The Devil's Delusion: Atheism and Its Scientific Pretensions

by David Berlinski

book data

34 ratings, 3.21 average rating, 22 reviews (more data...)

rating	frequency	%
5		14%
4		38%
3		11%
2		23%
1		11%

edit

published

April 1st 2008 by Crown Forum

binding

Hardcover

isbn

0307396266 (isbn13: 9780307396266)

description

Militant atheism is on the rise. Richard Dawkins, Sam Harris, Daniel Dennett, and Christopher Hitchens have dominated bestseller lists with books deni...more

find at: Amazon | Half.com | Barnes & Noble | Abebooks | compare prices…

new topic
discuss this book

There are no discussion topics on this book yet. Be the first to start one »

friend reviews

To see what your friends thought of this book, please sign up.

lists with this book

This book is currently not featured on any Listopia lists. Add this book to your favorite list »

other reviews (showing 1-20 of 72)

sort: default (?) | date
filters: all | text-only

04/09/08

Paul rated it:

bookshelves: apologetics, the-new-atheism

Read in April, 2008

I don't feel like spending much time writing any sort of review for the book: The Devils Delusion: Atheism and its Scientific Pretensions. Berlinski has a Ph.D from Princeton and has taught philosophy and mathematics courses at universities around the world. He claims on page 1 to be “a secular Jew. [His] religious education did not take. [He] can barely remember a word of Hebrew. [He] cannot pray. ]He] has spent more years than [he] cares to remember studying mathematics and writing about the...more I don't feel like spending much time writing any sort of review for the book: The Devils Delusion: Atheism and its Scientific Pretensions. Berlinski has a Ph.D from Princeton and has taught philosophy and mathematics courses at universities around the world. He claims on page 1 to be “a secular Jew. [His] religious education did not take. [He] can barely remember a word of Hebrew. [He] cannot pray. ]He] has spent more years than [he] cares to remember studying mathematics and writing about the sciences.”

The book's assumed value is also its downfall. I didn't care much for my religion being defended by a "secular Jew"...well, a "secular" anyone, for that matter. We're doing fine all by ourselves, thank you. At times he tries to defend my theism by postulating a weak version of God. He also attempts some exegesis of some biblical statements, but this is laughable given his admission about his "religious education." Exegesis is a science and an art. He tries to make a point about the Christian God--appealing to the "I am" statements--and then calls him a "lofty and remote deity" (p.89). But the "I am" statements show God condescending to humans. Using human language. Showing that he is intimately involved in the lives of his people. The "I am" statements do not, in context, teach a "lofty and remote deity." At the end of the day, this secularist "defends" a "god" that I don't care about. He "defends" the possibility of some kind of god, some lofty and remote deity, a being who might exist, not the in-your-face God of the Bible. The god presented in the book doesn’t matter. Berlimski wants to defend some abstract deity. “What is at issue,” writes Berlinski, “is not so much the character of the Deity but his existence” (p.45). As if those could be separated in traditional Christian theism.

Berlinski also claims on page 1 that he is writing this "defense" of theism because "none has been forthcoming." But this is simply untrue. If you scan my "the new atheism" bookshelf, you can find plenty of "defenses" of theism in response to the New Atheists. Perusing Amazon.com will locate a multitude of other defenses. Indeed, by clicking on Berlinski's book, Amazon offers pages of listings with other books in this class.

There are a few good quotes and statements dispersed throughout the book, perhaps some helpful quips, but there are bigger problems. Berlinski does not footnote his book, at all. He offers quotes that, as far as I know, have been pulled out of context. So, a word of advice to the Christian apologist: If you want to use this book to show what a "secular" person has said on your behalf, and what he claims some atheists have said, watch out since someone may ask you to provide the page number, or he may know the page number and show that the context doesn't support Berlinksi's use. So, use the quotes with discretion, you may end up getting embarrassed. Another problem is that Berlinski barely engages the arguments in their developed and robust forms. So, perhaps the subtitle should have been: "The New Atheism And Its Scientific Pretensions." Besides this, I also found Berlinski's writing style to be choppy, vague, and deathly boring at points.

At the end of the day, Berlinski is just as deluded as those atheists he critiques. I couldn't wait to finish this book, and not in a good way, either.(less)

Like this review? yes (1 person liked it)

add a comment

02/02/09

Stupac rated it:

Read in January, 2009

Just finished this one. Mostly I got this book because I have read quotations of Berlinski's other works and found them witty and fascinating. This book did not disappoint. This book has received some criticism because of its elaborate language, which I personally very much appreciated, but I can understand that it is not for everyone. It would appeal most to those who appreciate a little philosophical humor, and being well read also helps (he lost me at a few of his allusions, but for the most ...more

Like this review? yes

add a comment

05/15/09

Neal Tucker rated it:

Read in May, 2009

Berlinski, a secular Jew, combines his incisive wit, a comprehensive understanding of a wide array of topics, and a searing curiosity to dispel the myths of the "New Atheism." He shows clearly that science has not (can not?) prove their is not a God, no minds, evolution, the Big Bang even, etc. The lack of evidence is astounding, according to Berlinski, and it is near impossible to disagree with him. To those needing a counter-read to the hogwash of the New Atheists, this is one of ...more

Like this review? yes

add a comment

12/12/08

Jason rated it:

Read in January, 2009

As both a scientist and a believer, there are few things that make me squirm with more gusto than hearing other scientists spout dogmatic baloney for one side of an argument and against another. There is no room for dogma in either science or religion, and one would hope that people buried up to their knees in either discipline would be the first to acknowledge such a fact. Sadly, no. As a result, every single page of this book made me want to squeal with glee, but since I'm not a little girl...more

Like this review? yes

1 comment

10/13/08

xJane rated it:

Read in October, 2008

recommends it for: atheists who want to learn to argue better; theists who wish they were right

Berlinski's book is, from its title, a rebuttal to Richard Dawkins' the God Delusion. It is, however, more often a rebuttal of Sam Harris' Letter to a Christian Nation specifically and broadly to all atheist works. Having read neither, I will take as a given that both Dawkins and Harris say what Berlinski says they say. However, given how inconsistent his own internal arguments are, I wonder.

Berlinski starts by assuaging the fear of his atheist readers. He is not a theist! He pro...more Berlinski's book is, from its title, a rebuttal to Richard Dawkins' the God Delusion. It is, however, more often a rebuttal of Sam Harris' Letter to a Christian Nation specifically and broadly to all atheist works. Having read neither, I will take as a given that both Dawkins and Harris say what Berlinski says they say. However, given how inconsistent his own internal arguments are, I wonder.

Berlinski starts by assuaging the fear of his atheist readers. He is not a theist! He proclaims, he is rather, "a secular Jew". From that description one might assume that he is of Jewish heritage and descent but does not believe in a (specifically Jewish) deity. However, this quickly is disproved as, through his arguments, Berlinski states that a deity must necessarily exist.

Contrary to most debates in internet fora, Berlinski's arguments start with ad Hitlerum arguments, broken up briefly by ad hominem attacks. Beginning with calling Harris (and his ilk, by association) a terrorist, he continues by calling them anti-Semites.

The first chapter asserts that science is a god, like any other, whose adherents refuse to admit to the existence of other deities. As evidence for this, he sites the fact that Dawkins/Harris are scientists. If this is the case, it is surely news to Harris, a philosopher.

Continuing this argument into the second chapter, Berlinski asserts that science was the cause of the Holocaust. Once again, this must surely be news to many Germans and Historians alike. Citing the fact that the world is still a horrible place (and listing the number of deaths caused by wars in the 20th century), Berlinski concludes that a deity must exist. (The argument goes something like this: since atheism is wrong, &c.) One wonders just what kind of "secular Jew" it is who argues for but does not worship a deity—perhaps there is no hell for him to go to for his lack of faith. We heretics have no such luxury.

In the third chapter, he delves into physics, a subject about which I understand admittedly little, but about which he seems to understand even less. Somewhere in there is a flying horse, but I was left unsure whether its existence was proven or disproven by neutrinos with fingers.

He continues in such baffling manner, creating "atheistic" arguments for him to refute with both theology and physics. By the end, the reader is left wondering if Berlinski believes in anything at all, a failing he notes in atheistic arguments. It seems to me that Berlinski is, in fact, an atheist. He is simply not a militant atheist, an epithet he despises and wishes so much to distance himself from that he talks himself into a theistic/atheistic corner, wanting to have it both ways, and calling all atheists who speak up fundamentalists with no grasp of logic, history, or physics.

All in all, Berlinski comes across as someone I'd love to have to dinner and who really does have some wonderful arguments against the evils of fundamentalism—be it religious or atheistic. However, his disgust of atheistic fundamentalism manifests in bizarre and, yes, entertaining ways. The Devil's Delusion: Atheism and Its Scientific Pretensions is a great book to hone an atheist's analytical skills.(less)

Like this review? yes

add a comment

04/02/08

Donald rated it:

bookshelves: philosophy-of-science

Read in April, 2008

David Berlinski is one of the most intellectually honest writers I have ever read. His dissent of neo-Darwinism is argued in the realm of physics, biology, chemistry, and philosophy. I will read this book more than once. Himself a secular, unbelieving Jew, finds the great conundrum of nature and grace difficult, but somehow an essential component of human existence.

There are no cliches in this book. His disagreements with Weinberg, Pinker, and Stencker are respectful. He is even r...more

Like this review? yes (1 person liked it)

add a comment

05/31/09

Alkoma rated it:

Anyone who has read Dawkins/Harris/Hitchens should pick this one up, if only to gain some balance on the GOD debate. There have been complaints about the language, and I did keep a pencil in hand to underline words (I used up a lot of lead) but I thought it was kind of fun. Berlinski is a likable character, even if you don't agree with his views.

Like this review? yes

add a comment

05/28/08

Jay rated it:

Read in May, 2008

I looked forward to this book with promise, hoping to stock up on ammunition to use against hard-core atheists who use science as the basis for their rejection of, or ridicule of, religion--specifically, Christianity. Unfortunately, Berlinski's writing style is so dense, and full of asides and unnecessarily flowery language, that's it's very hard to follow his points and see his arguments through to their conclusions. It also seems more like stream-of-consciousness writing and not a well-organiz...more

Like this review? yes

add a comment

05/13/08

Cbpax rated it:

Read in January, 2008

recommends it for: Teens/Adults/Apologetics

This was not light reading and it was rather slow reading.
I almost gave it up at times but everytime I almost quit reading I'd hit another great nugget that would make me continue. The buried nuggets made me rate the book a 3.
I'm sure Dr. Berlinski is a great mathematician but he's not a great writer. Every so often he comes out with a great thought and that did make the book a keeper. (Since I have not been able to make myself read "The God Delusion" perhaps it is just ...more

Like this review? yes

add a comment

12/18/08

Brian rated it:

This one is a ton of fun. A "secular jewish scientist" making fun of the recent atheist writers. No holds barred.

Like this review? yes

add a comment

01/10/09

Douglas Wilson rated it:

Read in October, 2008

Really fine.

Like this review? yes

add a comment

05/23/08

Quinn Price rated it:

I heard Belinski speak in Seattle. He's a multiple PhD kind of guy who doesn't hold to a particular religious position but loves to take shots at mindsets of all varieties. I loved his comments on Darwninism....a big dumb beast that you beat until one day you realize the beast can't run, can't fight back and you just get bored with it and walk away.

Worth a read if you're engaged in Christian apologetic work and need fodder to make way for intelligent design in the minds of those wh...more

Like this review? yes

add a comment

06/15/08

elizaholtr rated it:

A challenge to the claim that science "proves" what Dawkins and fellow travelers claim, by a mathematician who claims he has no horse in either race, but wants only to uphold the integrity of science. An entertaining read, becasue in contrast to the spate of atheist authors, this one has a sense of humor.

Like this review? yes

add a comment

05/20/08

Bob rated it:

bookshelves: donated-books

Read in May, 2008

Most of what Berlinski says here is just wrong, and much of it is mean-spirited and uncharitable, but he does have a flair for the unexpected turn of phrase. Some of what he writes is suficiently thought provoking, or clever enough that in spite of my nearly complete disagreement with him, that I did like the book.

Like this review? yes

add a comment

09/19/08

Dee is currently reading it

bookshelves: currently-reading

Haven't cracked it open yet but it looks really interesting. Berlinsky is one of the intelligent design guys--he's the mathematician who talks about how statistically improbable macroevolution is. I'll be critiquing his arguments as I read.

Like this review? yes

add a comment

11/20/08

Laura rated it:

bookshelves: to-read

this book was an ugh. couldn't finish it, but the main point is that science can not disprove the existence of god. therefore god does not NOT exist. got the point. some interesting points and arguments presented.

Like this review? yes

add a comment

05/28/08

Duncan rated it:

bookshelves: currently-reading

Thus far it is one of the finest books I know of debunking the neo-atheist pretensions that exist and have little to no epistemological grounding or awareness. Fuller review to follow upon completion of the book.

Like this review? yes

add a comment

09/22/08

Charisse rated it:

I read the first chapter only because it was our book-club book, but the language was completely over my head and boring. I don't have to read a book by a scientist to know that atheism is unfounded.

Like this review? yes

add a comment