How "God" Works: A Skeptic Questions Belief

by Marshall Brain

Does God exist? Using an intellectually rigorous, scientific approach, Marshall Brain—the founder of HowStuffWorks.com and author of the How Stuff Works series—sets out to resolve the eternal debate once and for all. With a compelling sense of curiosity, he breaks down mankind's search for a higher power, tackling such quandaries Who is God? What are his attributes? What is God doing and why? How does God interact with humanity? And ultimately, how can humans know with certainty whether God is real or imaginary? How God Works is an enlightening journey in critical thinking that challenges readers to boldly approach the subject of personal faith and put aside intuition in favor of objectivity and logic.

Genres: Atheism, Nonfiction, Religion, Spirituality, Philosophy

280 pages, Hardcover

First published November 5, 2013

About the author

Marshall David Brain II was an enthusiastic American author, public speaker, futurist, entrepreneur, and professor, who specialized in making complex topics easier to understand for the general public. Brain was the founder of HowStuffWorks.com and the author of the How Stuff Works book series. He hosted the National Geographic channel's Factory Floor with Marshall Brain and Who Knew? With Marshall Brain.

Reviews

[Sarah · Rating 4 out of 5]

This book builds an extremely strong case for the nonexistence of God by examining each characteristic associated with God separately. For example, he proves that God is not omniscient, that God is not omnipotent, that God does not answer prayer, that God is not morally good, etc. he built such a strong case that I would really be curious to see one of my Christian friends try to respond to it. If any of my Christian friends want to take a whirl at it, let me know - I'm really interested in having a discussion about this book A lot of the arguments he makes are things I've never considered before, even though I've been an atheist for some time. He allows you to do scientific tests to determine if God exists, based on the promises of God and the Bible. He carefully explains critical thinking and why religious beliefs are not a result of it. The only downside is that he comes off as being pretty arrogant, with his insisting again and again that Christians are delusional thinkers, and not thinking critically – he repeats this ad nauseam, and I think he drills that into the reader again and again which can backfire as a strategy because he starts making the reader feel sorry for the people he obviously views as being very stupid. And I think that would turn a lot of Christians off. But this is the first book I ever read that systematically sets out to destroy belief in God by using logic and reason, and I can't fault his reasoning. They do not seem to be any holes in his logic. I'm taking one star off though, because I don't think he should've come across as arrogant as he did. Maybe he didn't mean to, but I think his arrogance is going to turn a lot of people off who otherwise might've been susceptible to this message. I would be hesitant to give this book to a Christian I didn't know because I think the tone might offend them, and they might not even see the arguments for what they are.

[Arensb · Rating 2 out of 5]

Brain comes across as a fresh voice in the genre (I guess it's an actual genre now) of atheist books. He's not an academic like Dawkins, Dennett, Stenger, or Krauss. He's out on the street talking to people and addressing the way religion actually works, at least in the US south.
And in particular, the argument that Brain keeps coming back to is that intercessory prayer doesn't work, even though the Bible clearly says it should. It doesn't cure cancer. It doesn't regrow limbs. It doesn't even show up as a statistical bias in the rates of cancer recovery.

Unfortunately, Brain's reasoning is often not very rigorous. He leaves a lot of wiggle room for apologists to find excuses for their god's absence. In part this is because the Bible has so many clear statements that prayers will be answered, that "God moves in mysterious ways" and the like just don't cut it. On the other hand, apologists have had centuries to hone their excuses, and it might be well to at least consider them.

Finally, I found Brain's style repetitive and grating after a while. He is fond of citing dictionary and Wikipedia definitions of terms, which brings to mind the stereotypical High School essay that begins with "Webster's Dictionary defines X as...". He also keeps telling us that a critical thinker would do this, and a critical thinker would reject that, to the point where it becomes an argument from intimidation: if you're smart, you'll do the following.

[Marshall · Rating 4 out of 5]

This book takes a novel approach to atheism. For one thing, it doesn't talk about it. It doesn't even refute Christian apologist arguments. What it does is teach critical thinking and then applies it to theism. Taking this much more simplified approach, he actually manages to do something incredible: he proves that God doesn't exist.

He does by keeping things very narrow and specific, and carefully applying critical thinking skills. In order to think critically, you have to define your terms very clearly. What does it mean to say God exists or doesn't exist? You have to define "God" and then you have to define "exist."

A common trick believers use is to switch back and forth between a specific god (their god) and a much more broad godish concept like merely a creator or even "God is love." To think critically, you have to get your definitions straight first. So he uses the most common definition of God in his home country and much of the rest of the world: the Christian God. He spells out 12 characteristics of this god which is uncontroversial no matter your denomination, things like omniscience, perfection, answering prayers, etc.

He defines "existence" as "not imaginary," which is a bit more specific. He spends a lot of time on this at the beginning. He explains how double-blind studies work, and how they are used to prove whether various medical treatments are real or imagined (placebo effect). He shows how meticulous researchers have to be to correct for our blind spots which may make imaginary things appear to be real. He uses this to teach critical thinking skills. This doesn't come easily to those who are unused to thinking in this way, so he gives you a lot of practice with things like homeopathy before he even spends much time on God.

Then he uses the same exact process he used for homeopathy on prayer. Answering prayers is a characteristic of God, so if we can prove that answered prayers are imaginary, just as a placebo is an imaginary remedy in medicine, then we can prove that God too is imaginary. We already do it for medicine all the time, proving that something is imaginary. The same double-blind studies have been done on prayer, and has proven that the effects of prayer are imaginary.

He spends a LONG time on this, too long I think. The first half the book is about prayer. It gets pretty repetitious. I think he's trying to be careful and meticulous, but I think he overdid it. But I guess if you can carefully deconstruct only one characteristic of God, then the whole God concept falls apart. God, as it is defined, is disproven if only one aspect of that definition proves false. Prayer proves false. Ergo, God doesn't exist. Done and done. In the second half of the book he dismantles the other 11 characteristics of God, much more rapidly.

He doesn't even use the word "atheist" until the last couple of pages. I thought his explanation for this was quite brilliant and succinct: "A theist is someone who believes in an imaginary god. Therefore, an atheist is someone who does not believe in an imaginary god. This is a double negative that is unnecessary--nonbelief in imaginary beings is the default state for any intelligent person. This is why I and many others reject the atheist label. I'm not an atheist: I'm a normal, intelligent, rational human being. I'm a critical thinker who strives to see reality clearly and is free from the super-irrationality of religious believers. . . Am I an atheist? No. Nor am I an a-leprechaunist--that label would be just as silly. I'm a normal, rational human being who understands reality. There are no imaginary gods and no imaginary leprechauns."

This book sometimes feels like he's reprimanding a child, which might feel demeaning to some believers. I think the idea is the talk straight and slowly because it's teaching a new language, the language of critical thinking. He defines words we take for granted to make sure there is no misunderstanding about their meaning.

Anyway, this isn't a good book for believers who want to argue, like The God Delusion or God is Not Great. This book seems more aimed at believers who are questioning their beliefs and want to read something that will help them think critically about those beliefs. I can't imagine such a reader continuing to believe in a god after reading this book.

[Jake · Rating 3 out of 5]

I got a free copy of this from a goodreads giveaway. This was written by the guy who founded the website howstuffworks.com, which is a pretty cool site that I have used a few times to try to understand stuff that I don't understand too well (like mechanical shit). The book uses the same formula as the site, which is very methodical and logical, which I also liked. He stated his premises, defined his terms, and made conclusions using deductive logic. The book also pointed out several logical fallacies that I hear every single day and must that die (e.g. yes/no/wait, ad hoc, doublethink, circular reasoning, confirmation bias, etc..). I felt like he tore up religious reasoning pretty well, but it just wasn't a page-turner for me. I guess I like my heresy to be more pure philosophy or ridicule/satire. But, nevertheless, it was a fun approach and I enjoyed it for the most part.

[William Nist · Rating 5 out of 5]

If you have some family or friends who are tipping away from religion, this may be the book that will push them over the edge. Marshall Brain offers an elementary work on critical thinking as it applies to the Bible. He is relatively gentle with his reader but relentless in pointing out the problems that scripture presents to the thinking mind.

His case is solid but it is directed at the more fundamentalist believer. But he also points out that suspending belief upon encountering passages that you do not like calls into question the entire Bible (which is why liberal Christianity is in profound decline). So he assumes that you believe scripture is inerrant and divinely inspired.

This of course makes it pretty easy to debunk. But the exercise of identifying all the thinking errors is useful to everyone, even if they are not thinking about religious matters.

Good work Marshall. Your book just might end up on my Christmas shopping list.

[Robert Malcomson · Rating 5 out of 5]

I consider this book to be very important if you are going through a period where you are questioning your faith of any religion. If one considers himself/herself an atheist who has just begun seeking more information about their faith then this is an excellent book to start on. This book focuses more on the logical questions/fallacies that may be found in the bible. Marshall Brain is excellent at using modern day examples do illustrate how the use of bias has led to the increase use of religion to explain the unexplained.

[Marie Kos · Rating 5 out of 5]

This book is EXTREMELY nicely broken down for folks looking at a critical view of religious claims. It can be a little tedious, so it will not be for all casual readers. But I can recommend it for people who have had serious issues reconciling faith and doubt, either in the present or the past. It tends to focus on breaking down the flaws in fundamentalist belief, and also focuses on Christianity, but with a little tweaking this can help the reader look critically at any superstitions or religious obsessions with which they might be struggling.

I think it would be especially good for those who may be suffering from religion-affiliated mental crises ('crisis of faith,' OCD/scrupulosity, PTSD related to religious and cultural trauma). For this reason, I have to highly recommend this book. It is not as humorous or scathing as Hitchens or Dawkins, but it is a more unique exploration of the scientific basis for agnosticism/atheistism that anyone can read and understand. Definitely read it if anything I have said intrigues you, or if it sounds like it could help you or someone you love!

Disclaimer: The author and his book make NO SUCH CLAIMS to help people with mental illness. I just think that the approach, format, and content of the text is highly conducive to folks who are struggling with cognitive dissonance.

[Wayne Clark · Rating 5 out of 5]

This book provides the most cogent and the most critical analysis of religion that I have ever read.

I normally don't read books about religion because I consider it a waste of time. Like Marshall Brain so eloquently states in this book, Christianity -- and the Bible in particular -- is the product of a primitive, prescientific culture that is entirely devoid of critical thinking skills.

Many years before "How 'God' Works", Marshall wrote the book "How Stuff Works". After that book, I began following his work more closely and quietly became one of his big fans. When he first published "How 'God' Works", I ignored it for the reasons stated above.

However, when I saw that Marshall Brain had tragically committed suicide recently in his office at NC State University, I felt like I needed to read "How 'God' Works" to see who he might have offended. After all, North Carolina is still solidly in The South and there is no shortage of ethical absolutists.

Coincidentally, Marshall and I coexisted in the same domain of NC State University and Research Triangle Park North Carolina for over 20 years. However, through all of those years, we never did meet. One of my big regrets in life now is that I never took the time to introduce myself and get to know him personally.

[Bradley Hanson · Rating 5 out of 5]

A must read. I'll update my review, but if you want a logical outline of why The Bible is pre-scientific mythology, full of contradictory messages and how "god" is both cruel and imperfect (by the bible's own words) and how prayer does nothing, this is your book. It discusses the scientific method and the value of double-blind studies in testing theories, and how otherwise sensible people still believe in this nonsense. In some ways, these are all things I've thought before when I was a kid questioning the mythology I grew up with (and didn't receive logical or satisfactory answers from the church or it's practicing members), but you get all the details with specific bible versions, showing both the contradictions and the absence of logic. A simple example: god is not "good" or omniscient if he created people knowing what would happen only to destroy them in the first mass genocide of the flood. (I won't weigh in on the impossibility of a family of non-ship builders building a giant boat and getting 50,000 species of male and female samples in it). Genocide seems like a harsh punishment for a loving, forgiving god who many believe is perfect and can see the future.

[Jonah Kunisch · Rating 3 out of 5]

“Since God is imaginary, there is no divine law and therefore it’s impossible to sin” (267).
Brain fails in this book to prove that God is imaginary. It is well known that it is impossible, actually, to prove OR disprove the existence of God. So, the latter two statements do no logically follow from the first, as he proposes.
Definitely makes one think, and consider one’s own belief in a deity. A lot of cognitive dissonance occurred for me—mentally uncomfortable. However, dogmatism and impassioned tirades against any belief in a higher power, passed off as objective scientific reasoning, do not pass muster for solid proof against God, gods, or the existence of human souls.

[David · Rating 3 out of 5]

I picked up this book by mistake when I actually wanted David DeSteno's work of the same name.

While I appreciated Marshall's attempts at explaining the scientific method and critical thinking, I doubt he will be able to change the mind of his intended audience - the believer in a higher power.

Christians, especially, have quite a few answers to his arguments. Their apologetics may not meet the standard of a "critical thinker", but, nevertheless, he has not addressed them.

Also, the use of the phrase "critical thinker" throughout the book only further alienates his audience. He should have used a more inviting phrase like "curious investigator" or "inquisitive thinker".

I did like his final chapter and think that he should expand on it in a future edition.

[Will Waller · Rating 2 out of 5]

The content is fascinating . Given to me by a church member, this book was purchased by that member believing that it would be beneficial for his faith. Instead, he found the book to be dishearteningly not what he thought it would be. He gave it to me after he complained about it.

While I appreciate the author's intent, to dismantle theistic beliefs, his argument would be stronger if he were to quote more than just wikipedia. It's not helping his case when he goes to Dictionary.com to define words or wikipedia to provide the backbone for his arguments.

It's very skimmable.

[Jonathon Moore · Rating 5 out of 5]

I plan on handing it out and also referencing it often. I learned something new in every chapter. It illustrates many common traps of common fallacies people with little critical thinking fall prey to with religion. A few that are reiterated due to their frequency of use are - confirmation bias, anecdotal evidence, placebo effect, delusion, regression fallacy, post hoc fallacy, yes/no/wait fallacy, groupthink, doublethink, and of course, cherry-picking.

Read this with a highlighter! It contains many definitions and then uses those definitions to expand your knowledge of common logical fallacies. Every argument is defined with step-by-step walk-through treatise in critical thinking. I found that there is plenty of room in the cloud illustrated margins to write notes.

[Joshua Erickson · Rating 1 out of 5]

In comparison to other authors who have tried to prove or disprove the existence of a higher being, Brain's logic falls short. Logic in the true sense must move from one point to another based on sound logic, using unbiased conclusions for the means to an end. This book uses sprinkled logic along with heavily biased opinions to conclude that a truly complex subject, is simply and obviously absurd. I enjoy logical arguments when they move from one point to another using true logic, not opinion and developed situations. I was hoping for a good read, instead I got another heavily anti-religious biased opinion.

[Darla Stokes · Rating 2 out of 5]

Meh. I'm an atheist, and even I was insulted by this book. At least the first 1/4 or so. After that, it got slightly better, but I never got past the idea that he was talking down to everyone. Maybe that's the tone of all the How Stuff Works books, and I'm just not his audience.

[Николай · Rating 5 out of 5]

Detailed examination of the available evidence written in exceptionally clear and approachable language. The book presents a critical look of the examinable facts without delving too much into doctrine or philosophy.

[Tom Rhoads · Rating 4 out of 5]

An interesting approach for this subject. I enjoyed it.

[David Melbie · Rating 5 out of 5]

Excellent!

[Anthony Faber · Rating 4 out of 5]

He's a bit repetitive, dydactic and dogmatic, but I enjoyed the book. Anyone believing in God probably won't be swayed by it, in my opinion.