids direct schoolyard insults but delivers some sentences unflattering to believers, such as: "Many atheists tend to confront reality like grown-ups." (p. 323)
50 Reasons reflects some of my personal beliefs and opinions, but not the approach by which I arrived at those opinions nor the way in which I care to make use of them.
Pascal's Wager is often criticized for its crass opportunism, and it should be criticized yet more for its failure to consider all possibilities of the types of gods that could exist. The Wager purports to favor Christianity specifically, but it doesn't. Christians argue for Christ; Muslims argue for Allah; they can't both be right, and it is quite possible that no gods whatsoever exist. This argument demolishes certain theistic arguments such as Pascal's Wager. In siding with "God," you think you've successfully cast your bets in favor of heaven and as insurance against hell? Well, what if you picked the wrong god?
But 50 Reasons overstates its case. Not all theistic arguments favor a particular god. And many theists, as I understand, feel that the god to whom they pray is inclusive of other people's definitions or understandings of God. They may be ignorant of, skeptical of, or repulsed by religious practices that differ from their own, but they often recognize and respect the theism at the core of an otherwise alien practice. The theological details may be important, sometimes a matter of life and death, but there is still an underlying universal idea of God (as creator, judge, or "presence") to which theists occasionally refer without specifically referring to any particular god. Harrison acknowledges that neuroscientists have been able to stimulate "religious experiences" in laboratories, but he seems to assume that believers fail to understand the implication that "religious experience" is a universal capability of the human brain that transcends their personal religious lenses. In general, he seems to assume that one cannot acknowledge one's own religious particularities and simultaneously acknowledge that there might be an underlying truth shared with other people; instead, he seems to assume that one must cast off all theistic prejudice before being able to understand religious belief as a general category. I'm not sure that's correct. Here's an overgeneralization about believers and atheists alike: "Any given believer thinks most believers in the world today are worshipping an imaginary god while the atheist thinks they are all wasting their time." (p. 167)
Additionally, while he is aware that some people experience their god as a feeling or presence, he describes this as one of many reasons people give for believing in a god. The believer might realize it's not exactly a reason in the strictly logical sense. It's some other kind of justification or prompt. In at least one place, he notes that "the believer who did not make a rational choice to believe is unlikely to make a rational choice to stop believing. There are other things at play here. There is feeling..." (p. 157) But he seems put off by religious feeling. Referring to a woman dancing and touching a stone that allegedly had been touched by Jesus, he commented that her rejection of "truth and reality" was "not beautiful". (p. 243)
These "50 reasons people give for believing in a god" are derived from conversations the author had with believers (as illustrated by his anecdotes from his own extensive travels). I really wanted them to be grouped into overarching categories, so I did — and, 12 years later, posted the list to Medium.
The book is not perhaps as respectful of believers as the author may have hoped or intended. He writes: "'Faith head' sounds a lot like an insult. Okay, maybe some believers' heads are filled with too much of that intellectual poison called faith, but why call them 'faith heads'? It's counterproductive..." Well, "intellectual poison" isn't great either for these purposes. Generally, he avoids direct schoolyard insults but delivers some sentences unflattering to believers, such as: "Many atheists tend to confront reality like grown-ups." (p. 323)
50 Reasons reflects some of my personal beliefs and opinions, but not the approach by which I arrived at those opinions nor the way in which I care to make use of them.
August 1, 2017
"Religion is a source of tremendous prejudice, hatred, division, violence, and murder." (Harrison, 326-327).
50 Reasons People Give for Believing in a God is a critical look at believing in gods more than religion, but a thought-provoker nonetheless. As an atheist this book was probably supposed to confirm my atheism although sometimes it actually made me question it! The author is very educated and knows a lot about history and religion - he shares a few tidbits with readers which adds to the book.
Overall it was very good although as other reviewers have mentioned, he really does recycle some of the same ideas over and over again, such as:
1) There is no concrete evidence of ____.
2) Evolution is the answer.
His approach is cold, logical, factual and scientific; he does not appeal to the emotional side of people, including ruling out an afterlife, thinking miracles aren't real, magic, etc. You can tell he's a no-nonsense kind of guy; but maybe having a little bit of magic in your life wouldn't hurt?
I am not religious but might believe in an afterlife; of course there's no hard evidence but I don't expect that. He has a hunch there is no afterlife, and I have a hunch there is... I guess?
In other words, this book is entirely facts & logical; not many "creative" arguments (think left-brain right-brain).
Although sometimes repetitive, this book gives a lot to think about and it is interesting to hear an atheist's point of view; it is respectful and polite. I would recommend it to religious and non-religious people alike as some food for thought. If you don't feel like reading it all, just skip to the chapters you're interested in. Whether you agree with him or not, as Harrison says, there is nothing wrong with critical thinking! And this book will encourage exactly that.
Harrison cites research (summarized best points):
a) UN's Human Development Report ranking 177 countries on "Human Development Index" (life expectancy, education, per-capita income, literacy, etc.) Top five nations (Norway, Sweden, Australia, Canada, Netherlands) have high amounts of organic atheism. Bottom 50 lacked atheism.
b) The 39 poorest nations in the world are highly religious.
c) Most religious nations (mainly in Africa) have highest HIV/AIDS rates. Irreligious places in Europe like Scandinavia have public sex education and birth control support fared best.
d) Women are treated better in countries with higher atheism rates.
"The point here, however, is that belief in gods Is supposed to solve serious social problems and provide a better life for people. This is the claim so many believers make. More religion is better, they say. Clearly, however, it is not." (Harrison, 299).
~ Bad quotes ~
"I reject the claims of... reincarnation... there is compete and total absence of credible evidence to support the claims." (Harrison, 269).
What evidence would you expect to find though... if there is an afterlife only dead people would know about it! (Other than NDEs which he doesn't believe)
"It's probably one of the reasons why I have had an extremely happy life so far." (Harrison, 323).
Good to be aware of privilege and to be positive, but this sounded a bit fake and like it was trying to show atheists can be soooo happy.
BEST QUOTES
(if you don't read the book just read these)
"Suppose an atheist, refusing to look at any religious claims, were to say, "You must have faith that there is no God. If you believe in your heart that nothing transcends nature and that humanity is the highest judge of morality, then you will know that atheism is true." Wouldn't the [foll0wers of other religions] snicker? (Barker, 102-103)." (Harrison, 32).
"To many [Christians], Hinduism has something to do with cows; Buddhism has something to do with meditation; and Islam has something to with Osama Bin Laden." (Harrison, 95).
"Most religions rely on authority figures, very old stories, early introduction to children, and faith in the absence of evidence." (Harrison, 213).
"I do not want to overstate this or antagonize believers, but belief in gods really does seem like a social toxin based on the current state of the world. The more of it there is, the sicker the society." (Harrison, 297).
50 Reasons People Give for Believing in a God is a critical look at believing in gods more than religion, but a thought-provoker nonetheless. As an atheist this book was probably supposed to confirm my atheism although sometimes it actually made me question it! The author is very educated and knows a lot about history and religion - he shares a few tidbits with readers which adds to the book.
Overall it was very good although as other reviewers have mentioned, he really does recycle some of the same ideas over and over again, such as:
1) There is no concrete evidence of ____.
2) Evolution is the answer.
His approach is cold, logical, factual and scientific; he does not appeal to the emotional side of people, including ruling out an afterlife, thinking miracles aren't real, magic, etc. You can tell he's a no-nonsense kind of guy; but maybe having a little bit of magic in your life wouldn't hurt?
I am not religious but might believe in an afterlife; of course there's no hard evidence but I don't expect that. He has a hunch there is no afterlife, and I have a hunch there is... I guess?
In other words, this book is entirely facts & logical; not many "creative" arguments (think left-brain right-brain).
Although sometimes repetitive, this book gives a lot to think about and it is interesting to hear an atheist's point of view; it is respectful and polite. I would recommend it to religious and non-religious people alike as some food for thought. If you don't feel like reading it all, just skip to the chapters you're interested in. Whether you agree with him or not, as Harrison says, there is nothing wrong with critical thinking! And this book will encourage exactly that.
Harrison cites research (summarized best points):
a) UN's Human Development Report ranking 177 countries on "Human Development Index" (life expectancy, education, per-capita income, literacy, etc.) Top five nations (Norway, Sweden, Australia, Canada, Netherlands) have high amounts of organic atheism. Bottom 50 lacked atheism.
b) The 39 poorest nations in the world are highly religious.
c) Most religious nations (mainly in Africa) have highest HIV/AIDS rates. Irreligious places in Europe like Scandinavia have public sex education and birth control support fared best.
d) Women are treated better in countries with higher atheism rates.
"The point here, however, is that belief in gods Is supposed to solve serious social problems and provide a better life for people. This is the claim so many believers make. More religion is better, they say. Clearly, however, it is not." (Harrison, 299).
~ Bad quotes ~
"I reject the claims of... reincarnation... there is compete and total absence of credible evidence to support the claims." (Harrison, 269).
What evidence would you expect to find though... if there is an afterlife only dead people would know about it! (Other than NDEs which he doesn't believe)
"It's probably one of the reasons why I have had an extremely happy life so far." (Harrison, 323).
Good to be aware of privilege and to be positive, but this sounded a bit fake and like it was trying to show atheists can be soooo happy.
BEST QUOTES
(if you don't read the book just read these)
"Suppose an atheist, refusing to look at any religious claims, were to say, "You must have faith that there is no God. If you believe in your heart that nothing transcends nature and that humanity is the highest judge of morality, then you will know that atheism is true." Wouldn't the [foll0wers of other religions] snicker? (Barker, 102-103)." (Harrison, 32).
"To many [Christians], Hinduism has something to do with cows; Buddhism has something to do with meditation; and Islam has something to with Osama Bin Laden." (Harrison, 95).
"Most religions rely on authority figures, very old stories, early introduction to children, and faith in the absence of evidence." (Harrison, 213).
"I do not want to overstate this or antagonize believers, but belief in gods really does seem like a social toxin based on the current state of the world. The more of it there is, the sicker the society." (Harrison, 297).
Read
July 8, 2018Un’ottima introduzione all'ateismo. Semplice e didattico, ha uno stile scorrevole e leggero. Dà spazio agli aneddoti e alle esperienze personali ma nel contempo non abbandona il rigore degli argomenti razionali. Il più solido dei quali, secondo Harrison, è l’immensa diversità delle religioni, che per forza non possono essere tutte vere e quindi sono quasi certamente tutte false. Purtroppo salta un po’ di palo in frasca e a lungo andare diventa ripetitivo: forse voleva arrivare per forza alla cifra tonda. Unico punto debole: la risposta alla paura della morte. Infatti la possibilità del transumanesimo è affascinante ma poco verosimile. Questo saggio è comunque una lettura interessante, da consigliare a chi crede come sfida intellettuale e a chi non crede per avere un buon prontuario di argomenti.
June 1, 2019
This is an interesting take on the central claim of religions since time began i.e. the debate as to whether god or gods exist. This is steeped in culture as well of course since when the question: "Do you believe in God?" is posed, the natural, although rarely asked return question should be: "Which God?" since there have, in history, been thousands. The culture side dictates the normal thought however which leads most to answer from the perspective of the God of the Bible, Yahweh, Allah, the pantheon of Hindu gods etc.
This is a straightforward, rational take on the most common reasons that believers give for belief in their god of choice. I suspect that it will change few minds, but since this is the one of the most important questions ever and it is always worth discussing. Easy to read, not esoteric in any sense and sometimes a little repetitive.
This is a straightforward, rational take on the most common reasons that believers give for belief in their god of choice. I suspect that it will change few minds, but since this is the one of the most important questions ever and it is always worth discussing. Easy to read, not esoteric in any sense and sometimes a little repetitive.
May 17, 2017
This book is oatmeal. Absolutely fine if you're hungry and poor, but if you have a full kitchen, you're probably better satisfied making something else. This book suffers from repetition due to its author's desire to respond to exactly 50 reasons; combine the many similar claims and it would have been a much easier read. The author isn't particularly gifted, either, and when the literature contains big fish like Christopher Hitchens, books like this can simply be boring in comparison. This is a fine (adequate, middling, serviceable) entry in the atheist canon, but I wouldn't particularly recommend it to anyone.
January 16, 2020
This book is systematic exploration of how ordinary people give justifications for belief in God. Although very honest in his take on the 'belief'part of religion there are some cringe worthy parts where the author misrepresented few religions in an attempt to give an impression that 'All religions are same'. As a matter of fact all religions are not same. As Sam Harris argues - there is a gulf of difference between different religions- Jainism and Islam for example. Nevertheless, the core of the book is not about discussing religion but discussing 'belief in God' which it did rather systematically and for that this book is worth a read.
November 19, 2022
Guy Harrison has collected 50 reasons given by believers for their belief in God or gods in this book. Then he analysed these reason and demonstrated the hidden flaws in each of them and explained why these beliefs exist among people.
This is like a wake-up call for believers. Of course, he tried to express his views without any insults and in a friendly manner. As he himself mentions in the introduction of the book: “No gods were harmed in the writing of this book.”
This book is invitation for believers to reconsider their religious beliefs with the help of critical thinking and science.
This is like a wake-up call for believers. Of course, he tried to express his views without any insults and in a friendly manner. As he himself mentions in the introduction of the book: “No gods were harmed in the writing of this book.”
This book is invitation for believers to reconsider their religious beliefs with the help of critical thinking and science.
April 9, 2014
Harrison successfully tackles common arguments and claims made by believers without coming off as arrogant or disrespectful toward the religious. The strength of Harrison's arguments and the respect/understanding he shows his opponents make this not only an informative read but also a very fun read. I'd recommend this book to skeptics who wish to see how to argue against believers respectfully as well as believers who are comfortable having their beliefs challenged.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 105 reviews