What do you think?
Rate this book
The Threat to Reason: How the Enlightenment was Hijacked and How We Can Reclaim It
Today, media commentators, intellectuals and politicians declare that westernscience and rationality are threatened by irrational enemies.Evangelicals, postmodernists, and Islamists are on the march, they say.The Rome that science built is under siege. But there’s a problem withthese stirring attempts to defend the truth. They aren’t true.
In this urgent new book, Dan Hind confronts the great machinery ofdeception in which we live, and which now threatens to destroy ourcivilization. In particular, he takes to task a group of prominentintellectuals who have exaggerated the threat posed by the so-calledforces of unreason—religion, postmodernism and other “mumbo-jumbo.”The commentators, says Hind, distract us from much more pressingthreats to an open democratic society based on freedom of speech andinquiry.
This book shows that the real threats to reason aren’t wacky or foreignor stupid; they reside in our state and corporate bureaucracies—and,one way or another, they probably pay your salary. In recovering theidea of Enlightenment, Hind explores its vital importance and revealshow it can help us to achieve a truly democratic politics, in which wehave a genuine say in the decisions that are taken on our behalf.
In this urgent new book, Dan Hind confronts the great machinery ofdeception in which we live, and which now threatens to destroy ourcivilization. In particular, he takes to task a group of prominentintellectuals who have exaggerated the threat posed by the so-calledforces of unreason—religion, postmodernism and other “mumbo-jumbo.”The commentators, says Hind, distract us from much more pressingthreats to an open democratic society based on freedom of speech andinquiry.
This book shows that the real threats to reason aren’t wacky or foreignor stupid; they reside in our state and corporate bureaucracies—and,one way or another, they probably pay your salary. In recovering theidea of Enlightenment, Hind explores its vital importance and revealshow it can help us to achieve a truly democratic politics, in which wehave a genuine say in the decisions that are taken on our behalf.
184 pages, Hardcover
First published June 17, 2007
1 person is currently reading
82 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 6 of 6 reviews
Read
December 29, 2011I strongly agree with the crux of Hind’s core argument: that the New Atheist fetishization of Enlightenment is thoroughly misguided. The New Atheists target what they believe to be “irrationalist” groups rather than targeting enemies who operate within the scientific tradition (corporate science, neoliberal capitalists). These enemies are either pretty damned marginal (postmodern academics, New Age spiritualists) or on an equal plane of guilt with corporate science (fundamentalist Christianity and Islam).
The problem is that this argument—more or less the entirety of it, beyond the anecdotes—is encapsulated in that above paragraph. Dan Hind is certainly a talented storyteller, and he brings together some amusing examples that illustrate his argument, but there’s not a whole lot of breadth here.
The problem is that this argument—more or less the entirety of it, beyond the anecdotes—is encapsulated in that above paragraph. Dan Hind is certainly a talented storyteller, and he brings together some amusing examples that illustrate his argument, but there’s not a whole lot of breadth here.
June 18, 2022
A good polemic against what Dan Hind calls "folk enlightment" by popular science writers such as Richard Dawkins and Sam Harris.
At the same time he critiques post modernism.
He says science is not so much under threat from religion and it doesn't stop people from doing science. He says alternative medicine and herbal medicine has not harmed or killed as many People compared with drugs by pharmaceutial companies which faked/lied or hidden harmful sidereffect of medicine and for their research for profit.
He is not against pharmaceutial medicine he just mention One drug where they cheated With their research.
Science is much more under threat of capitalism and corperate profit which Only cares about making money not the enviroment or peoples Health than by religion.
Corperate media who lies about what happens in the world and to start wars is much more dangerous and cia false flags and "national security state" than killings and wars by religious fundementalism.
Also the Focus on religious fundementalism of the folk enlightment and "islámic fascism" is wrong when they long have ignored their Ally Saudi Arabia. Often western countries allied With religious fundementalism such as tablians against the soviet union and the muslim brother hood against democracy in egypt.
I would have given it 5 stars if he didn't eqaute stalinism with nazism which is bullshit.
Overall a good book 4 stars.
This is from versobooks, which refused to publish Domenico Losrudo book.
At the same time he critiques post modernism.
He says science is not so much under threat from religion and it doesn't stop people from doing science. He says alternative medicine and herbal medicine has not harmed or killed as many People compared with drugs by pharmaceutial companies which faked/lied or hidden harmful sidereffect of medicine and for their research for profit.
He is not against pharmaceutial medicine he just mention One drug where they cheated With their research.
Science is much more under threat of capitalism and corperate profit which Only cares about making money not the enviroment or peoples Health than by religion.
Corperate media who lies about what happens in the world and to start wars is much more dangerous and cia false flags and "national security state" than killings and wars by religious fundementalism.
Also the Focus on religious fundementalism of the folk enlightment and "islámic fascism" is wrong when they long have ignored their Ally Saudi Arabia. Often western countries allied With religious fundementalism such as tablians against the soviet union and the muslim brother hood against democracy in egypt.
I would have given it 5 stars if he didn't eqaute stalinism with nazism which is bullshit.
Overall a good book 4 stars.
This is from versobooks, which refused to publish Domenico Losrudo book.
March 6, 2010
Mountains of books have recently been published on the supposedly damaging and undermining effects of postmodernism and multiculturalism. But Dan Hind's excellent and slim, though hard to find (as in, low profile), volume details how these fears, which are not unfounded, have been exaggerated out of all proportion in comparison to the very real, very dire effects of basing our culture, education, economy, and entire society on a globally corporate, profit-obsessed order where the only acceptable (read "normal") decisions must conform to the pathology of the free market. The Threat to Reason places such concerns back into a meaningful perspective. The book I wish everyone I meet would read.
February 29, 2020
Upscale rantings of a crank who’s found the truth. What value there is in this book – and some of it is interesting in terms of research and raising awareness of issues – is undone by the tendentious and conspiratorial presentation. As an example of the approach taken, having accused (highly respected philosopher) John Gray of giving a ‘reliably eccentric take’ he shortly afterwards lists as ‘subjects that cannot be ignored’ ‘state and corporate mind control programmes’ and ‘fluoridation’ (pg. 184-85, n.14 and n.21.).
His fundamental argument is against all accepted authority and expertise and in favour of a mass public truth finding project. Of the two major problems with this he only addresses one. The huge time waste and danger of taking seriously half-informed conspiratorial crazies is just a price worth paying for his ‘open enlightenment’. On the idea that there may be no one truth that will settle political arguments and differences – that some things are essentially contested – he is silent, presumably because he hasn’t considered it. Ultimately this renders his a fundamentally anti-politics take on (then) contemporary politics.
His fundamental argument is against all accepted authority and expertise and in favour of a mass public truth finding project. Of the two major problems with this he only addresses one. The huge time waste and danger of taking seriously half-informed conspiratorial crazies is just a price worth paying for his ‘open enlightenment’. On the idea that there may be no one truth that will settle political arguments and differences – that some things are essentially contested – he is silent, presumably because he hasn’t considered it. Ultimately this renders his a fundamentally anti-politics take on (then) contemporary politics.
January 13, 2016
The part of this that was most interesting for me was his explanation of how/why post-modernism came about, which is no doubt is only part of the story but it is a part I wasn't familiar with before reading this book. I don't think that post-modernism is as marginal as he seems to think it is, though I do agree with has broad argument.
Displaying 1 - 6 of 6 reviews