What do you think?
Rate this book
Life After Faith: The Case for Secular Humanism
Although there is no shortage of recent books arguing against religion, few offer a positive alternative—how anyone might live a fulfilling life without the support of religious beliefs. This enlightening book fills the gap. Philip Kitcher constructs an original and persuasive secular perspective, one that answers human needs, recognizes the objectivity of values, and provides for the universal desire for meaningfulness.
Kitcher thoughtfully and sensitively considers how secularism can respond to the worries and challenges that all people confront, including the issue of mortality. He investigates how secular lives compare with those of people who adopt religious doctrines as literal truth, as well as those who embrace less literalistic versions of religion. Whereas religious belief has been important in past times, Kitcher concludes that evolution away from religion is now essential. He envisions the successors to religious life, when the senses of identity and community traditionally fostered by religion will instead draw on a broader range of cultural items—those provided by poets, filmmakers, musicians, artists, scientists, and others. With clarity and deep insight, Kitcher reveals the power of secular humanism to encourage fulfilling human lives built on ethical truth.
Kitcher thoughtfully and sensitively considers how secularism can respond to the worries and challenges that all people confront, including the issue of mortality. He investigates how secular lives compare with those of people who adopt religious doctrines as literal truth, as well as those who embrace less literalistic versions of religion. Whereas religious belief has been important in past times, Kitcher concludes that evolution away from religion is now essential. He envisions the successors to religious life, when the senses of identity and community traditionally fostered by religion will instead draw on a broader range of cultural items—those provided by poets, filmmakers, musicians, artists, scientists, and others. With clarity and deep insight, Kitcher reveals the power of secular humanism to encourage fulfilling human lives built on ethical truth.
175 pages, Hardcover
First published October 28, 2014
32 people are currently reading
572 people want to read
About the author
Philip Kitcher
44 books38 followersPhilip Kitcher is John Dewey Professor of Philosophy at Columbia University. He was the first recipient of the American Philosophical Association's Prometheus Prize for his work to expand the frontiers of science and philosophy.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 21 of 21 reviews
November 10, 2014
This book has good insight, but it is needlessly philosophical in parts, in that the author takes too long to develop his point or arguments. The introduction is engaging, but then he spends too much time in the rest of the chapters making points, rather than providing more vision for the possibilities of a humanistic worldview and ethics.
I do admire how the author puts an emphasis on humanism and social justice, but there are works by Martin Luther King, bell hooks, and others who could help flush out his humanistic visions much better. His literally references are too Western male focused. So quite honestly, I'm not sure I can really recommend this book, especially if you don't want to spend time reading philosophical writing. There are other writers who could do a better job on these same subjects.
I do admire how the author puts an emphasis on humanism and social justice, but there are works by Martin Luther King, bell hooks, and others who could help flush out his humanistic visions much better. His literally references are too Western male focused. So quite honestly, I'm not sure I can really recommend this book, especially if you don't want to spend time reading philosophical writing. There are other writers who could do a better job on these same subjects.
September 7, 2023
I read this book for a paper I am writing for class in which I had to critique a worldview different from my own. I tried very hard to suppress any presuppositional arguments until I read all the way through. I asked a lot of questions of the author throughout this work.
Like most of the reviews I saw of this book whether the critic was for or against Kitcher’s position, he was said to be unnecessarily philosophical at times. This got me lost a time or ten. This is ok because it was originally intended as a lecture series to philosophy students. I would just say, that he should of dumbed it down for the average reader. Oh 🐋
Kitcher begins by explaining Secular Humanism through the lens of doubting the transcendent. He explains that the transcendent is impossible (for now, he later explains the existence of the transcendent may be possible in the future or at least discoverable in the future) and we are better off as a human society doubting the existence of God. He explains that the proper attitude is one of a agnostic, not atheistic.
He tries to explain how objective morality is possible through societal construction in what is called the “ethical project.” This obviously falls short since there is no standard, and the “standard” he argues for is constantly changing and evolving through the minds of finite individuals. Morality is created and not discovered for Kitcher. He even calls this view “my version of secular humanism” showing the relativity of the worldview.
His thoughts on religion were pretty absurd. He argues that the believing in God was necessary for religious worldviews to contribute what they did to society but now these religions can continue in what they do without believing in the transcendent. Also, his thoughts on death and meaning were just sad and hopeless. He has absolutely no argument for the existence of suffering and for the large majority of the population that does not get to live what he calls “the good life” are reliant upon people changing the world for them to get an opportunity at it.
At times he was humble, admitting faults in this system. At other times he would say things such as “secular humanism faces no intellectual problems when it comes to meaning” lol.
I did enjoy his constant quoting of the Karamazov brothers and did actually appreciate he did not outright attack and mock Christianity but actually would praise them for their work in our society. These are the reasons it is getting two stars.
Like most of the reviews I saw of this book whether the critic was for or against Kitcher’s position, he was said to be unnecessarily philosophical at times. This got me lost a time or ten. This is ok because it was originally intended as a lecture series to philosophy students. I would just say, that he should of dumbed it down for the average reader. Oh 🐋
Kitcher begins by explaining Secular Humanism through the lens of doubting the transcendent. He explains that the transcendent is impossible (for now, he later explains the existence of the transcendent may be possible in the future or at least discoverable in the future) and we are better off as a human society doubting the existence of God. He explains that the proper attitude is one of a agnostic, not atheistic.
He tries to explain how objective morality is possible through societal construction in what is called the “ethical project.” This obviously falls short since there is no standard, and the “standard” he argues for is constantly changing and evolving through the minds of finite individuals. Morality is created and not discovered for Kitcher. He even calls this view “my version of secular humanism” showing the relativity of the worldview.
His thoughts on religion were pretty absurd. He argues that the believing in God was necessary for religious worldviews to contribute what they did to society but now these religions can continue in what they do without believing in the transcendent. Also, his thoughts on death and meaning were just sad and hopeless. He has absolutely no argument for the existence of suffering and for the large majority of the population that does not get to live what he calls “the good life” are reliant upon people changing the world for them to get an opportunity at it.
At times he was humble, admitting faults in this system. At other times he would say things such as “secular humanism faces no intellectual problems when it comes to meaning” lol.
I did enjoy his constant quoting of the Karamazov brothers and did actually appreciate he did not outright attack and mock Christianity but actually would praise them for their work in our society. These are the reasons it is getting two stars.
October 29, 2014
LIFE AFTER FAITH by Philip Kitcher provides a thoughtful and well-researched examination of how secularism can respond to the challenges of life.
A professor of philosophy, Kitcher uses his knowledge of both religion and secularism to address an imagined critic. Chapter by chapter he skillfully engages the reader in increasingly deeper discussions of the issues and arguments surrounding the creation and justification of a meaningful life without religion. His frank and well-articulated discussion provides a positive alternative to society’s historic reliance on religion. Each chapter focuses on commonly asked questions from issues associated with mortality to the meaning in life.
The author’s conversational writing style make even the most complex discussions enjoyable to read and easy to comprehend. Kitcher acknowledges the purposes that religions have traditionally served and is concerned that contemporary atheists ignore the role of religion in the lives of many humans. He skillfully explains why people are draw to religion and continue to practice rituals instilled in childhood throughout their lives. Pointing out strategies religious people use to defend their religion, he provides persuasive arguments for why religion isn’t necessary in today’s society. Kutcher states that “faith is belief that outruns the evidence available to the believer.”
The author stresses that secularists can’t rule out the possibility that new evidence may be presented because throughout history humans continue to build knowledge. He notes that “soft atheism acknowledges the bare possibility of the transcendent, but regards the present assertion of any such aspect of reality as entirely unwarranted.”
The book features discussions on a wide range of issues but places emphasis on the relationship between ethics and religion noting that the secular view of ethics allows for new information and change. Rather than putting religion in a negative light, the author prefers to focus on the positive. He notes that people like Mary Wollstonecraft, Jesus, and Buddha have all sparked thinking about important topics and provided a framework for developing arguments outside their connections to particular movements or religions. The author notes that these people can be “recast as initiators of a thoroughly secular conversation.”
Kitcher’s innovative approach is best reflected in his discussion of how humans possess a mixture of factual beliefs and value judgements. He stresses that humans are impacted by their feelings. From the varied perspectives of early abolitionists to the impact of Dicken’s works on Victorian reader’s views on poverty, the author does an outstanding job providing detailed examples from history to help readers understand the connection between facts and feelings. He stresses that emotions often associated with religion such as joy, gratitude, respect, and awe can all be connected to ethical traditions that don’t require religion. Kitcher states that “my version of secularism places humanity at the center of value. It does not need a detour through some dim and remote transcendent. Nor does it see vivid vindication of human worth in supposing, whether literally or metaphorically, that we are children or servants of God. My naturalism conceives us as both creators and loci of value.”
The author does an extraordinary job addressing abstract concepts in an accessible way. Using easy to understand examples, Kitcher walks the reader through each chapter laying out his arguments. However, this isn’t a book for beginners. Those without a background in the work of Hume, Kant, and others may momentarily feel lost. However those with a limited background in philosophy will be able to follow the author’s clear arguments and well-organized narrative. A chapter by chapter list of sources provides the reader with background information. In many cases, additional explanations are also provided.
Throughout the book, Kitcher focuses on ways that secular humanists can have a fulfilling life without religion. For those readers just beginning to let go of their religion, this book may be very useful in helping them make the transition to a meaningful life without religion.
For happy secular humanists like this reviewer, the book provides useful suggestions for talking with religious friends about the secular humanist perspective on life. By employing cases from literature, mathematics, and other fields, readers can easily identify examples that connect with their backgrounds and philosophies. I highly recommend this innovative approach to secular humanism.
ARC NetGalley
A professor of philosophy, Kitcher uses his knowledge of both religion and secularism to address an imagined critic. Chapter by chapter he skillfully engages the reader in increasingly deeper discussions of the issues and arguments surrounding the creation and justification of a meaningful life without religion. His frank and well-articulated discussion provides a positive alternative to society’s historic reliance on religion. Each chapter focuses on commonly asked questions from issues associated with mortality to the meaning in life.
The author’s conversational writing style make even the most complex discussions enjoyable to read and easy to comprehend. Kitcher acknowledges the purposes that religions have traditionally served and is concerned that contemporary atheists ignore the role of religion in the lives of many humans. He skillfully explains why people are draw to religion and continue to practice rituals instilled in childhood throughout their lives. Pointing out strategies religious people use to defend their religion, he provides persuasive arguments for why religion isn’t necessary in today’s society. Kutcher states that “faith is belief that outruns the evidence available to the believer.”
The author stresses that secularists can’t rule out the possibility that new evidence may be presented because throughout history humans continue to build knowledge. He notes that “soft atheism acknowledges the bare possibility of the transcendent, but regards the present assertion of any such aspect of reality as entirely unwarranted.”
The book features discussions on a wide range of issues but places emphasis on the relationship between ethics and religion noting that the secular view of ethics allows for new information and change. Rather than putting religion in a negative light, the author prefers to focus on the positive. He notes that people like Mary Wollstonecraft, Jesus, and Buddha have all sparked thinking about important topics and provided a framework for developing arguments outside their connections to particular movements or religions. The author notes that these people can be “recast as initiators of a thoroughly secular conversation.”
Kitcher’s innovative approach is best reflected in his discussion of how humans possess a mixture of factual beliefs and value judgements. He stresses that humans are impacted by their feelings. From the varied perspectives of early abolitionists to the impact of Dicken’s works on Victorian reader’s views on poverty, the author does an outstanding job providing detailed examples from history to help readers understand the connection between facts and feelings. He stresses that emotions often associated with religion such as joy, gratitude, respect, and awe can all be connected to ethical traditions that don’t require religion. Kitcher states that “my version of secularism places humanity at the center of value. It does not need a detour through some dim and remote transcendent. Nor does it see vivid vindication of human worth in supposing, whether literally or metaphorically, that we are children or servants of God. My naturalism conceives us as both creators and loci of value.”
The author does an extraordinary job addressing abstract concepts in an accessible way. Using easy to understand examples, Kitcher walks the reader through each chapter laying out his arguments. However, this isn’t a book for beginners. Those without a background in the work of Hume, Kant, and others may momentarily feel lost. However those with a limited background in philosophy will be able to follow the author’s clear arguments and well-organized narrative. A chapter by chapter list of sources provides the reader with background information. In many cases, additional explanations are also provided.
Throughout the book, Kitcher focuses on ways that secular humanists can have a fulfilling life without religion. For those readers just beginning to let go of their religion, this book may be very useful in helping them make the transition to a meaningful life without religion.
For happy secular humanists like this reviewer, the book provides useful suggestions for talking with religious friends about the secular humanist perspective on life. By employing cases from literature, mathematics, and other fields, readers can easily identify examples that connect with their backgrounds and philosophies. I highly recommend this innovative approach to secular humanism.
ARC NetGalley
April 26, 2015
This book seems to try to occupy an awkward middle ground between being aimed at a serious philosophy audience (it is published by a university press) and being directed more at the casual reader. The arguments are probably too drawn out and (sometimes) technical to be of interest to the general reader, but for the more serious reader are often maddeningly imprecise. On a number of occasions while reading the book, I was annoyed by the author's tendency to heap on rhetoric to cover up less-than-rigorous arguments.
My favorite part of the book was chapter 2, which gave what I thought was a very convincing argument for the secular origins of ethics as arising from a social Darwinian evolution towards greater "responsiveness" in our interactions with each other. In other words, ethics necessarily arise from the evolutionary pressure of living in close contact with other people (and are therefore not arbitrary).
In chapter 4, the author similarly gives a secular definition for the meaning of a "life well lived": one in which the person whose life is in question pursues whatever themes or goals are important to them. However, unlike in the case of chapter 2, no defense (at least none that was apparent to me) is given for why this is necessarily the proper secular definition for this notion. This was a major, frustrating omission.
So, everything I really got out of this book came from chapter 2, which, flipping through the Sources section at the end, I realize is actually further elaborated in another book by the same author: The Ethical Project. That book might be a better use of the reader's time.
My favorite part of the book was chapter 2, which gave what I thought was a very convincing argument for the secular origins of ethics as arising from a social Darwinian evolution towards greater "responsiveness" in our interactions with each other. In other words, ethics necessarily arise from the evolutionary pressure of living in close contact with other people (and are therefore not arbitrary).
In chapter 4, the author similarly gives a secular definition for the meaning of a "life well lived": one in which the person whose life is in question pursues whatever themes or goals are important to them. However, unlike in the case of chapter 2, no defense (at least none that was apparent to me) is given for why this is necessarily the proper secular definition for this notion. This was a major, frustrating omission.
So, everything I really got out of this book came from chapter 2, which, flipping through the Sources section at the end, I realize is actually further elaborated in another book by the same author: The Ethical Project. That book might be a better use of the reader's time.
December 30, 2015
Fantastic exposition of secular humanism, especially chapter 4, which is a detailed exploration of meaning and morality without transcendence. What I appreciated most about Kitcher's book is his effort to give credit to religious believers' challenges. I think he does a more than admirable job.
You should be prepared to do some heavy lifting with this one, but it's worth the effort!
You should be prepared to do some heavy lifting with this one, but it's worth the effort!
February 10, 2015
I had high hopes for this book, but couldn't get past chapter 2. Bummer. Too many readable books to stick with a struggle like this one.
November 5, 2014
I found the approach of Philip Kitcher in arguing for secular humanism quite refreshing compared to some of the "hard" or "militant" atheists that are more well known. Kitcher describes himself as a "soft atheist", meaning that although he finds no evidence to believe in a transcendent, he leaves the door open for future evidence that may lead toward support in belief toward one. Like nearly all atheists he has little regard for theists who base their entire foundation of belief on literalistic readings of their "holy" documents. He is more charitable toward what he terms "refined religion" that takes a more subjective interpretation toward religious artifacts, such as scripture. (This reviewer would probably fit into the group that he defines as "refined religion".)
The contents of the book were originally five lectures, now presented as five chapters. Through these lectures Kitcher argues that secular humanism has responses to religionists' typical challenges to atheism on the questions of ethics, morality, values, meaning of life, death and the afterlife, and whether humans are naturally inclined toward good or evil. As his primary area of expertise is philosophy, he is on far better ground to make these arguments than some of his more popular and vocal compatriots.
As a Christian theist, albeit on the progressive/liberal end, I find that Christians, particularly those on the conservative/fundamentalist end holding to caricatures and straw-man ideas of atheists and atheism. It doesn't help that what I've seen, heard, and read from the more hard/militant atheists reinforce some of the stereotypes. What Kitcher does is argue against the extremes in his own camp as unhelpful in bringing legitimacy to the cause of secular humanism.
I recommend this book to both theists and atheists. For theists it will challenge stereotypes they have toward atheism, and it will provoke thinking and perhaps revisions of common arguments made against atheism and in support of theism and religion. For atheists it will provide helpful ways of thinking about their life philosophies and worldview, and how to respond thoughtfully to arguments made against secular humanism.
In the end this book probably won't sway theists to atheism but it can offer a means of better understanding between these two opposing philosophical camps. At the very least it should lay to rest the misconception that there is no rational ethical and moral basis for secular humanism.
(This review is based on ARC from NetGalley.)
The contents of the book were originally five lectures, now presented as five chapters. Through these lectures Kitcher argues that secular humanism has responses to religionists' typical challenges to atheism on the questions of ethics, morality, values, meaning of life, death and the afterlife, and whether humans are naturally inclined toward good or evil. As his primary area of expertise is philosophy, he is on far better ground to make these arguments than some of his more popular and vocal compatriots.
As a Christian theist, albeit on the progressive/liberal end, I find that Christians, particularly those on the conservative/fundamentalist end holding to caricatures and straw-man ideas of atheists and atheism. It doesn't help that what I've seen, heard, and read from the more hard/militant atheists reinforce some of the stereotypes. What Kitcher does is argue against the extremes in his own camp as unhelpful in bringing legitimacy to the cause of secular humanism.
I recommend this book to both theists and atheists. For theists it will challenge stereotypes they have toward atheism, and it will provoke thinking and perhaps revisions of common arguments made against atheism and in support of theism and religion. For atheists it will provide helpful ways of thinking about their life philosophies and worldview, and how to respond thoughtfully to arguments made against secular humanism.
In the end this book probably won't sway theists to atheism but it can offer a means of better understanding between these two opposing philosophical camps. At the very least it should lay to rest the misconception that there is no rational ethical and moral basis for secular humanism.
(This review is based on ARC from NetGalley.)
October 24, 2022
Kitcher's brief, thoughtful case for secular humanism. In five chapters, he addresses the substantive arguments put forward by supernaturalists when insisting that humans cannot be moral (or ethical) without a divine commander or transcendent policeman dictating the rules and enforcing justice. Drawing from my extensive personal experience, I found his characterizations of his opponents' positions to be fair and thoughtful. Similarly, his arguments were on-point in addressing the substance of the debate, offering compelling reasons and alternatives.
In Chapter 1, Kitcher succinctly puts forward the rational grounds for skepticism. In Chapter 2, he summarizes his convincing alternative for the rise of ethical practice in humans, which he more fully explains in his book, The Ethical Project. I find The Ethical Project aimed at philosophers, drawing on philosophy-specific jargon which makes that book harder to digest. Chapter 2's brief summary of that longer text conveys the spirit and substance of his longer argument.
In Chapter 3, Kitcher breaks with Dawkins and other popular atheist advocates in describing a style and splace for religion in secular humanist society, albeit one that devout adherents of literalist faiths won't recognize. In Chapter 4, he offers a compelling viewpoint on how the finite nature of human existence and humanity's search for meaning are enhanced by a secularist worldview. In Chapter 5, Kitcher closes his argument by contesting the unique place of epiphanies in religious experience and disputing the bleakest characterizations of human nature.
At his most compelling, in chapters 2 and 4, Kitcher paints a vision of humanity's purpose that is both stirring and captivating. Passages from chapter 4 are thoughtful and touching reflections on the human condition that would serve well in any eulogy.
Will re-read. Five stars.
In Chapter 1, Kitcher succinctly puts forward the rational grounds for skepticism. In Chapter 2, he summarizes his convincing alternative for the rise of ethical practice in humans, which he more fully explains in his book, The Ethical Project. I find The Ethical Project aimed at philosophers, drawing on philosophy-specific jargon which makes that book harder to digest. Chapter 2's brief summary of that longer text conveys the spirit and substance of his longer argument.
In Chapter 3, Kitcher breaks with Dawkins and other popular atheist advocates in describing a style and splace for religion in secular humanist society, albeit one that devout adherents of literalist faiths won't recognize. In Chapter 4, he offers a compelling viewpoint on how the finite nature of human existence and humanity's search for meaning are enhanced by a secularist worldview. In Chapter 5, Kitcher closes his argument by contesting the unique place of epiphanies in religious experience and disputing the bleakest characterizations of human nature.
At his most compelling, in chapters 2 and 4, Kitcher paints a vision of humanity's purpose that is both stirring and captivating. Passages from chapter 4 are thoughtful and touching reflections on the human condition that would serve well in any eulogy.
Will re-read. Five stars.
July 1, 2015
This is an excellent book that makes a strong case for a positive and meaningful secular humanistic outlook. Written by Philip Kitcher, professor of Philosophy at Columbia, it thoughtfully disputes religious claims on meaning, faith and ethics.
It took me a little time to adjust to Kitcher's writing style, which I found dense and academic in places, but after adjusting to it I found him to have sure hand in guiding the reader through his arguments.
This is not polemic, as some of the mid-2000's books on atheism are (God Delusion, God is Not Great, etc), but a sophisticated and rigorous work. It is well worth the time to understand the arguments, which can be difficult in places (I have no formal philosophic background), and I hope to read it again soon.
It took me a little time to adjust to Kitcher's writing style, which I found dense and academic in places, but after adjusting to it I found him to have sure hand in guiding the reader through his arguments.
This is not polemic, as some of the mid-2000's books on atheism are (God Delusion, God is Not Great, etc), but a sophisticated and rigorous work. It is well worth the time to understand the arguments, which can be difficult in places (I have no formal philosophic background), and I hope to read it again soon.
April 22, 2016
Unreadable? Not literally but after 60 unenjoyable pages I don't see any points that haven't been made before and better made. It's as if the guy delights in paining his readers with 35 word sentences. I've got an idea. Make a point and end a sentence for secular humanist's sake. Fun but not my kind of fun.
I came back for more, conscientious fella that I am. I found the second half of the book much more interesting than the first half. I enjoyed it so much I'd have rated it five stars if it were cleaved of the first half.
I came back for more, conscientious fella that I am. I found the second half of the book much more interesting than the first half. I enjoyed it so much I'd have rated it five stars if it were cleaved of the first half.
July 7, 2016
"Life After Faith" was needlessly academic.
It's theme lies in philosophy and religion, so of course it will be difficult to 'sum things up.' I was reminded of my own professors' speaking...that kind of talking where you talk mainly to show off your own knowledge. It doesn't seem helpful to me. The points were still made in this book, although they were buried underneath dense language.
After the first few pages, I adjusted to the language. I wish the very important message was clearer so more people would gain more out of this book. I am going to look for more books with a similar topic.
It's theme lies in philosophy and religion, so of course it will be difficult to 'sum things up.' I was reminded of my own professors' speaking...that kind of talking where you talk mainly to show off your own knowledge. It doesn't seem helpful to me. The points were still made in this book, although they were buried underneath dense language.
After the first few pages, I adjusted to the language. I wish the very important message was clearer so more people would gain more out of this book. I am going to look for more books with a similar topic.
October 28, 2017
This book was not as good as I thought it would be. A lot of arguments that don't really do much to separate the author's philosophy from very liberal religion (what he calls refined religion). I did enjoy his commentary on King Lear and The Brothers Karamazov towards the end of the book however.
October 8, 2016
plausible
August 4, 2019
I need to think about this further. And perhaps reread it.
February 3, 2020
Not an easy read. Makes some interesting points.
February 1, 2021
I'm sorry but for a novice just starting to explore the concept of secular humanism this was not the book to start with. I'm sure for someone who can get lost in the philosophical rabbit hole this is good stuff but for a guy just starting out, couldn't get thru it and quit like halfway. So could see someone well versed in the concept and philosophical writing in general this would be the book for you.
March 13, 2019
The book was a bit more dense than expected, but there are two key takeaway that I like.
1. Ethical truth necessarily undergirds all other realms of truth claims.
2. Ethical progress should be viewed as "progress from X" rather than "progress towards X."
1. Ethical truth necessarily undergirds all other realms of truth claims.
2. Ethical progress should be viewed as "progress from X" rather than "progress towards X."
May 17, 2016
I refined and genteel argument for Secular Humanism from the perspective of a liberal theologian.
Humanism though, for the introvert, is a false goal and endpoint for establishing meaning in life. Making 'other-directedness' the criteria for the good life leaves half the species behind who have little intrinsic interest in others (with no hostility implied).
So, this work to not establish Secular Humanism as a viable alternative to "refined" religion for me and the billions like me, and his argument fails. Although reading the book is like having tea with an English gentleman.
Humanism though, for the introvert, is a false goal and endpoint for establishing meaning in life. Making 'other-directedness' the criteria for the good life leaves half the species behind who have little intrinsic interest in others (with no hostility implied).
So, this work to not establish Secular Humanism as a viable alternative to "refined" religion for me and the billions like me, and his argument fails. Although reading the book is like having tea with an English gentleman.
January 16, 2024
After too many "new atheist" books that find no merit in religion at all, I appreciated that the author makes a solid case for secular humanism but doesn't feel the need to reject everything about religion as terrible and superstitious. I was reading it mostly for the chapter on thinking about death from a secular perspective, but found it worthwhile enough to read the whole thing.
August 23, 2017
This book was extremely hard to read and I couldn't get past the first few chapters. Could just be me, but I could t get into the writing style.
Read
May 1, 2017211.6 K623 2014
Displaying 1 - 21 of 21 reviews