God and the Folly of Faith: The Incompatibility of Science and Religion

by Victor J. Stenger

A thorough and hard-hitting critique that is a must read for anyone interested in the interaction between religion and science.It has become the prevalent view among sociologists, historians, and some theistic scientists that religion and science have never been in serious conflict. Some even claim that Christianity was responsible for the development of science. In a sweeping historical survey that begins with ancient Greek science and proceeds through the Renaissance and Enlightenment to contemporary advances in physics and cosmology, Stenger makes a convincing case that not only is this conclusion false, but Christianity actually held back the progress of science for one thousand years. It is significant, he notes, that the scientific revolution of the seventeenth century occurred only after the revolts against established ecclesiastic authorities in the Renaissance and Reformation opened up new avenues of thought. The author goes on to detail how religion and science are fundamentally incompatible in several the origin of the universe and its physical parameters, the origin of complexity, holism versus reductionism, the nature of mind and consciousness, and the source of morality. In the end, Stenger is most troubled by the negative influence that organized religion often exerts on politics and society. He points out antiscientific attitudes embedded in popular religion that are being used to suppress scientific results on issues of global importance, such as overpopulation and environmental degradation. When religion fosters disrespect for science, it threatens the generations of humanity that will follow ours.

Genres: Science, Religion, Atheism, Nonfiction, Philosophy, History, Spirituality

412 pages, Kindle Edition

First published January 1, 2012

About the author

Victor John Stenger was an American particle physicist, outspoken atheist and author, active in philosophy and popular religious skepticism.

He published 13 books for general audiences on physics, quantum mechanics, cosmology, philosophy, religion, atheism, and pseudoscience. He popularized the phrase "Science flies you to the moon. Religion flies you into buildings".

Reviews

[Daniel · Rating 5 out of 5]

A few years after Albert Einstein proposed his theory of special relativity in the 1905 paper “On the electrodynamics of moving bodies,” my maternal great grandfather financed the publication in twelve volumes of The Fundamentals, a conservative Christian call to arms that defended Protestant orthodoxy and attacked atheism, liberal theology, Catholicism, Mormonism, Christian Science, evolution, socialism, and modern philosophy. These books were distributed free to clergyman across America and apparently around the world. A second edition in four volumes was published in 1917 and remarkably reprinted in two volumes as recently as 2008. The Fundamentals became the nominal and theological foundation for the development of American Christian Fundamentalism. His son-in-law, my grandfather, was a Presbyterian minister. In balance to this matrilineal piousness, my father was a self-educated scientist and electrical engineer who once confided to me that he only went to church to please my mother. I idolized my father, so it perhaps was no surprise that I failed my eighth grade confirmation class to join the Presbyterian church when I asked the minister what proof there was that God was real and was told that this was not a matter of proof but a matter of faith. My agnosticism evolved into unrepentant atheism over the years to come as I trained to become a physiologist and physician. Now nearly 50 years later, I continue to be puzzled that any intelligent person could be anything but an atheist.

Victor Stegner’s God and the Folly of Faith is the most readable and cogent explanation I have encountered of the irrationality of religion and the absolute incompatibility of religion and science . It is not patronizing and does not ridicule religion and in fact has helped me understand the thought process of some intelligent people who still believe in God. I would strongly recommend it not only to atheists but also to agnostics and believers looking for a cogent but polite explanation of the evidence in support of atheism.

[Bakari · Rating 5 out of 5]

Very good read. Though I have a lot more reading and studying do before I can begin to understand basic physics, I appreciate how Stenger provides scientific evidence about important questions, including the accidental emergence of the cosmos, the lack of evidence for the existence supernatural gods and transcendent after-life, the lack of intrinsic purpose in the universe, and arguments that morality comes from God.

Stenger makes no apology for arguing that there's no compatibility between religion and science—the former relies on believe and ancient outdated scriptures, and the latter relies on material evidence, reason, and empiricism.

He takes on the religious apologists, like Dinesh D'Souza, by quoting and explaining their claims, and then argues how they are wrong. He also takes on his fellow scientist who support Stephen Jay Gould's concept that science and religion are "non-overlapping magisteria" (NOMA)—i.e., that science is concerned with the "'outer' world of the senses, while religion deals with the 'inner' world of morality and meaning." Science and I would add "critical thinking" can say a lot about morality. Our morality is based on our biological evolution, and more on social morals codes that cultures and and societies have developed and agreed upon based on numerous factors. Outdated god-believe is no longer needed to teach us about morality.

Stenger is of course a physicists, and he does make arguments using the evidence and claims of physics, but you don't have to fully understand the science in order to get through the book. (Read what you can, because you'll need to read more than one book to understand physics.) Stenger's writing is lucid and engaging, and he is very much concerned about the survival of the planet. He rightly argues that religion is holding back humanity, and it's time we move forward and bury religious philosophical views. His books are a contribution to the transition from a religious-based society to one guided by science, reasoning, critical thinking, and I would add, social and economic justice.(less)

[Ryan Manns · Rating 1 out of 5]

Basically religious fundamentalism is bad and has inhibited the progress of science. Yes that is correct. Doesn't mean we should put all religious people in the same boat as fundamentalists. I admit that I didn't read the entire book only the chapters that peaked my interest. It's not the he didn't have any good points it just felt like he was grasping at straws at times as he tried to argue against God and religion as a whole. For some examples he states that because there are some who believe RNA could self-assemble then we now have a plausible explanation for the origin of life that doesn't invoke a God. As far as I'm aware "RNA-origins theories" are not popular among origin scientists and the theories themselves have very little support. I'm not even suggesting we should invoke a God for the origin of life but saying that RNA theories solve the problem seemed a little dishonest to me for our current knowledge. Another example could be that he states in the last 30-40 years 172 children have died due to religious parents not seeking medical attention for curable diseases because they had faith God would save their child. Well if we're going to say that why not also mention that the 3rd leading cause of death in America is medical professional mistakes. Should we then conclude that seeking medical help is bad? Obviously not. So why use this example of extreme fundamentalism and say religion is bad and has a negative impact on health. Or how he says that because some of the "fine-tuned" constants actually have wide ranges of values that are permissible for life the universe really doesn't show fine-tuning. Well it seems to me that as long as all those constants are within the range then yes the universe (or at least our planet and others in goldilock zones) are fine-tuned for life (that doesn't mean we NEED a creator or God though it's just admitting that certain places like earth are exactly what we need to live). I could list more examples throughout the book, and perhaps he just tried to tackle too wide a range of topics, but I feel like all he really argued against was blind faith and religious fundamentalism and we shouldn't come to the conclusion based on his arguments that all religion is bad and all religion needs to be done away with.

[Carl · Rating 5 out of 5]

Great book by Victor Stenger on how religion has been a detriment to society and a menace to science and reason and is incompatible when it comes to empirical evidence verses blind faith.

[Stefan · Rating 5 out of 5]

A great many of the 2 or 3 star reviews here are not given due to the quality of the work, but rather due to personal tastes. One guy gave it 3 stars because it lacked 'humer' (humour), another as 'too complicated' and so on.

Subjective comments are supposed to be expanded upon in the review section here, but we should rate the book objectively.



Anyway, I loved this book. I had recently come off McCormick's 'Atheism and the Case Against Christ,' and my god was it painful. Stenger argues strongly and with passion. It's really a shame that a book like this needed to be written to be honest, and it would have surprised me greatly (despite my bias) if Stenger had failed to present a strong case against the compatibility of science and religion.

I think the author's overload on science was awesome (contrary to the opinions of others). I mean if you want those generic new-atheist books catered to the masses, read Dawkins, Dennett, Hitchens or Harris.

Stenger's book is brilliant, and very rarely does a non-fiction book have me feeling entertained (i usually read non-fiction to expand knowledge and not really for entertainment purposes.'

I don't think this is a book that will shatter the beliefs or faith of theists, and I don't think it's supposed to. It was written to highlight the flaws in the theistic belief that science - a process in which we utilize to explain *natural* occurrences - can be reconciled with that which exists in another freakin' dimension (the supernatural!!)

[Dan Graser · Rating 5 out of 5]

This is Stenger's greatest work, his most thorough and lucid examination of religion and science and how the two have interacted for thousands of years as opposing forces. Magnificent!

[Thomas Westbrook · Rating 5 out of 5]

Fantastic book, but if you don't have a background in science, it's going to be a tough read.

[Book Shark · Rating 5 out of 5]

God and the Folly of Faith: The Incompatibility of Science and Religion by Victor Stenger

“God and the Folly of Faith" is a call for action to put a stop to superstition that only serves as an impediment to science and progress. This book provides compelling evidence of why science is incompatible with religion and why superstitious thinking and blind faith is a threat to our planet and our lives. Dr. Stenger takes the reader on an enlightening ride that covers many areas of incompatibility and shows quite convincingly that Christianity has hindered progress. This excellent book is composed of the following fourteen chapters: 1. Introduction, 2. The Earliest Skirmishes, 3. The Rebirth and Triumph of Science, 4. Darwin, Design, and Deity, 5. Toward the New Physics, 6. Particles and Waves, 7. Cosmos and Creator, 8. Purpose, 9. Transcendence, 10. Beyond Evolution, 11. Matter and Mind, 12. Metaphor, Atheist Spirituality, and Immanence, 13. From Conflict to Incompatibility, and 14. Why Does It Matter?.

Positives:
1. As expected, a well-written and well-researched book. Stenger doesn’t disappoint.
2. Stenger’s background in physics, philosophy and writing sets him apart from many authors. His writing style and background are conducive to excellent books like this one.
3. I enjoyed reading this book, always an important parameter but the other important factor is that he is fair and even-handed. Example, he doesn’t overstate what science knows and is quick to keep things in perspective as is the case with Michael Persinger’s famous research that has yet to be independently confirmed.
4. Good use of sound logic backed by good science and lively prose makes for a worthwhile, enlightening treat.
5. Stays on topic and proceeds to methodically provide compelling arguments that support his main thesis: science and religion are incompatible.
6. A quote fest. Many great quotes throughout the book.
7. “Irreconcilable differences arising from different and methodology of science and religion include the origin of the universe and its physical parameters, the origin of complexity, the concepts of holism versus reductionism, the nature of mind and consciousness, and the source of morality”. And true to his word he proceeds to cover these areas with expertise.
8. Great history in which Stenger shows how the “Dark Ages” thwarted scientific progress.
9. The origins of religion…the tendency of humans to ascribe animate agency. The evolution of human thinking. Plato and of course the great thinker Aristotle’s influence is noteworthy.
10. The Enlightenment and triumph of science. Interesting insights into Arabian science.
11. Stenger does a real good job of rebutting the Christian worldview.
12. Darwin’s great contribution to the world and how it threatened the faithful. The movements that grew to oppose evolution.
13. Great accessible chapters on physics in which Stenger lays the foundation to show where religious apologists and spiritualists distort science. “Reductionism and materialism are stronger now than they ever were”.
14. Stenger does not shy away from tackling the “best” arguments presented by those who oppose his views, he relishes in it. He goes after William Lane Craig, Dinesh D’Souza, Francis Collins to name a few.
15. Putting purpose into perspective and how holistic thinking keeps people from grasping simple concepts.
16. How religious beliefs thwarts stem-cell research, birth control, same-sex marriage.
17. Fascinating chapter on transcendence. One of my favorites in which Stenger goes after souls, prayers, the afterlife, spirits, (NDEs) near-death experiences, reincarnation…
18. Great wisdom…”If people believed that cosmic justice will be meted out in the afterlife, they wouldn’t have any need to worry about justice in this life”. And thus why such beliefs have negative consequences in society. Interesting look into morality.
19. How the Bible has been used to justify the evil that slavery was and is. Hmmmm.
20. A look at nonmaterial entities. The material brain, consciousness, free will…
21. The modern view on religion, science and atheism.
22. A great summary of conflicts. Excellent!
23. Religion and politics and how it threatens our present and future. What we believe and what we deny…global warming as an example.
24. Links worked great.

Negatives:
1. Some very minor editing problems. A couple of words were misspelled like commonwealth.
2. The chapters on physics (Particles and Waves) may be a little science-heavy for the layperson.

In summary, I really enjoyed this book. Dr. Stenger has the perfect background to write such enlightening books. His prose is lucid and he writes with conviction. This book successfully proves the main point of the thesis: that science and religion are incompatible. Another keeper from Dr. Stenger, I highly recommend it!

Further recommendations: “God: The Failed Hypothesis. How Science Shows That God Does Not Exist” by Victor Stenger, “Lies, Damned Lies and Science” by Sherry Seethaler, “Fool Me Twice” by Shawn Lawrence Otto, “Scientific Paranormal” by Benjamin Radford, “Science Under Siege” by Kendrick Frazier, “Braintrust” by Patricia S. Churchland, “Who’s In Charge?” by Michael S. Gazzaniga, "The Religion Virus” by James A. Craig, “50 Reasons People Give For Believing in a God” by Guy P. Harrison, “The Atheist Universe” by David Mills, “Science and Nonbelief” by Taner Edis, “Society Without God” by Phil Zuckerman, “Atheism Advanced” by David Eller “The Believing Brain” by Michael Shermer, and “Why I Became An Atheist” John W. Loftus.

[Elliott Bignell · Rating 5 out of 5]

I can't decide whether to praise this book more highly as an introductory summary of modern physics or as a cool piece of rationalist apologetics. On either account it's a blinder. We've had atheist literature in recent years from biologists, philosophers and rhetoricians, but now we have a physicist up to bat, and suddenly I realise it was what we were missing. What motivates apologists on either side is the fact that since Darwin, science has seemed to render the folly of faith unnecessary. There was a gap labelled "quantum" which was filling up with the small gods of what-the-bleepism and teleology, and Stenger with great facility and skill has mortared it closed, leaving barely the mark of a trowel.

The book is so good, in fact, that the only fault I can really find is that Stenger (died 20xx) consistently places the date of death of his scientific dramatis personae in brackets after their names. This used to be a convention in history books and I can report that it hasn't got any less irritating for having largely disappeared. There is also an attempt to create a distinction between "eternal" and "infinite" which I found to be rather forced.

Stenger, like all those articulately confronting the pro-religious prejudices enshrined in our societies and states - I speak from a seat in Europe here - has been accused of being confrontational. Personally, I find his refreshing ruthlessness far preferable to the appeasement of the otherwise admirable Chris Mooney and his kind. In the UK bishops still have reserved seats in the upper house of Parliament, for Dawkins' sake! We have only just acquired the right to criticise religion, historically speaking, and there are outright wrongs needing urgent correction. Stenger's tone, in any case, is calm and even; he shows, clearly and thoroughly, why religion and science are incommensurable and why quantum holism and the like are snake oil. He does not offend, unless you find the very fact of being questioned offensive.

Stenger clears up a few misunderstandings of quantum physics that even I, fairly versed in the subject as a lay-reader, had still entertained, and there is at least one real bombshell realisation in the book: Physics is famously time-reversible, the arrow of time emerging only statistically from thermodynamics. With no preferential direction in which to seek a beginning, therefore, the boundedness of time does not suffice to fix a moment of creation! The fact that our arrow of time stops at the big bang does not mean that this was the "start", as time has no inherent arrow, so it also cannot indicate a creation!

There are a few claims I could quibble with. In the face of the demographic transition, even visible in Iran and Saudi Arabia, changes in birth rate cannot fairly be laid at the door of retreating religion, for instance. They are more than compensated for by dazzling blasts of realisation: Science eradicated smallpox without omipotence or omniscience; why, then, is the glory of life evidence for a deity exhibiting either of the two, and how can he be good if he has both and yet permitted smallpox?

Truly, this man is the son of another man.

[Amy · Rating 5 out of 5]

Despite its title, God and the Folly of Faith is more or a science book than a religion one. Chapter by chapter, Dr. Stenger takes the various claims made by traditional religions and new age mystics regarding science and explains how the science has been cherry-picked or otherwise misused, how the claims are incorrect, and how the claim has been used to create the a misleading impression that undermines actual facts and a worldview founded on openness and evidence. The author makes clear multiple times throughout the book that the 'folly of faith' is the worldview promoted by religion and mystics; basically, that accepting claims with no evidentiary basis in reality is unintelligent and ultimately harmful to both the individual and their society, even they feel nice in the short term. I very much enjoyed the book and - despite its length - found it to be very well-researched, well-written, and informative.

[Amy · Rating 2 out of 5]

Stenger is a retired research scientist (physics?) and one of the “New Atheists” along with Dawkins and Hitchens and Harris. In this book, Stenger goes through a very brief history and explanation of various elements of science, debunking religion’s claim for itself along the way. I skimmed most of it, wondering who the audience was. The tone was such that a Believer would never pick it up with an open mind. Yet for me, the things Stenger discussed were things I either already knew and understood, or didn’t care about (like some of the finer points of quantum mechanics). Interesting enough, I suppose, but I don’t think I was the one he was writing for.

[Liquidlasagna · Rating 1 out of 5]

Amazone


I agreed with the premise of the book but...

This book was highly recommended. I found the early part boring, not because I disagreed with the book, but, having read Dawkins and Hitchens, it just didn't add much to my knowledge of the subject.

What annoyed me the most was the end where it devolved into ad hominem whereby the author blamed much of the ills of US political decisions on the religious right and Republicans who the religious right in general supported.

His acceptance of Global Warming by invoking "consensus" of scientists uses another logical fallacy of appeal to authority. By somehow conflating being a Global Warming skeptic with religion shows me that the author, although an atheist, has embraced the religion of Catastrophic Global Warming.

If you haven't read them, I suggest Dawkins' the God Delusion or any of Christopher Hitchens' book.

Most Hitchens on YouTube are vastly more useful and interesting.

gerrybuddy

---

Write a political book with that nonsense.
I wanted to read about science.

Timothy

---

[and two religious reviews with some interest]

---

One Crying in the Wilderness

The basic premise of this book is that Science can disprove the existence of God - when all that Science can give is more Science.

This book of Victor Stenger, like his other attempts to give Science a support for atheism, is an exercise in futility.

The Science is awesome, overwhelming, massive, unquestioned - any proof that Science proves "the Folly of Faith" is non-existent. He is out of his league, a child playing with his scientific blocks, an infantile attempt to make 2 + 2 = six million.

Like his partner in his attempt to use Science for atheistic purposes, Richard Dawkins, he drinks down gulps of the Science ocean - and almost chokes. His affirmations lead to nothing but empty affirmations.

Why this attempt of a scientist to prove that God does not exist? Because he has to justify his atheism, which hangs on his scientific clothesline like a dead cat.

His book is a great encyclopedia of modern science - BUT IT PROVES ABSOLUTELY NOTHING ABOUT GOD, CHRISTIANITY OR FAITH.

From that point of view, it is illusory, deceptive and the use of Science to defend a private and personal bias.

It seems, for Victor Stenger, Atheism cannot stand on its own two feet.
It needs the illusion that it has a basis in Science or it falls flat on its face.

Atheism is a private and personal bias, no more.
As an apologia for atheism, the book fails miserably.

Father clifford Stevens

---

[this review was poor in a lot of places but it did have occasional good points]

For example, he asserts without a shred of evidence, that once upon a time there were multiple universes from which our universe sprang (pg. 188). Such a fairy tale is not science but an article of faith.

A few oddities, absurdities, or matters of interest in this book:

a. Stenger denies the law of cause and effect in order to do away with any talk about God as the First Cause (p. 50). Stenger claims that theists who see causality are using "caveman logic" (p. 97).

He misuses "Heisenberg's uncertainty principal of quantum mechanics" in order to make these claims (pp. 91, 141ff.).

b. Stenger writes, "...we have no reason to rule out an eternal multiverse" (p. 188) That's like saying we have no reason to rule out little green men on the other side of the universe. We have no reason to rule it in either other than to support our preconceived ideas that there is no God. Stenger is handing us science fiction, not science. If only pigs could fly!

c. Stenger brushes off the theistic "anthropic principle" argument by asserting that "other life forms" still "might have developed had the universe had a different set of constants" (p.174). Well, the universe does not have "a different set of constants," so Stenger's assertion is really irrelevant and unprovable! It is nothing but a statement of faith, another attempt to escape the evidence in front of him and replace it with this unscientific gap-filler.

d. Stenger's last chapter, entitled, "Why Does It Matter?" reveals why it matters, but not for the reasons he gives. Here he displays his warped radical left-wing political views. Those who disagree with him are accused of being anti-science, relying on "magical thinking and blind faith" (p. 322).

e. Stenger says, "I don't know of a single mass-murdering atheist who did so in the name of godlessness" (p. 256). One can only wonder if Stenger ever heard of Jeffery Dahmer or Columbine. The murderers involved were all godless and believed its foundational underpinning, evolution.

"Evolution" was printed on the T-shirt of one of the murderers at Columbine. The two murderers in that case deliberately targeted Christians and so stated their intentions to do so on video prior to the event. Isn't that evidence?

Dahmer, in a recorded interview, said that belief in atheism and evolution gave him a green light to do what he wanted to do to satisfy his urges. Isn't that evidence?

Steven

[Ilia · Rating 3 out of 5]

I feel like this book was all over the place. There are many interesting bits of information, but it does not do a cohesive job of talking about God vs Science, honestly. It sometimes felt like author just explains science and the history of science without connecting it to religion, and then at the end of the chapter remembers "Oh, this is a book about religion too, let me throw some comparisons in".

Also, it felt like the author has this attitude that everything is figured out by science and there's nothing more to learn or discover. For example, in at least one field it felt oddly out of place - the origin of consciousness. I don't believe in eternal souls, heaven or hell, but to say that consciousness is 100% arises from matter and there's simply nothing else to discuss is to lie, in my opinion. Science does not know where consciousness is coming from and how it actually works. Why thoughts arise and arise in your unique and specific way, it does not know how our identity returns to us every morning as if we never stopped existing for a brief moment...

There's many mysteries to be discovered about the nature of consciousness, and there are a lot of theories (not all are hardcore about matter, and not everything is about God) like brain is a filter or panpsychism, and probably even more. No one can say for sure that consciousness simply arises from big clusters of matter, it is just one of the theories. Brain is a filter or panpsychism, despite sounding fancy, are just as good theories, and in many cases interestingly even better, than simply "materialistic" one. And it is very interesting to talk about this blind spots and mysteries without invoking God. However, it is simply a lie to say that everything is 100% material and all is figured out.

[Steve · Rating 4 out of 5]

Victor J. Stenger’s God and the Folly of Faith is a no-holds-barred assault on the notion that science and religion can coexist peacefully. This book is a battleground where reason and faith square off, and Stenger, a seasoned physicist, pulls no punches. He aims to convince readers that these two realms are fundamentally incompatible, and he sets out to prove it with a blend of scientific evidence, historical analysis, and philosophical argument.

Stenger’s central thesis is as clear as day: faith is folly. He contends that religion has historically hindered scientific progress and that its core tenets are fundamentally at odds with the findings of modern science. He takes aim at everything from the creation myth to the existence of a divine being, leaving no stone unturned in his quest to debunk religious claims.

The book is structured in a logical and accessible manner, guiding readers through a series of well-defined chapters. Each chapter tackles a specific aspect of the science-religion debate, allowing readers to follow Stenger’s argumentation with ease. While the subject matter is complex, Stenger’s writing style is surprisingly engaging. He manages to balance academic rigour with a conversational tone, making the book accessible to a wide audience.

Stenger clearly knows his stuff. He backs up his claims with a mountain of evidence, citing numerous scientific studies and historical documents. His deep understanding of both science and religion is evident on every page. However, the book’s greatest strength is also its biggest weakness. By focusing so intently on dismantling religious beliefs, Stenger risks alienating potential readers who hold those beliefs dear.

While God and the Folly of Faith is undoubtedly a well-researched and thought-provoking book, some readers might find Stenger’s tone overly combative, and his dismissal of religious experience as mere delusion could be seen as dismissive. And the book could have benefited from a more in-depth exploration of the philosophical implications of its arguments.

Despite these criticisms, God and the Folly of Faith is a valuable contribution to the ongoing debate about science and religion. It’s a must-read for anyone interested in understanding the philosophical and historical underpinnings of this complex issue. While it might not change everyone’s mind, it certainly gives readers plenty of food for thought.

I would recommend this book to anyone with a curious mind and a willingness to challenge their assumptions. Whether you’re a devout believer, a confirmed atheist, or somewhere in between, Stenger’s provocative ideas will undoubtedly spark conversation and debate.

[Marc Wojciechowski · Rating 5 out of 5]

Comes at this with a strong physics underpining

I am undergoing a conversion. Raised as a Catholic, I used to think that if I could only convince others of the Catholic way, the world would be free of wars and hate. I led an isolated life. Then my father died. I knew he had to but it didn't seem right. I began reading about life after death and realised it just didn't make sense. Why the "good die young", why the word Christ was so important. One book led me to another until I got to this one. It unabashedly claims that religion is harmful. It gives the litany of reasons which I had heard, and discarded before. But it added a political twist. As I read, it became clear that religion is a tool of corporations, without any regard to morals! I know this may seem obvious to some, but I was looking for some solace in my father's death and found that all the reverence put forth by religion is a sham. I especially liked the quote "science flew us to the moon while religion flew us into buildings." I now see the great sin IS religion. My father can now rest, in my mind, with the truth.

[Jrobertus · Rating 3 out of 5]

Stenger is an experimental physicist and popularizer. Like Richard Dawkins he has been very active in resisting the spread of religion, particularly “intelligent design” into the science curriculum. This book has a succinct history of the development of modern science and some key battles with religion. It also explores more contemporary issues like the use of quantum mechanics by theists and new age gurus to sell their goods. Stenger methodically disassemble these lame arguments but his style is a bit stiff and he lacks the flair of Dawkins. I also found the laundry list of misuses of science to be depressing. One might hope that 400 years after the enlightenment, we might have discussions on a higher plane, but the USA is not Scandinavia and our culture seems stuck in the Middle Ages.

[Edward B. · Rating 3 out of 5]

There is much that is interesting in this book (at least, if you find particle physics interesting), but I don't think that I would particularly recommend it. It is mostly the God-of-the-gaps argument with highly detailed expounding on what particle physics says, in order to minimize the gaps. Fair enough. The tone occasionally swings wildly, though. And I think that I noticed a couple places where Stenger explicitly pointed out that "absence of evidence is not evidence of absence" when disputing science but seemed to imply otherwise when disputing faith.
It's not a bad book, I just found it a bit disappointing.

[Roberto Hortal · Rating 3 out of 5]

A lot of repetition with Vic's prior books. Some passages feel lifted verbatim. Some good stuff in there but not as engaging a read as the books from some of the other New Atheists, particularly the British ones

[Johansan Moaas · Rating 5 out of 5]

must read again.

[Jan Peregrine · Rating 5 out of 5]

Victor J. Stenger, a particles physicist educated in the 1950s and 1960s, has published many books, but his latest one, God and the Folly of Faith: the Incompatibility of Science and Religion may be his most helpful one. I would start with it if the subject interests you. I did, even though he's written about why he's a new atheist like biologist Richard Dawkins, neuroscientist Sam Harris, and journalist Christopher Hitchens. This book superbly explains why the methods used for science and religion are incompatible and so it's very difficult to argue that he doesn't make his point.

Nevertheless a cab driver did argue that they aren't incompatible in their methods. Evolution by intelligent design or natural selection, he argued, seemed compatible because God could use both methods. Yes, that's true, but a god who uses natural selection, which is evolution by randomness and proxy, is merely a deist's uninvolved god rather than a theist's personal, involved god.

Stenger, thus, points out what should be obvious. Most monotheists believe in deism.

Another point he made is that the simple often becomes complex over eons, not in a straight line, and in many different methods with different results for different creatures. He may not have made, in so many words, the observation that since God supposedly made man in His image, why didn't man start out right away as a complex creature? If god used evolution is god a simple being? If so there's no need for him and if not, how do you explain evolution?

I also noted how science can plausibly explain the existence of our universe with no recourse to supernatural, god-in-the-gaps explanations that are simply religious apologism. Just because science cannot yet \completely explain human consciousness, that doesn't mean it won't eventually. Stenger thoroughly explores near-death experiences and how there's nothing but anecdotal evidence for them.

There are many more fascinating observations he makes that are going to give religious apologists great trouble in answering. How might one explain that seminarians learn the opposite of what the congregation demands to hear from the pulpit and in Sunday school classes? Hypocrisy? Yeah.

I too learned that time may go forward or backwards from a quantum perspective and that non-living things in nature like rocks or anything are all made of the same quarks and electrons as we are!

This is only a short review of the book and what comes to my noncientific, nontheist mind. You may find other points more exciting and persuasive, but I hope you'll agree that the physicist knows what he's writing about and should be taken seriously. He ends the book making the case that religion can not be considered harmless to our culture and world; it fosters violence and, above all, a lack of responsibility toward the world's health and justice in this life because they'll get it in the next.

I agree with him that religion is a virus people cannot get rid of easily, but it can be done. Morality originates from our life experiences and trial and error. We will be more ethical when we realize that (as a billion people around the world have) instead of thinking we're moral by sucking up to an invisible friend you believe will grant you a ticket to a ghost's paradise.

[Hugh Coverly · Rating 5 out of 5]

God and the Folly of Faith is a well-written contribution to the parade of books presenting a solid case for the claims of the New Atheists that religion represents a real danger to the world we live in. This book demonstrates convincingly that scientific thinking has resulted in more knowledge about the multiverse than anything that has been claimed by religious faith. Victor Stenger also demonstrates that the scientific and religious communities are in conflict because their knowledge base and worldviews are incompatible. This is not a temporary situation, this an incompatibility without a resolution. Some of the attempts at reconciliation have been valiant but foolhardy. Those in the religious community who do understand the science simply fill the gaps in human knowledge with a deistic god who isn't necessary and who bares little resemblance to the God of hardcore Bible-thumping theists. Stenger also highlights those theists who clearly do not understand the science and misrepresent the results in their writings. In the end, Stenger notes that if the scientific community is to make a difference in preserving Earth for present and future generations of humans and other species, then it needs to confront the religious hegemony that actively thwarts the application of scientific knowledge on policy at all levels of government. Religions are not benign entities, they offer a deadly threat to Earth's survival. "From its very beginning, religion has been used by those in power to retain that power and keep the masses in line. This continues today. . . . Science is not going to change its commitment to the truth. We can only hope that religion will change its commitment to nonsense." (p. 322)

[Jim Whitefield · Rating 5 out of 5]

Although I was not able to completely take in everything in one or two of the more scientific chapters, the rest of the book was a most enjoyable read, brilliantly written and easily understandable. The evidence regarding each aspect was well explained and documented, so common sense and reason is really all you need to appreciate it. Many aspects of life and politics (especially in America) are frighteningly affected by religious influence. In the author's conclusion, he asserts "Religious faith would not be such a negative force in society if it were just about religion. However, the magical thinking that becomes deeply ingrained whenever faith rules over facts warps all areas of life. It produces a frame of mind in which concepts are formulated with deep passion but without the slightest attention paid to the evidence that bears on the concept." Elsewhere, Stenger confirms that of course in secular terms, the word 'faith' equates to 'trust' which is an entirely different concept to faith in the religious sense where it overrides facts. This is why religion fails to be remotely plausible. This book provides a scientific view that puts religion in its place, leaving no plausible reason to continue having 'faith' that a god exists - or is even needed. Indeed, the title captures the truth of the matter; such faith is indeed a folly. This is a five star book of immense value for those whose minds are open to evidence based facts and love science and reality.

[Daniel · Rating 4 out of 5]

Professor Stenger's book debunked the myth weaved by the Christian apologist, that Christianity led to the advancement of modern science. In this book, Stenger went through the history of science, and demonstrated why religion impedes the advancement of science rather than assisting it.

I like Stenger's tone in this book. He was civil, he criticized Christianity (as an ideology) with razor sharp reasoning, but he didn't attack Christians (the people). My only complaint is that this book can be very... dry... at certain places - In this book, Professor Stenger communicated as a scientist. For me, I didn't mind the style of writing because I have a background in scientific research. But a layperson may find some parts of this book difficult to follow.

Overall, I think Professor Stenger did an excellent job at debunking Christian apologetics. All of his arguments in this book are supported by established science, as well as historical facts. In summary, I think this is a very good book, and I wish I had read this book years ago when I was still a Christian. It would have helped me to see the problem with the Christian belief system a lot sooner.

[Lukas Szrot · Rating 4 out of 5]

I did not agree with Stenger's take on religion and science when I picked up this book, and I still don't. I am not religious personally, but as a social science researcher I see a lot of evidence that the divide between science and religion is not as wide as a few on either side make it out to be.

But rather than inflammatory rhetoric or bloated polemics I found in the pages of this work a good deal of well-reasoned and erudite scholarship. I learned a few new things about intellectual history, and found the rest a lively and generally well-written memory-refresher. I find the philosophical existence of god debate rather tedious, admittedly, as I see faith being more akin to other subjective, emotional human experiences rather than a refutable scientific hypothesis or particularly amenable to analytic logic-chopping.

For me subjecting paranormal claims to skeptical scrutiny is preaching to the choir, but I don't believe such work is ever really done, either. Generally glad I read this one.

[John Grange · Rating 2 out of 5]

I'll start by saying that I'm a huge fan of Vic Stenger and his writing. However, I prefer his writing that is geared more towards technical scientific concepts rather than musings on culture. The highlight of this specific works, in my opinion, was Stenger's survey of the history of science and religion and highlight the intersections. Of course, his logos is that the two are incompatible, yet that incompatibility is what makes those intersections more fascinating. Where religion and science intersect, and expose an inherent incompatibility, is where societal ailments arise for which Mr Stenger expresses great concern for in this book. While I concur with the generalization that faith is foolish, I felt the last chapter was too politicized. The final chapters betrayed his leftist sensibilities, which I believe, detracted from the pragmatism of the book. I enjoyed it but not as much as I had hoped. But I will aways recommend a Stenger book to anyone who enjoys learning.

[Jennifer Weiss · Rating 1 out of 5]

"Marked as finished" doesn't mean I made it to the end. I was really excited to read this book; the subject matter interested me and it had good reviews. However, it turned out to be more or less an overview of college physics... with every other paragraph or so stating why physics supports the existence of the universe without God as a creator. Regardless of your view on this matter (I actually agree with the author), the book was dry, overly didactic, with arguments that were obviously scientifically correct but were difficult to follow for non-scientists. Sorry to say, I do not recommend. If you agree with the author, there is no need to read the book in the first place since it simply reaffirms your position. If you don't agree with the author, you won't likely make it through the book to be convinced otherwise.

[Jc · Rating 4 out of 5]

A combined history of science, especially the physical sciences, and the growing rift (and "incompatibility") between scientific thinking and religion/philosophy from the time of the ancient Greeks to modern times. A well thought out criticism of religion as told through the fight against superstition which has often tried to hinder scientific progress. A couple of chapters may be a bit too intense for some readers, as Stenger gets dives a little deep into some details of physics (he can't help it - he IS a physicist!), but if you can slog your way through those, the book is well worth the read. [the physics isn't that bad -- a good high school or 100 level college course should be enough to get you through those chapters]. As one of the blurbs said, this book is a, "readable adventure through the history of science should leave no doubt that science and religion are not friends."

[Oscar · Rating 4 out of 5]

Great little book. Lays out the history of the conflict between science and religion in a succint, yet clear manner. There are some chapters in the middle of the book that delve into particle physics and quantum mechanics that are very dense and require several readings to absorb completely, though. Being a particle physicist himself, Stenger dominates these subjects but doesn't quite have the ability of Carl Sagan and Richard Dawkins to explain complex concepts in an easy to grasp manner to non-experts. Still, a great and enjoyable read for anyone wanting to read an introductory and comparative work of scientific and religious epistemologies. Highly recommended.

[Mark Gowan · Rating 4 out of 5]

Dr. Stenger's latest addition is a great book that adds to his already copiously warranted argument that science has put to rest any argument that religion has anything to add to the explanation of the universe. While Stenger relies heavily upon his deep understanding of physics, this book seemed easier to read than some of his previous writings. That being said, Stenger does not skim over important points and details that really do make the difference. His skewering of religious claims is as strong as ever, backed by the enormous amount of detailed evidence and warrant that modern physics offers today. This is a great addition to his collection of writings!

[John Gordon · Rating 4 out of 5]

Victor Stenger clearly lays out how science and religion are incompatible - without pulling any punches. The chapters on quantum theory and particle physics are heavy going but the remainder is quite readable and entertaining. This book is thorough and comprehensive, it deserves to be the final closure on this "debate" but I fear will not be. Worth reading if you are already on board with logic, reason and free thought.