|
Loading... God: The Failed Hypothesis. How Science Shows That God Does Not Existby Victor J. Stenger
LibraryThing recommendationsMember recommendationsLoading...
won't like
will probably not like
will probably like
will like
will love Sign up for LibraryThing to find out whether you'll like this book. Since I have just started reading this book, it is difficult to completely evaluate it yet. So far, it's been fascinating! Stenger moves beyond the usual philosophical arguments and builds a testable "God hypothesis" (where God is the Judeo-Christian-Islamic God). Proof that atheism is hot -- at least from the perspective of bookstores -- hit me in the local national chain bookstore. Just a few feet from the front door sits a center cap of new releases on sale. Amongst the dozen or so selections -- Victor Stenger's God: The Failed Hypothesis. Considering the religious and political views of the state in which I reside, that is a bold move. A significant portion of the population might well consider the placement of Stenger's book as flaunting the devil's work. At the same time, the placement of the book is reflective of some of the buzz the so-called "new atheism" has been generating due to the popularity of Sam Harris' Letter to a Christian Nation and Richard Dawkins' The God Delusion. Among the issues they raise is why religion is exempt from the same scrutiny applied to other areas of life and society. Although Stenger does not go as far as Harris or Dawkins in condemning religion itself, he takes the ultimate analytical step in the process. He subjects the question of the existence of the Judeo-Christian-Islamic God (and, hence, the very foundation of those religions) to the scrutiny the scientific method would apply to any other hypothesis. Stenger is fully aware of and does not hesitate to refer to the cries theists raise to this approach. Specifically, they claim that matters of faith, belief and miracles are not amenable to logic or the scientific method because they are outside science itself. Balderdash, says Stenger. You don't need to apply science to beliefs or faith itself. Instead, it can be applied to the factual foundations of the assertion that God exists. Balance of review at http://prairieprogressive.com/?p=976 Stenger is a top-notch writer on physics and cosmology. Here he gives a systematic account of how the various sciences falsify all the claims of the monotheistic religionists. 0.057 seconds to build listing no reviews | add a review
No descriptions found. The first test round has been closed. Visit the Open Shelves Classification group for details. |
Abebooks |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Victor Stenger makes an empirical investigation of the God Hypothesis and delivers a geek-fest of smack-down to the theory that God can be anything close to what most theists believe. From the outset, Stenger establishes a baseline of characteristics that the God(s) in his experiment will have, populated largely with the often-stated abilities and preferences of the Judeo-Christian God Yahweh.
A challenge is issued in the first chapter to those who say that science has no ability to test the claims of the religious realm. As Stenger points out, many of the most compelling reasons to believe in God are the very events and characteristics which lend themselves to empirical science. Actions such as prayer, design, and fine-tuning of the universe are taken on with a scientific eye, and what Stenger finds is that in each case, we find exactly the results we would expect to find in the absense of God. His arguments for fine tuning and cosmology are some of the strongest in the book and make for an excellent primer against those arguing strong anthropic stances or who are otherwise insistent that our current laws of nature, position and composition of our solar system, and indeed our very carbon-based nature are somehow fundamental and thus require the careful hand of a diety.
One-by-one, Stenger takes on each God-like proposition, greatly ignoring the 30s (omnipotence, omnipresence, omnibenevolence), which he rightly states don't really need to be posited in order to test the hypothesis. Only rarely does the author deviate from his empirical model, and even then, he does so only to offer an alternative explanation which is at least as likely as any put forward by a theist. Christian apologist William Lane Craigis a frequent target of Stenger's rebuttals.
This straight-forward book offers a investigation into the basic claims offered as proof of the existence of God, and Stenger handily refutes each and every point. I have no doubt apologists will find gaps in his presentation and will find his use of science to be the wrong tool for the job of exploring the mystical, but as Stenger points out, there is absolutely no legitimacy to the idea that science cannot investigate any falsifiable claims made by the religious. Very well argued with no wasted efforts anywhere in this book, Stenger delivers a four and one-half star rebuttal of the God Hypothesis. (