The Happy Atheist

by P.Z. Myers

From the author of one of the web's most popular science blogs, The Happy Atheist takes on religious fanaticism with all the gleeful disrespect it deserves. A small, fearless book that takes aim at big, stupid targets--and nails them.

For the last several years, PZ Myers, writing the blog Pharyngula, has entertained millions of readers every month with his infectious love of evolutionary science and his equally infectious disdain for creationism, biblical literalism, "intelligent design" theory, and other products of godly illogic. While PZ does not accept the common atheist argument that religion necessarily makes people do evil, violent things, he does think that, most of the time, it makes them believe in the truly ridiculous--which is exactly what he skewers in this riotously funny book. In fact, The Happy Atheist is so outrageous, it's the only book about religion anyone should take seriously.

Genres: Nonfiction, Religion, Atheism, Science, Philosophy, Essays, Zen

208 pages, Hardcover

First published January 1, 2013

About the author

Paul Zachary Myers is an American biology professor at the University of Minnesota Morris (UMM) and the author of the science blog Pharyngula. He is currently an associate professor of biology at UMM, works with zebrafish in the field of evolutionary developmental biology (evo-devo), and also cultivates an interest in cephalopods. He has published numerous research papers in Nature and other notable scientific journals.

Reviews

[Socraticgadfly · Rating 1 out of 5]

Per my status update, for any non-Gnu Atheists, skeptics, agnostics, etc., who are familiar with PZ, this book is what you'd expect. Basically, it's a collection of edited blog posts.

He has good critiques of religion, and is good at things like rejecting non-overlapping magisteria, at pointing out that liberal-minded believers have the same metaphysical problems as fundamentalists, and more.

But, it's the usual PZ bombast that goes beyond snarkiness to snideness.

And, this made me realize one new thing about PZ.

Not only does he not know philosophy well, he knows psychology at least as poorly.

Gnu Atheists, whether they would use the word or not, are atheist **evangelists.**

Now, the fundamentalist Christian type uses the big carrot and big stick of heaven and hell, though they claim that's not why they believe, in many cases. (Fundamentalist Hindus and Buddhists, I would expect, use the carrot and stick of good karma/reincarnation and bad karma/reincarnation.)

But snideness, rudeness, and ridicule are neither carrot nor stick.

They're shaming, is what they ultimately are, in many cases.

And, our Internet world shows just how well, or poorly, shaming works.

Hence my comment about how little PZ knows about psychology. That said, given that many Gnus are dismissive of reading about psychology of religion, or evolutionary psychology of religion, per a Scott Atran or Pascal Boyer, among others, this isn't surprising.

Finally, I had originally 3-starred this, until I checked the price. $24 for a 200-page compilation of blog posts? What an effing ripoff.

Then, after reading this from an Amazon commenter:

>> If you Google the terms "The Happy Atheist", "PZ Myers", and "free" you can find the URLs of the recycled articles. << I moved it down another star.

If you're going to be an atheist evangelist, do it right. If you're going to make bucks off fanboys, and fangirls, at least be more honest about it.

[Occam's Whetstone · Rating 1 out of 5]

I bought this book as a possible toilet reader, thinking it might be fun to have short essays to dip in and out of on visits to the throne, and to be hyperbolic I'd suggest this book could be put to good use in the water closet, just not for reading.

The essays themselves are poorly written and edited, the sources are minimal, the arguments are straw and there's no theme or consistency. There is nothing additional to the original blog posts in most cases and it just doesn't work in this format. Would be better off printing out a few copies of the blog posts for yourself rather than fund this.

Not up to the standards of Dennet, Harris, Dawkins, Shermer or even a teenager.

Would not recommend.

[jeremy · Rating 4 out of 5]

people aren't religious because they're stupid; rather, religion is a parasite of the mind that makes people do stupid things and think stupid thoughts and, worst of all, believe that freeing themselves of superstition would make them less human and less able to cope with reality, when the exact opposite is true. i laugh because they do goofy, foolish things in the name of their god, but also because i hope that a little raucous hilarity will wake a few of them from their surreal lives and show them how wonderful they and the real world are, if they only lived in it.

that's what this book is about: the folly of faith, the absurdity of apologetics, and i hope, the joys of reality, as seen through the focusing lenses of humor as well as the more traditional ones of science and reason.

pz myers is a biology professor, founder/author of the popular science blog, pharyngula, and a prominent, outspoken atheist. orbiting the realm of new atheism (with dawkins, dennett, harris, the late hitchens, krauss, shermer, et al.), myers is evidently more willing to directly engage and confront those that espouse creationism and intelligent design. the happy atheist, his first book, collects essays that appeared originally on his blog.

half the people in the world commit this sin against god: they are born women.

it's astounding that any women at all accept christianity, judaism, or islam; these are profoundly misogynistic faiths. throughout the christian bible, women are treated as chattel to be abused and misused, and uppity women are regarded as the worst of the lot, fit only to be slaughtered. parts of the bible read like snuff porn - but it's all okay, because it's the bible, god's holy word, and if god is gonna have to choke a bitch, who are we to question it?

myers's approach to combating "godly illogic" is anything but subtle, as he regularly dismantles magical thinking with unabashed directness and provocative humor. to most theists, his essays would almost certainly be regarded as heretical, incendiary, and offensive. although his approach may alienate some (both believers and non-believers alike), it would be difficult to argue that his writing is ineffective in reaching readers.

a priest buggered a little boy? look - an atheist! it's his fault! how dare he stir up disturbing changes in society? father murphy was so distressed, he had to stick his penis in timmy's butt! aww, poor father murphy...

myers is candid, sarcastic, unapologetic, and perhaps recalcitrant - a combination that inevitably make him a lightning rod for criticism (which he seemingly welcomes). his arguments derive from his scientific background, but that is unlikely to assuage those with contrasting beliefs. throughout the happy atheist, myers considers the authoritarianism, patriarchy, misogyny, hypocrisy, and duplicity of the three major abrahamic religions. his feelings are beyond mere intellectual posturing - it's quite evident that supernatural absurdities elicit strong, visceral reactions in him. it's easy to understand how myers may well be seen as a divisive figure, even amongst those that self-identify or align with atheistic principles. for myers, not believing is hardly enough, however, as efforts must be made to undermine the encroaching and pervasive effects of fundamentalist and fanatical thinking. the efficacy of his essays notwithstanding, myers's writing is often uproarious and never minces words. while the happy atheist isn't likely to convert those possessed by dogmatic faith, it could give them pause enough to consider the logic of their closely-held beliefs - or, if nothing else, many a reason to compose a decidedly non-virtuous letter to the author instead.

[Joy · Rating 3 out of 5]

Good points for preaching to the choir (irony intended), but a bit confrontational for non-atheists. I call myself "The Peaceful Atheist," because, after a personal 55-year long Reformation that has taken me from Catholic school pupil to agnostic to atheist, I have attained a peaceful belief in post-death oblivion. I attribute this acceptance to the book THE SWERVE, which seemed to give me permission to be atheist. THE HAPPY ATHEIST seems to tell people what to think, just like many Christians do,instead of leading them to make their own decisions. But as someone who already decided, I appreciated the arguments.

[Jinx Mchue · Rating 1 out of 5]

The fact that PZ wrote a book called "The Happy Atheist" is incredibly ironic. This man is NOT happy, as clearly evidenced by his blog. Speaking of his blog, that's all this book is: culled and marginally edited copies of his blog posts. If you've read his blog, you've read the book. Pretty sad.

[Jim · Rating 3 out of 5]

Probably the most difficult thing about this book is that what he spends most of his time with are exact same issues I have with religion today.

I believe in God, but sometimes I wonder what's the point when so many who claim to follow him are silly at best, and evil at worst.

"Lately [God] has become a devotee of football, and players and spectators beg for his divine favor in helping to get a ball from one side of the field to the other."

"Jehovah is the god of sanctimonious killjoys. How else to explain people who think the greatest threat to their happiness right now is the existence of people of the same sex who fall in love with each other? At the same time, we have priests raping children, and their defenders are most irate at the people who ratted out the pedophiles..."

That's just the first chapter. (Or section, they're not exactly numbered.)

I believe in God. I see art. I see beauty. I see love. I believe that these were created by God.

But the biggest argument against the existence of God is how many awful people He has as ambassadors.

Misogyny in the church is rampant. Historically, and now. It's important, but too big of an issue to get into in this review.

And how Christians represent the afterlife? I don't know what happens after we die - but I don't think it's the same picture painted by popular evangelicals - the Bible doesn't even agree. (I talk about this a lot in my review of Heaven is For Real.)

And the importance of the afterlife? It seems like we weight that so much, we don't have to worry about this life. But this is where we are supposed to be bringing Heaven to Earth! This is where we are supposed to treat people right. Care for people. And, yes, care for God's creation. Bible scholars have been debating for years about Heaven and Hell, and to pretend we know exactly how things will work after death is a bit crazy. Yet, we still focus on a few petty points of doctrine to try to determine where people will go at the end.

Logic and science are thrown out the window. If you don't think so, look at the Apologetics Press magazines with pictures of people using dinosaurs as beasts of burden. Creation scientists have arguments with holes big enough you could drive an ark through. (Like how I did that?)

There's a fair amount I disagree with in this book. But there's so much that resonates with me. How do I keep a faith in God that chooses so many hateful people to share His love? How do I keep faith in a God that chooses so many misguided people to share His Gospel? I so rarely see the Gospel Jesus preached coming from the pulpits and members of today's Western church. I think it's reasonable for people to turn away from God because of it. And whose head will that be on? I don't think it will be the people turning from God. It will be on the people pushing people away.

In the end, Myers uses a lot of good arguments, asking, How can people believe in a God like this? Or, How can people believe in a God that these people profess? I have to answer that I don't know - because I don't believe in the God that most of these people preach either. It's the crux of my struggle.

[David · Rating 4 out of 5]

PZ Myers is a breath of fresh, godless air. As much as I enjoy reading the works of the "new" atheists (Daniel Dennett, Richard Dawkins, Sam Harris, etc), the tone of their efforts is generally of a much more serious, often times combative nature, an urgent call to action against primitive beliefs that hold back the progress of humanity. While Myers does address many serious topics, his humor pervades within The Happy Atheist, offering an alternative, light-hearted perspective on why the belief in god(s) is silly and antiquated.

The Happy Atheist is broken up into short, easily digestible chapters, each focusing on different issues that arise in the "to believe or not to believe" debate. Myers uses his sharp scientific mind to great effect, poking copious holes in the arguments and defenses laid out by believers, many of whom respond to Myers with nothing less than death threats. Some of the various topics covered in this short book are abortion, evolution, morality, and perhaps my favorite chapter, the desecration of a communion wafer.

My only real grievance with the book (pamphlet?) is the overall lack of cohesiveness. There does not seem to be an overarching point or message, other than the belief in god(s) is no longer relevant in our modern, scientifically-learned world.

An enjoyable read offering wisdom and compelling arguments on every page, The Happy Atheist is sure to polarize its readers, but will ultimately satisfy those on the godless side of the argument. I'll end with my favorite passage from the book:

(P. 28) [Referring to the desecration of "sacred" items] "Nothing must be held sacred. Question everything. God is not great, Jesus is not your lord, you are not disciples of any charismatic prophet. You are all human beings who must make your way through your lives by thinking and learning, and you have the job of advancing humanity's knowledge by winnowing out the errors of past generation and finding a deeper understanding of reality. You will not find wisdom in rituals and sacraments and dogma, which build only self-satisfied ignorance. You can find truth by looking at your world with fresh eyes and a questioning mind.

[jess sanford · Rating 2 out of 5]

While it admittedly sounds harsher than I really intend, what I want to say about this book is that I don't have much to say at all, because neither does PZ Myers. By this I don't mean at all that he is unintelligent or inarticulate in his criticisms and observations; he is obviously both of these things and has a relatively commensurate following in the skeptical community. Arguably worse, this book largely commits the cardinal sin that the late and indelible Christopher Hitchens warned against above all others: this book is boring. 'Chapter' (edited blog post) after 'chapter', the same metaphor kept struggling to take shape in my mind -- something about low-hanging fruit that wasn't quite right, but more something along the lines of PZ Meyers wandering alone in the fruit orchard that has been picked clean. He's not looking for a new orchard, or planting new trees, so to speak.

Every single criticism here is well worn, every argument is an argument rehashed, every snarky aside not only a second act but a second act that can't live up to the first. I honestly cannot locate one point raised here that is either original or at least an entertaining and engaging re-interaction with a point familiar to Myers' audience. Anyone remotely familiar with the work of the New Atheists will feel, probably, both bored and shorted, page by page. Missing both depth and any rich rhetorical work, it just feels like a hollow collection of prose. Revisit Dawkins, Harris, Hitchens, Dennett, Krauss, Stenger, et al, and feel assured you'll find the same ground and find it better guided. It's not that Myers is wrong or bearing any great argumentative faults, and I'd argue if he were it'd actually make for a more worthwhile book. But it seems that Myers shies away from anything but the most superficial and cozily familiar ground, doesn't seem to want to step more than a couple feet into the more challenging terrain. His writing and personality have never struck me as terribly lazy or insecure, so I'm at a loss to explain this. I'd like to see someone of Myers' intellect and at least affected confidence put more skin in the game and dig a little deeper. It's certainly telling that I am about as deep in his targeted audience as one could be and I couldn't force myself to finish the last 1/4 of the book out of sheer disinterest.

'The Happy Atheist' is like a third-rate cover band; loving the original only makes you all the more disappointed, and you wish the frontman would apply himself a bit more.

[Martin · Rating 4 out of 5]

This book made me a Happy Atheist. Not that I wasn’t before I read it, but in some small way PZ Myers has made me that much happier. I have already recommended this book to a number of friends and will continue to do so. Unlike many of Myers’ critics, who predictably complain that he broke no new ground here, and that his approach was unrefined and lacked direction, I enjoyed the pace and meandering path the book led me along. In fact, I dare say, this is precisely the point of any book, to allow the author to guide you along the path that they intend, not the one you think should be.

The Happy Atheist is a heartfelt and unpretentious look at the folly of religion. It is blissfully free of condescension and elitism, which many of its contemporary works cannot claim. And it is smart and witty and impassioned. Myers set out to write a book on atheism, using humour as a weapon against superstitious wish-thinking, and he succeeded, at least in my mind.

I was immensely impressed with Myers lament for the lost history of generations past. Lost because their lives, their struggles and their triumphs were not recorded and handed down in the form of a sacred book. He deftly illustrates the historic and poetic value of the Bible, emphasising its importance as a tool for recognising that our ancestors were people, with lives and dramas and loss.

Though if you take only one thing away from this book, let it be this: every person has the right to designate any silly thing as sacred to them, but they do not have the right to dictate what is sacred to you and me. This is the most succinct and intelligent argument that I have ever read against the fallacy that religious beliefs somehow deserve the reverence that the devout so often demand.

Whatever your personal opinion of PZ Myers and his secular antics, or his scathing and often misunderstood wit, you would do well to add this book to your shelf, along-side The God Delusion and God Is Not Great, and if you’re truly enlightened, perhaps even a copy of the Koran and the Bible.

[Kayleighetc · Rating 1 out of 5]

I'm an atheist and was hoping this book would talk about how to lead a meaningful life and form connections without religion, the title makes it seem like that. But the emotion I got from this was contempt, and the sick satisfaction that comes from pointing out someone else's faults. The book was published in 2013 and in this post-Trump culture I just couldn't stand to read something so divisive.

"People aren't religious because they're stupid; rather, religion is a parasite of the mind that makes people do stupid things and think stupid thoughts (8)"

I read about a third of it, telling myself to be open to different points of view, but I don't really feel like Myers constructs ideas that warrant an actual book. Each short chapter feels pretty much the same and could just be a blog post. I can understand that some people are energized by this kind of thing but it really drains me. I didn't think I would get anything else out of it so I decided not to read to the end. I'm still marking it as read though!

[Jeff Koeppen · Rating 5 out of 5]

This book spoke to me. This is a collection of essays by PZ Myers, a biology professor at the U of M - Morris. PZ is a nationally known personality in the skeptic and atheist circles, and is very active on Twitter and posts regularly on his blog at scienceblogs.pharyngula. He speaks eloquently of evolution and takes down such things as creationism, biblical literalism, intelligent design, and a number of religious-based beliefs. Each essay is interesting and well written. He mixes a lot of humor and wit in to his essays. He pulls no punches, and uses the Richard Dawkins approach rather than the Carl Sagan approach. Highly recommended to any skeptics and athiests. I'm going to read this book again with a highlighter, there are so many good points made that I need to remember.

[Eugéne · Rating 1 out of 5]

Easy targets. Little insight. Nothing on the complexity or poetry of religion. Unhappy (a)theist.

[Spectre I · Rating 4 out of 5]

As a Christian, I disagree with the authors conclusions/beliefs. However, I rate the book 4 stars because it caused me to think and I appreciated the honest critiques of organized religion.

Two points I wanted to comment on:

1. A few times Myers referred to parents teaching their kids their religion and practices as “brain washing.” If teaching a child what you believe is brain washing then everyone (atheist, agnostic, Christian, etc.) is brainwashing every child on earth. At least, I suppose, children will have clean brains.

2. I agree with Myers frustrations regarding the abuse of church/religious power. Historically, men and women have used positions of power in the Christian church to abuse people. For the most outlandish example we just have to look to the crusades where the Pope promised forgiveness of sins for any crime committed in the war. That’s horrendous. Clearly, he was using religion to advance his agenda. Where I disagree is the conclusion that because many religious leaders have abused power, their religions are wrong/harmful. To fairly judge a religion we first need to see if the follower is acting in alignment with religious teachings. In the case of religions that point to Jesus Christ as God (Christianity, Catholicism, Orthodox, etc.) and the Bible as the Word of God, you need to see what Jesus and the Bible say. Clearly, anyone who sexually abuses children, orders holy wars in the name of Christ, or even verbally lashes out at his neighbor in the name of righteousness is in direct contradiction with the teachings of Jesus Christ. The person is to blame. They have allowed their greed/wicked desires/etc to rule them and they have used their power to obtain what they want. In these cases, other religious leaders should be calling out these wicked instances and disciplining/removing/handing over the leaders for punishment. Unfortunately, as in the examples given by Myers this doesn’t happen often enough.

Overall, I enjoyed the book. However, I don’t see it as being a nail in the coffin for Christianity. If you strip away all the bad things from Christianity that Myers pointed out you would still be left with Christianity. Myers would have succeeded in stripping away unhealthy patterns many have fallen into but the core doctrine/truths wouldn’t have been touched. It would actually be a healthier Christianity.

[MKF · Rating 4 out of 5]

The Happy Athiest is a book of essays about the insanity of religions and the religious. Many of the essays were about topics many of us have probably wondered about or thought. Some of the things PZ Myers wrote was worth a good laugh but it was scattered throughout.

[Sea Lard · Rating 1 out of 5]

The book is quite controversial and, at the same time, typical for the majority of the people being atheists. It includes a lot of interesting, wise and somewhat funny ideas about religions. Yet, the philosophy of the author remains on the level of a teenager who has just started analyzing the world and found many illogical aspects of the things which are important only for real fanatics while the majority of the Christians treat this religion just as a simple tradition which lacks any sacral sense.

It is sad the author believes such literature is really able to change the world since, in point of fact, it is attractive exclusively for atheists, whereas real religious fanatics will become even more irritated after reading such things. Furthermore, I am afraid the majority of atheists won’t be even interested in reading all these revelations since they are absolutely obvious and do not need any comments whatsoever. I actually agree with those who have already noticed that this “Happy Atheist” seems to be unhappy. My personal opinion is that it is not normal to spend so much time in one’s life on searching for the evidence of the incompatibility of the Bible texts and science. If you are a normal person, this inconsistency is apparent. Otherwise you won’t even look at the obvious facts.

The book reveals that the author is angry with the greatest world religions which is normal for the majority of atheists. Still, the author is absolutely oblivious to the fact that there are many people in the world who have their own understanding of god or the sense of a life which is not based on any religious dogmas at all. These people do not even share their ideas with others in order not to make anyone agitated or offended. Well, why can’t I believe in the laws of physics and nature to be my god who doesn’t promise me nothing else than giving the life to the new plants in case I am buried after my death? I am not an atheist as I do really believe the nature is sacred while being so complicated and fascinating that it is odd to claim humans have already learnt everything about it. Yet, it doesn’t mean I believe in a god being a person, multiple gods or paradise and hell, although I am afraid it won’t be understood by the atheists who have become atheists because they are simply fed up with the traditional religion of their motherland.

Once again, the author shows that some atheists can’t stand the ideas of other people just in the same way the fanatics of religions can’t do it. Because of such passionate works I do really believe that atheism as shown by P. Z. Myers is simply another religion and I am really happy with the idea that the atheists surrounding me just ignore religions instead of being aggressive ideologists.

[Koen Crolla · Rating 3 out of 5]

PZ's inevitable and long-awaited book about atheism. He talks about most of the major events that have also made his blog—Crackergate, Terry Jones, Catholic paedophiles and paedophile apologists, Boobquake, &c.; Atheism+ is conspicuously absent—as well as general issues surrounding religion, but each chapter is an independent vignette and the whole thing lacks focus and a directed narrative.
In fact, The Happy Atheist reminds me of nothing so much as Paul Arden's execrable God Explained in a Taxi Ride : feel-good bites written for members of the choir to consume by opening the book in a random spot and reading a single tiny chapter whenever they're bored. It's considerably less smug, of course, and happens to argue for the side that's right, but it will largely be incapable of convincing anyone who isn't already convinced.
I'm sure there's a market for it, but I'm pretty disappointed.

[Tommy Carlson · Rating 4 out of 5]

Not an earthshaking work and it suffers from a lack of direction. Despite that, it's a good fun read and I recommend it.

On the negative side, it reminds me of a lot of popular science books in that there's a lot of stuff that any decently well-read atheist already knows. It also reads more as a series of blog posts than as cohesive work. Until the very end, where it then attempts to string some chapters together. Which, at that point, merely illustrates the lack earlier in the book.

On the positive side? It's well written. It's breezy and fun while still being serious. There isn't a really bad chapter to be found. And there are some really good insights and examples that were new to me. It's not a wheat/chaff situation at all.

[Joe Donohue · Rating 1 out of 5]

Tiring. I became an atheist, because I was tired of people preaching to me.

[Patrick · Rating 2 out of 5]

Stopped reading 13% in. I think this author is well meaning, but he comes across as very antagonistic. I doubt he will change anyone's mind.

[Celia Sánchez · Rating 4 out of 5]

PZ Myers shows our human and humane side with wonderfully written accounts of the struggles all of us face, regarding religion vs. free thought. and shows how religious dogmatism too often obstructs reason and critical thinking.” .... All the articles in this book are from his blog ...In fact in In 2009, Hemant Mehta ranked Pharyngula the most popular atheist blog, based on subscriber levels and other factors. It is true that you would be more able to understand love and meaning when those silly notions of supervision and blind dogmatic obedience toa religous deity cease to bother your life. The book presents plenty of interesting ideas and arguments, and it is a punchy and provocative read.....

https://freethoughtblogs.com/pharyngula/

Outstanding articles .... genuine delightful reading ....

[Steve Chaput · Rating 4 out of 5]

Myers does a wonderful job of explaining just what it is to be an atheist in a world filled with so many believers. He does this with humor, but also with a serious and scientific viewpoint. He examines the sometimes laughable arguments of those who defend their beliefs, but also understands where some of that belief comes from.

Wonderful book for those beginning to question what they were raised to believe and also for those who have been happy to have put that behind us years ago.

[Paul Baker · Rating 3 out of 5]

This appears to be a collection of blog posts gussied up to look like a real book. It is not an impartial scientific approach to atheism, but rather a very personal, highly opinionated series of repetitive arguments. I am still waiting for a book that calmly explains to everyone else what it is really like to be a happy atheist without so many axes to grind.

[Prooost Davis · Rating 5 out of 5]

Perhaps "Happy" is not quite the right adjective. "Snarky," maybe, or even "angry." P.Z. Myers is more direct than I am. I'm a bit timid, and I don't like to hurt people's feelings, but I do, in the end, think that Myers's derision of religion is warranted.

When you realize there is no God, a weight is lifted; a whole raft of questions is off the table. Am I going to heaven, or hell? How do I know my religion is the true one? Does imagining committing a sin mean I have committed the sin? And what about the famous "problem of evil?" Theologians have worried about these issues for thousands of years. The atheist is relieved of all of those problems. All that remains is the atheist's realization that death is the end. There is no life after death, and these few years are all we have. That is burden enough, I suppose, but I believe that all of the theologians' arguments for the existence of God are in the service of denial that death is the end.

The early chapters of The Happy Atheist are, as I have said, snarky. But as the book goes on, the tone is more serious; by the end, the book contains a great deal of beauty.

Question: Can one be both a scientist and religious? Answer: Of course. One sees it all the time.

Better question: Are science and religion compatible? Answer: No. Despite the hopes of the Templeton Foundation, there is no way to reconcile religion and science.

And I need to take my hat off to P.Z. Myers for addressing the writings of Karen Armstrong. In her book, The Case for God, she complained that today's "New Atheists" debated only with biblical literalist fundamentalists, and not with more reasonable people like herself. There are two answers to that lament. First, the Christians who are trying to force religious ideas into science curricula are not the "reasonable" Christians, so there's not much urgency in debating people like Karen Armstrong. The second reason, as I realized when I read Karen Armstrong, is that debating her would be much like debating a cloud, or a bowl of Jello. What would there be to argue with? Myers hits the nail on the head with his chapter, "The Karen Armstrong Diet."

She has rediscovered religion as a nebulous source of vague meaning, which she makes excuses for in many long books that seem to consist mainly of earnest pleas for reaching the meaningful in the meaningless.

[Todd Martin · Rating 3 out of 5]

PZ Myers has been a leading force on the web for science and rationality and a staunch opponent of religious superstition (particularly where those beliefs intersect with public policy). He is known for his no-holds-barred style of writing and direct, sometimes confrontational approach … he also has a great sense of humor. His blog may be found at: http://freethoughtblogs.com/pharyngula

With that as an introduction, I very much wanted to like PZ’s book The Happy Atheist. I read his blog regularly and find his posts to be lively and interesting, but for me the book was a disappointment. The Happy Atheist is a series of short essays grouped around a few common themes (within the larger subject of atheism). While the essays make their point, I found them to be a largely lackluster affair. They didn’t inspire, say anything new or push the reader to think about atheism, science or rationality in a new way. The book reads merely as the scattered musings of an atheist blogger.

And here’s what I think is at the heart of the problem … bloggers typically cull a story, news article or content from the web and then provide commentary or critique of the material. PZ excels in this format of written argumentation. His on-line rebuttals to superstitious nonsense are honed to a fine eviscerating edge and often quite funny as well. However, the format of a book is quite different from that of a blog. Since all content must be generated by the author the book lacks the foil for Myer’s scathing critique. As a result, the essays come off as flat and uninteresting. In the end, the book format just doesn’t play to Myers’ strengths and didn’t really work for me.

On the positive side, I enjoyed his discussion of bringing critical thought to bear on religious matters. Myers’ does a nice job arguing that religion and the belief in the non-existent should not be above criticism, and while people deserve respect, ideas don’t. There is nothing wrong with strongly attacking ideas, or even mocking them mercilessly when they’re absurd.

[Autumn · Rating 1 out of 5]

I picked this up ages ago and wish I hadn't. I didn't read the summary, just saw the title and thought it might provide some insight into why it was that so many of my atheist friends were kinder, more empathetic, and, usually, happier than the Christians I knew. After reading this I have 0 idea what the difference is between Myers atheism and fundamental Christianity because both sides are arrogant, haughty, unhappy but convinced they are happier than everyone else, and insist on calling anyone who sees the world differently than them idiots (amongst other insults). For all the ranting Myers does about Christians (quite valid ranting, mostly) he has neither looked into the psychology of religion, nor tried to understand the non-fundies out there. He focused on the crazies and used that to denounce all other theistic beliefs. He ranted about Christians wanting to save others and convert them but also ended many rants on a "and see! This is why you have to believe exactly what I believe and if you don't, well, you're an idiot!". As someone who doesn't really practice a specific religion but has read a decent amount of sacred texts, his calling sacred texts stupid and worthless and awful was... something. One can read the sacred texts and find wisdom and practical guidance for living a good life without necessarily believing in the dieties or that the sacred texts are 100% fact. His own ignorance and lack of empathy showed through more than anything. Which isn't to invalidate his view of the world/opinion on the existence of a supernatural entity, just that, as with all religions, there are ways to hold that view while respecting others and while having an understanding of what those beliefs can do (positively) for others. (He might be very surprised to find a large amount of monotheists do not actively practice religion, but instead glean wisdom where they can find it and approach their own beliefs with a certain amount of skepticism.)

[David James · Rating 3 out of 5]

I suppose I could complain here that Myers spends this entire book going after the low hanging fruit. But the fact is, religion has never been composed of anything other than low hanging fruit. And in our society, at least, the dominant religion is based on the idea that if you dare pluck that low hanging fruit from the tree, you'll be condemned to hellfire eternal. It's such transparently absurd nonsense that any reasonably intelligent five-year-old could see right through it. So it's always good to see someone walk out into the orchard and start filling his basket.

Meyers is definitely on the sneering, sarcastic end of the atheist scale, and thus gets tedious at 190 pages. This book was born of his blog, and the various chapters are little more than refined blog entries. Ideas repeat themselves and there is little of true depth here. Mostly he just plucks the fruit and rants at it. But for those capable of rational thought who find themselves stuck trying to cope with life in an overwhelmingly religious society - and hence a completely irrational society - he offers a bit of catharsis.

You won't find much in the way of intellectual atheism here. You need to visit Dawkins, Hitchens, Shermer, Krauss, and the like for that. But there are some hearty chuckles and a few decent passages in this book. Call it a quick slice of Atheism Lite; a worthy fruit to ingest, but in the long run you need to eat a more complex diet.

[Lindor Joelle · Rating 2 out of 5]

Well, I have about 40 more pages to go in this one and I doubt if my rating will go any higher. I had great hopes for this one, being an atheist-leaning agnostic for about 20 years (a normally happy one at that!). I'm not sure if Goodreads censors reviews, but a more appropriate title for this book could have been "The Prissy Atheist." (with one key letter removed). Mr. Myers made such great points at many times (such as women's roles in religions, why oppressed people cling to religion and how most religions must change their stances based on what we continue to learn about the world).

Despite some really great points, the entire tone of the book seemed childish (or "teenagerish") to me. He spent a great deal of the book seeming to poke fun of nearly ever major religion out there now. At first it was funny, then it just seemed a bit classless. Of course most of us feel that our views are "right" (except for us agnostics who stubbornly refuse to pick a side!), but Mr. Myers tends to lay out his views in the same way that many religions do: I'm right, you're wrong so you need to change!

[Sbuh · Rating 1 out of 5]

Started and finished in one afternoon, and after seeing how much of it is simply repackaged blog posts, my two biggest regrets are not grabbing Jerry DeWitt's book on a nearby shelf instead and losing the receipt so I couldn't return and swap it.

For a book that was in production for multiple years, this is a terrible, lazy effort. PZ may gripe about people like Ken Miller and Karen Armstrong, but even if you disagree with these people you'll actually learn more from a couple chapters of any of their books than this tripe.

The one positive thing PZ might be credited for is introducing a few younger atheists/skeptics to Jacob Bronowski. Go find ANYTHING he's written instead.

[Brian · Rating 4 out of 5]

Classic PZ Myers, a style very familiar to those who read his blog, where much of the material in the book apparently originated. Many well-done criticisms of religion, many uplifting praises of the godless life. The essays near the end are some of the best in the book. It was good to have the "crackergate" story and the "Courtier's Reply" essay in there, along with several essays decrying accommodationism.

[Suzy · Rating 2 out of 5]

Yes I am agnostic but this book made me cringe. The sarcasm that is splattered profusely throughout this book is heightened to the level of ridiculous. Myers resorts to rather offensive depictions of a godly figure, (remember I'm agnostic, so for me to be offended....) and enjoys imagining a fallen god. I don't condone following religious beliefs, but to slam other religions in such a poor style of writing shows a lack of respect and shall only fuel anger in religious believers.