The Best Argument Against God (Palgrave Pivot) by Graham Oppy

by Graham Oppy

The best way to work out whether or not to believe in God is to compare the best theory that says that God exists with the best theory that says that God does not exist, taking into account all of the relevant data. This book compares Theism – the best theory that says that God exists – with Naturalism – the best theory that says that God does not exist – on a very wide range of data. The conclusion of the comparison is that Naturalism is a better theory than for Naturalism is simpler than Theism, and all of the considered data is explained at least as well by Naturalism as it is by Theism. The argument for Naturalism is novel both in outline, and in the details of the case that there is no data that Theism explains better than Naturalism does.

Genres: Philosophy, Atheism, Religion, Nonfiction, Metaphysics

Hardcover

First published January 1, 2013

About the author

Graham Robert Oppy is an Australian philosopher whose main area of research is the philosophy of religion. He currently holds the posts of Professor of Philosophy and Associate Dean of Research at Monash University and serves as CEO of the Australasian Association of Philosophy, Chief Editor of the Australasian Philosophical Review, Associate Editor of the Australasian Journal of Philosophy, and serves on the editorial boards of Philo, Philosopher's Compass, Religious Studies, and Sophia. He was elected Fellow of the Australian Academy of the Humanities in 2009. (Source: Wikipedia)

Reviews

[Caleb · Rating 3 out of 5]

I found this book disappointing, considering Oppy is one of philosophical atheism's leading defenders. He argues that naturalism is a simpler hypothesis than theism and that there is nothing that theism explains better than naturalism; ergo, naturalism is to be preferred. I thought his arguments for both these claims, but particularly the latter, were weak. Specifically, I wish he had spent more time considering the sort of predictions generated by "standard theism" (the hypothesis that there exists a God who is omniscient, omnibenevolent, omnipotent, etc.) rather than on the merits of "minimal theism" (the hypothesis that there exists some sort of God, without determining what sort of properties this God possesses, e.g. omnibenevolence). It's difficult to generate any kind of prediction from minimal theism. On standard theism, however, more progress can be made—for example, it seems reasonable to suppose, under standard theism, that a world created by God would possess some not-insignificant amount of value. Naturalism, however, makes no such prediction. So the fact that our world contains a lot of value has to be some evidence—even if only weak evidence—for standard theism. This type of argument can't be run on minimal theism because minimal theism doesn't predict valuable states of affairs.

Oppy evaluates most of the theistic arguments under the assumption of minimal theism. When he finally discusses standard theism, he says,

"Given that Standard Theism involves a (slightly) more developed conception of God than is afforded by Minimal Theism, there might be reason to reconsider all of the data that was appealed to in the previous chapter in our assessment of the comparative merits of Minimal Theism and Naturalism. However, we shall leave it to you to consider whether the move to Standard Theism makes any difference to the assessment of the comparative merits of Theism and Naturalism on all of that already discussed data."

I encourage the reader to pursue this investigation.

[Armin Hashemi · Rating 5 out of 5]

کتابی کم‌حجم و بسیار خوبی در زمینه طبیعت‌گرایی و برتری‌هایش در برابر خداباوری است. مترجم کتاب علاوه بر متن اصلی یک مناظره از پیتر سینگر و یک مدخل از دانشنامه استنفورد را در انتهای کتاب اضافه کرده و همین باعث دوبرابر شدن حجم کتاب نسبت به نسخه اصلی شده. خداباوری و طبیعت گرایی را به دو دسته استاندارد و حداقلی تقسیم‌بندی کرده و با رد استدلال های معروفی همچون برهان آنسلمی، برهان نظم و شرطبندی پاسکال برتری طبیعت‌گرایی را نشان داده.

[Laurent Dv · Rating 4 out of 5]

Ce livre est le meilleur résumé (à peine 100 pages !) de la défense de l'athéisme par Graham Oppy, l'un des meilleurs philosophes athées encore vivants. Il écrit dans la tradition de la philosophie analytique mais le livre est très accessible. Il arrive à présenter beaucoup d'arguments tout en en résumant l'essentiel sans trop sacrifier leur force (qu'il leur accorde).

C'est une analyse comparée du théisme (qui pose selon lui l'existence de choses surnaturelles) contre le naturalisme (qui exclut selon lui l'existence de choses surnaturelles). Autrement dit, il propose un argument cumulatif (inférence à la meilleure explication). Le problème, c'est qu'il ne dit pas clairement ce qu'est une chose naturelle : en gros il défend quelque chose de proche du physicalisme (au sens de que les réalités spatio-temporelles, physiques sont les plus fondamentales dans tout ce qui existe).

Son but est de démontrer que le théisme n'est pas une théorie plus explicative que le naturalisme (ce que l'un peut expliquer, l'autre le peut donc aussi), et que le naturalisme est une meilleure théorie explicative que le théisme. Pour cela, il parcourt de façon assez exhaustive tous les phénomènes de la réalité : la chaîne globale des causes à effets, le fine-tuning de la vie dans l'univers, la morale, la connaissance morale, la conscience, la raison humaine, le fait que Dieu est "caché" (hiddenness of God), le sens de la vie, etc. C'est à peu près le même contenu qu'une grosse partie de son livre débat plus récent Is there a God? contre le philosophe théiste chrétien Kenneth Pearce. Il vaut mieux lire ce livre plus récent pour une version plus à jour de ce livre que je commente.

Il définit les expressions clés d'abord avant de procéder à la comparaison. Le théisme minimal, c'est le fait qu'il existe un Créateur surnaturel de tout ce qui est naturel (et de des autres choses surnaturelles). Le théisme standard, c'est affirmer qu'il existe un être au moins omnipotent, omniprésent et omnibénévolent (parfaitement bon), plus des attributs plus controversés du théisme classique si on le veut (immuabilité, simplicité, etc.).

[Corey · Rating 5 out of 5]

Probably one of the best introductions to the philosophy of religion currently available. Dr. Oppy presents a clear and compelling argument against belief in God.

I can see the rationality behind his arguments, and can see why people find them compelling, but I don’t buy them and I remain agnostic.

I also think he knows little to none about the current state of evolutionary theory. He makes it seem like there is some monolithic “evolutionary theory” that all scientist agree on, but that is demonstrably false if you pay any attention to the current state of the theory, or history of the theory. There are many competing theories right now being debated, just like there has been since the 18th century. Evolutionary theory does not support naturalism because there’s no such thing as “evolutionary theory”, there are “evolutionary theories”, though. Since there is no consensus, I guess you can pick which theory supports your metaphysical views like Oppy does with Neo-Darwinian evolutionary theory. Oppy fails badly here, as I think he is either ignorant of evidence he gives to support his metaphysics, or he is cherry picking the evidence and he is biased. We’re all human though!

[J.]

Nah, the best argument against the existence of God is (and has to be) a priori. It's one or all of the set of variations of the following: 1) If God exists, God is omniscient, i.e., knows all truths. 2) There is no totality of truths (simple consequence of the diagonal theorems). 3) Therefore God, in any recognizable theistic sense, does not exist. Versions are due to Badiou, Grim, others.

[Damian Stevenson · Rating 3 out of 5]

I don't know how such a short book felt so long. So many topics. Assessing the validity of horrible arguments. A questionable methodology which wasn't explained enough. I liked the book because I got to learn about Oppy. But otherwise many sections were skippable and some reasonings seemed off to me. But Oppy is apparently great so I'll have to try going deeper.

[Kanyimbe · Rating 4 out of 5]

Clear, concise writing.

[Ali Nourbakhsh · Rating 3 out of 5]

کتاب خوبی در زمینه‌ی دیدگاه‌های خداباوری و طبیعت‌گرایی و... بود اما تقریبا می‌شه گفت با خوندش متوجه می‌شید هیچ‌کدوم از این ۲ گروه نمی‌تونن به طور قطع به دیگری ثابت کنن کدوم دیدگاه درسته، هرکدوم مزایایی دارن و اونقدری که اسم کتاب نوشته بهترین برهان شما چیز زیادی عایدتون نمی‌شه با خوندش چون ۲طرف در یه سری مسائل دارن حرف درستی می‌زنن حالا یکی بیشتر یکی کمتر، می‌شه گفت کتاب نسبتا سنگینیم هست چون از بعد فلسفی و برهان می‌پردازه تا نیمه‌ی اول به این موضوعات، در کل بد نبود ولی اونقدرم خوب نبود انتظار بیشتری داشتم.

[Abraham · Rating 4 out of 5]

Great book. Tackles classic arguments for God and lays out the tools to dismantle others. Lots of repetitive motifs though. Regardless, Oppy’s work is always interesting to engage with.

[Mohamad Naim · Rating 4 out of 5]

I started with this short book written by one of the current most formidable atheists, Graham Oppy. Oppy compares and contrasts between Theism and Naturalism; the main takeaway is, utilizing the most famous arguments, that there does not exist a preference between the two positions except that Naturalism requires less metaphysical commitments (as Theism is Naturalism with add-ons). I, personally, was fond of how he tackled the topics of Global Causal Structure, Cosmic Fine Tuning, and History of Humanity.