What do you think?
Rate this book
Atheism, Morality, and Meaning
Despite the pluralism of contemporary American culture, the Judaeo-Christian legacy still has a great deal of influence on the popular imagination. Thus it is not surprising that in this context atheism has a slightly scandalous ring, and unbelief is often associated with lack of morality and a meaningless existence. Distinguished philosopher and committed atheist Michael Martin sets out to refute this notion in this thorough defense of atheism as a both moral and meaningful philosophy of life. Martin shows not only that objective morality and a meaningful life are possible without belief in God but that the predominantly Christian world view of American society is seriously flawed as the basis of morality and meaning.Divided into four parts, this cogent and tightly argued treatise begins with well-known criticisms of nonreligious ethics and then develops an atheistic meta-ethics. In Part 2, Martin criticizes the Christian foundation of ethics, specifically the Divine Command Theory and the idea of imitating the life of Jesus as the basis of Christian morality. Part 3 demonstrates that life can be meaningful in the absence of religious belief. Part 4 criticizes the theistic point of view in general terms as well as the specific Christian doctrines of the Atonement, Salvation, and the Resurrection.This highly informed and sophisticated defense of atheism is a stimulating challenge to religious believers and a serious contribution to ethical theory.
330 pages, Paperback
First published January 1, 2002
8 people are currently reading
168 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 - 2 of 2 reviews
January 19, 2010
This is the pure philosophy take on morality, from an atheist perspective. Martin has four goals: develop foundations for (objective) morality and for the meaning of life in an atheistic fashion, and show the deep problems religion has in both spheres.
I would say he is moderately successful on all accounts. His account of an atheist objective morality is interesting and seems plausible, though I'm wary of pure reason arguments about anything other than math. However, the method he puts forth (a Firthian Ideal Observer Theory) meshes pretty well with what scientists find that people actually use (e.g., Moral Minds: How Nature Designed Our Universal Sense of Right and Wrong).
He appears to be quite successful in demolishing religious arguments, although definitions in religion are notoriously slippery, and things seem to be continuously redefined to sidestep logical analysis. (If physicists all had their own, individual, murky, ever-changing, indescribable ideas about what an electron was, we'd be wearing "e-" necklaces and praying to "charge" instead of, you know, using computers and calculating path integrals.)
In the religious sections, Martin focuses on Christianity, although many of his results are more broadly applicable.
A word of warning: the first time I tried to read this, I found it dull and impenetrable. The second time, I found it interesting and entirely lucid. You have to actually care about the subject. If you're interested in questions like the existence of supernatural beings (gods, etc.), this is not the book to read.
I would say he is moderately successful on all accounts. His account of an atheist objective morality is interesting and seems plausible, though I'm wary of pure reason arguments about anything other than math. However, the method he puts forth (a Firthian Ideal Observer Theory) meshes pretty well with what scientists find that people actually use (e.g., Moral Minds: How Nature Designed Our Universal Sense of Right and Wrong).
He appears to be quite successful in demolishing religious arguments, although definitions in religion are notoriously slippery, and things seem to be continuously redefined to sidestep logical analysis. (If physicists all had their own, individual, murky, ever-changing, indescribable ideas about what an electron was, we'd be wearing "e-" necklaces and praying to "charge" instead of, you know, using computers and calculating path integrals.)
In the religious sections, Martin focuses on Christianity, although many of his results are more broadly applicable.
A word of warning: the first time I tried to read this, I found it dull and impenetrable. The second time, I found it interesting and entirely lucid. You have to actually care about the subject. If you're interested in questions like the existence of supernatural beings (gods, etc.), this is not the book to read.
January 25, 2010
This is one of Martin's easier reads, but that being said, it is not easy. If one likes clearly laid out arguments using logical methodology, and detailed analysis then this is the book for you. Martin takes Christian morality to task, which is not hard to do, but Martin does it meticulously, leaving no detail out.
In four parts, Martin deconstructs religious arguments using precise language and explicit language. From the unclarity of religious arguments concerning morality to the implausibility of them, to pointing out the impossibility of religious claims.
This is a great book for anyone looking for clear, concise, philosophical arguments concerning religious belief. For the atheist, if they take the time to study Martin's arguments, they will better understand what it means to be an atheist and why. For the Christian, I would suggest that you come to the book honestly and compare Alvin Plantinga's writings.
In four parts, Martin deconstructs religious arguments using precise language and explicit language. From the unclarity of religious arguments concerning morality to the implausibility of them, to pointing out the impossibility of religious claims.
This is a great book for anyone looking for clear, concise, philosophical arguments concerning religious belief. For the atheist, if they take the time to study Martin's arguments, they will better understand what it means to be an atheist and why. For the Christian, I would suggest that you come to the book honestly and compare Alvin Plantinga's writings.
Displaying 1 - 2 of 2 reviews