The New Atheism

by Victor J. Stenger

In recent years a number of bestselling books have forcefully argued that belief in God can no longer be defended on rational or empirical grounds, and that the scientific worldview has rendered obsolete the traditional beliefs held by Christianity, Judaism, and Islam. The authors of these books―Richard Dawkins, Daniel Dennett, Sam Harris, Christopher Hitchens, and Victor J. Stenger―have come to be known as the "New Atheists." Predictably, their works have been controversial and attracted a good deal of critical reaction.In this new book, Victor J. Stenger, whose The Failed Hypothesis was on the New York Times bestseller list in 2007, reviews and expands upon the principles of New Atheism and answers many of its critics. He demonstrates in detail that naturalism―the view that all of reality is reducible to matter and nothing else―is sufficient to explain everything we observe in the universe, from the most distant galaxies to the inner workings of the brain that result in the phenomenon of mind. Stenger disputes the claim of many critics that the question of whether God exists is beyond the ken of science. On the contrary, he argues that absence of evidence for God is, indeed, evidence of absence when the evidence should be there and is not.Turning from scientific to historical evidence, Stenger then points out the many examples of evil perpetrated in the name of religion. He also notes that the Bible, which is still taken to be divine revelation by millions, fails as a basis for morality and is unable to account for the problem of unnecessary suffering throughout the world.Finally, he discusses the teachings of ancient nontheist sages such as Buddha, Lao Tzu, and Confucius, whose guidelines for coping with the problems of life and death did not depend upon a supernatural metaphysics. Stenger argues that this "way of nature" is far superior to the traditional supernatural monotheisms, which history shows can lead to a host of evils.The New Atheism is a well-argued defense of the atheist position and a strong rebuttal of its critics.

Genres: Atheism, Religion, Science, Nonfiction, Philosophy, Belief, Physics

282 pages, Paperback

First published January 1, 2009

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

[Michael · Rating 2 out of 5]

While the book provides a survey of the ideas comprising "the new atheism" and the relevant publications which gave rise to the movement (if one could call it that), it is poorly written and is not in the same class with the books by Harris, Dawkins, Dennett, and Hitchens. Stenger comes across as a shameless self promoter and drops the names of other books he has written at every opportunity. His unique contribution to the new atheism (according to Stenger) is his assertion that "the absence of evidence is evidence of absence" if one would expect the evidence to be there. While this is a good rule of commonsense, it seems an odd assertion for a scientist to make while advocating the scientific study of the existence or nonexistence of gods. The book is useful for its review of the literature but offers no truely original contributions to the subject. And then there are the egregious errors! On p. 58, he denies the historicity of Jesus on the basis of lack of external evidence but does not address the verisimilitude of the nonmythological materials about the ministry of Jesus in the New Testament, nor does he give a reason for the "invention" of the historical Jesus. On pp. 110-11, he quotes from the archaic, misleading, and at times deficient Authorized Version (KJV) in order to make a point about Mark 14: 3-9, which he lacks the scholarly background to understand in context. On p. 127, he expresses doubt in the historicity of Muhammad with the same lack of evidence or argument that he uses to deny the historicity of Jesus. For information on the history of religions, he relies on Karen Armstrong, a popular writer rather than a scholar, and summarizes her writings at length (a case of the blind leading the blind). On page 205 (during his summary of Armstrong), he gets confused with BCE dating and declares that Thales of Miletus predicted an eclipse of the sun in 585 BCE "a year before the destruction of Jerusalem" (an event he has already dated as 586 BCE). On p. 243, he gets the dates reversed for the two events, putting the destruction of Jerusalem in 585 BCE and the eclipse in 586. On p. 207, he does not question the existence of the historical Buddha (Gotama), although even some Buddhist scholars deny his historicity, but he does (following Armstrong?) get the traditional dates wrong, placing him toward the end of the fifth century BCE. The traditional date for the Buddha's birth is circa 560 BC with his death occuring in the early fifth century BC. My advice is to read the real new atheists (Harris, Hitchens, Dawkins, and Dennett) and use Stenger as a reference for the literature on the "movement"(including opposing viewpoints). There is a need for a comprehensive overview of the new atheism for use in college courses, but Stenger is not qualified to write it.

[David Melbie · Rating 4 out of 5]

I read this book twice. The first time was back in the summer and I skimmed through it pretty fast. This time, I read it much slower and made notations throughout. I think it is sad that the "new atheists" are not taken seriously, especially by themselves! It sort of reminds me of how wimpy the Democratic Party was during (and after) the 2010 elections, but that's another matter.

I totally agree with Stenger that atheists are not about eradicating religion, we just want to co-exist without being preached to. Stenger says, "Faith is belief in the absence of evidence. Science is belief in the presence of evidence. When the evidence disagrees with a scientific proposition, the proposition is discarded. When the evidence disagrees with a religious proposition, the evidence is discarded. . . . It is not the universe that is unreasonable or not. It is people that are unreasonable or not." (p. 239) I have made it my goal to not be "preachy" about my new-found unbelief but, alas, the believers tend to put me on the defensive stance. It should not be that way.

Stenger says, "We are not trying to shut down religious institutions, but we have a right as citizens to object to the illegal and unconstitutional distribution of taxpayer money to these institutions and other special privileges they are awarded by cowardly politicians. And, we feel it is our duty to protest when government officials rely on superstition instead of science to make decisions that affect the lives of everyone on the planet." (pp. 239-240)

One more statement that is important to the thrust of this book: "We see nothing wrong with asking the faithful to provide evidence and rational arguments for their faith, rather than us keeping quiet as do so many of our atheist and agnostic friends for fear of offending "deeply held beliefs."" (p. 239)

I am inspired by Stenger, as well as Dawkins, Harris, Dennett, and Hitchens, to take a stand for science and reason. It seems like a reasonable and upstanding thing to do!
-----
Second reading started: December 1, 2010; finished December 6, 2010.
Third reading started: May 6, 2013; finished May 12, 2013.

[Sarah · Rating 5 out of 5]

I think this book was an excellent summary of the arguments against a personal God in the universe. The author uses science and philosophy to argue against the presence of God. He also discusses some of the atrocities committed by religions, and explains why the new atheists oppose religion so strenuously. Also interesting was his analysis of how less religious societies have fewer social problems and religious societies, fewer murders, less poverty, less violence and crime, etc. This neatly debunks the belief of so many theists that religion is necessary for morality. Some of the stuff I already knew, but I found some valuable information about science that successfully debunks many of the Christian apologists who claim that the universe is fine-tuned for life or that there are so many gaps in scientific knowledge that God is the inevitable cause of life. An excellent book.

[Emma · Rating 5 out of 5]

Victor Stenger reviews the efforts of the New Atheists.

There is nothing more to say. Read it!!

[Andrew Ramos · Rating 5 out of 5]

This is an awesome book provided you already have a coherent knowledge of metaphysics, religion, and history. He wrote this book as a response to criticisms of the New Atheism movement and without a sound base, much of what he discusses would go over the casual readers head. This is not the first book to read if you're curious what New Atheism is about. But, if you are already well versed in the literature; this is a MUST read. I loved this book and devoured it.

[Joshua Nomen-Mutatio · Rating 4 out of 5]

Read the whole thing while sitting in Borders. Very well done. Amply sums up the last five or so years of a type of cultural criticism that I'm in strong support of.

[Julie Ellis · Rating 3 out of 5]

Stenger is not the most exciting writer, but he gives a clear and concise description and defense of the New Atheist position.

[Timothy Finucane · Rating 5 out of 5]

An excellent review and summary of the latest thoughts in modern atheism.

[Hp · Rating 5 out of 5]

Mostly a rehash of his other books but still a good read. Great overview of all his Atheist ideas.

[Debora Williams · Rating 5 out of 5]

Very good read

[Anna Cvetko · Rating 2 out of 5]

The New Atheism has some wonderful chapters, but ultimately I was left with more interest in the other works Stenger routinely cites than this book itself. I'm not sure how much new content it brings forward, but it's a nice overview.

[Steven H · Rating 5 out of 5]

STENGER BEGINS WITH “QUANTUM TUNNELING” AND ENDS WITH… “THE WAY OF NATURE”?

Victor John Stenger (born 1935) is an American particle physicist, philosopher, author, and religious skeptic; he is also a regular featured science columnist for the Huffington Post.

He wrote in the Preface of this 2009 book, “In this book I review and expand upon the principles of New Atheism. Not all nonbelievers---atheists, agnostics, humanists, or freethinkers---have been happy with the approach taken by the new atheists, especially our unwillingness to take a benign view of moderate religion. They would like to maintain good relations with the religious community… They worry that government funding for science might be put at risk and the teaching of evolution in the schools compromised. While new atheists sympathize with these concerns, we do not consider them as serious as the even greater dangers imposed by the irrational thinking associated with religion… We strongly disagree… that science has nothing to say about God or the supernatural. The gods most people worship purportedly play an active role in the universe and in human lives. This activity should result in observable phenomena, and it is observable phenomena that form the very basis of scientific investigation.” (Pg. 13-14)

He adds, “Perhaps the most unique position of New Atheism is that faith, which is belief without supportive evidence, should not be given the respect, even deference, it obtains in modern society. Faith is always foolish and leads to many of the evils of society.” (Pg. 15) And “Basically, then, this book debunks many of the myths about religion and atheism that are held not only be believers but by many nonbelievers as well.” (Pg. 16)

Perhaps surprisingly for some readers, Stenger says, “I have made my own independent study of ancient Eastern philosophy… I find that when stripped of any implication of supernaturalism I agree with [Sam] Harris that Eastern philosophers uncovered some unique insights into humanity and the human mind that were lacking in the West. I propose that the teachings of the ancient sages of the East constitute a ‘Way of Nature’ that provides atheists and materialists with a viable path to peace and happiness. The sages’ teachings are marked by selflessness and calm acceptance of the nothingness after death… the Eastern methods did not require any supernatural element. The mass-scale religions of the West and the East ignored this ancient wisdom, replacing it with the extreme self-centeredness associated with the absurd promise of eternal life.” (Pg. 30)

He argues, “as my colleague Brent Meeker points out, religion has not exactly shown any significant expertise with respect to morality. It has supported slavery, the oppression of women, ethnic cleansing, serfdom, the divine right of kings, and extraction of testimony by torture. It has opposed anesthetics, lightning rods, sanitation, vaccination, eating meat on Friday, and birth control. It is very easy to give nonsupernatural reasons for preferring honesty to lying, for outlawing murder and theft. And in fact those moral principles were common in human society long before anyone had thought of the current major religions. So whatever useful moral prescriptions religion has provided are equally available without it.” (Pg. 69-70)

He acknowledges, “we can now with a high degree of confidence rule out Enlightenment deism. The Heisenberg uncertainty principle of quantum mechanics has shown that the motions of bodies contain an element of chance… The universe is not a vast machine in which everything that happens is fully determined by what went on before. This still allows for the possibility of a god who built the universe and its laws but who also added a large amount of randomness. In fact, this is the ‘God who plays dice’ whom Einstein refused to accept.” (Pg. 83)

He asserts, “Since our only experience is with our universe and its parameters, we have no way of knowing what sets of parameters might still lead to some form of life different from ours but just as complex and still containing intelligent beings… We have no reason to assume that there aren’t many universes. Even if our particular universe is highly unlikely, the chance that we are one of many would be as high as 100 percent… The multiple universe, or multiverse, scenario is severely criticized by theists as unobservable. Of course God is unobservable, too, so the best the theists can claim is a standoff. Actually, there are already some ideas about how we might detect the presence of other universes, but they are highly speculative and too technical to mention here… In fact, we have good reasons to believe in the multiverse… the multiverse is not just some vague atheist notion dreamed up to counter the fine-tuning argument. It is sober, mainstream physics.” (Pg. 89-90)

He argues, “there is no scientific basis for the claim that the universe is fine-tuned for life. Indeed, the whole notion makes no sense. Why would an omnipotent god design a universe in which his most precious creation, humanity, lives on the knife-edge of extinction? This god made a vast universe that is mostly empty space and then confined humanity to a tiny speck of a planet, where it is destined for extinction long before the universe becomes inert. He could have made it possible for us to live anywhere. He also could have made it possible to live in any conceivable universe, with any values for it its parameters. Instead of being an argument for the existence of god, the apparent fine-tuning of the constraints of physics argues against any design in the cosmos.” (Pg. 97)

He outlines a “Natural Scenario for the Origin of the Universe”: “our particular universe appeared by a process called ‘quantum tunneling’ from an earlier universe that, from our point of view, existed limitlessly in the past… The earlier universe, again from our point of view, has been contracting in a way opposite to what we experience with the big bang… time’s arrow in our sister universe actually points in the reverse direction from ours and both universes can be viewed as arising by quantum tunneling from ‘nothing.’ I must admit that this picture of the origin of the universe is not widely recognized. However… I do not claim that this is IN FACT how the universe arose. I merely present it as a scenario consistent with all of our knowledge by which the universe occurs naturally and thereby closes a gap which a theist might want to insert God.” (Pg. 171)

He points out, “When theists … refer to gaps in the scientific record, the best they can do is say, ‘See, God must have done it.’ This provides no more information and is less economical than a simple statement: ‘Nature did it.’ But atheists can usually do much more than this simple assertion and give some idea of how nature did it… Even where we do not have an existing established theory, such as for the origin of life or mental processes, we have plausible proposals under consideration that agree with all existing knowledge and that require no supernatural elements. Theists can only make the simple assertion, ‘God did it.’ Scientists can say: ‘We don’t know. But we’ll try to find out.’” (Pg. 185)

In the next-to-last chapter, he proposes, “I am talking to those who have already recognized the undoubted fact that there is no eternal life and I am suggesting a possible way to cope with it… the sages of the East preached that the way to achieve peace of mind is to turn away from the ego-centeredness that we all seem to develop in childhood… I will simply call it the ‘Way of Nature.’ By living the Way of Nature we celebrate the natural and refute the supernatural. We accept the fact that our individual selves will pass along with our generation… I have a great personal life…

"What else can a man want? I wouldn’t mind continuing it forever. But I can’t. Not having yet practiced any serious meditation, I cannot recommend any one method… What this world needs is an honest, effective, and fully materialistic method of meditation… what I preach… is directed to other atheists as they approach the end of their lives: take up the Way of Nature and achieve a state of mind where the self does not matter and nothingness is approached with peace of mind. But don’t do it too soon! Live life first.” (Pg. 222)

This book has a lot of similar material to what Stenger has previously written (perhaps it was written to capitalize on the “New Atheism” craze). But Stenger’s near-mystical conclusion may infuriate some readers, and energize others. To each his own…

[Tucker]

Victor Stenger is one of the "New Atheists." In terms of name-recognition, he's a distant fifth to the Four Horsemen of the Apocalypse -- Dawkins, Dennett, Harris, and Hitchens -- so in his introduction he makes the case that he, too, had a concurrent bestselling book.

I read Stenger's God: The Failed Hypothesis last year. It relies on scientific arguments, especially physics, to arrive at an atheist conclusion.

This book, The New Atheism: Taking a Stand for Science and Reason also contains some scientific claims about the cosmos and many statistics about the prevalence of religious belief, but mostly it seems to be reflections about the New Atheists themselves, and as such, is part memoir.

As I wrote in Moral Relativism Magazine, Charlene Burns says in More Moral Than God that it is a mistake to reify religion, in part because this turns religion into a scapegoat for violence, and this takes pressure off people to be accountable for their ideas and actions. There are religious individuals and communities, religious ideas, and religious behaviors, but "religion" itself is an abstract concept that cannot bear responsibility for concrete acts in the world. Stenger commits this error in his book when he says of 9/11: "Islam flew those planes into those buildings." (p. 241) Strictly speaking, if "Islam" did it, there's no people to blame, and that doesn't start us off on good footing for addressing the problem of that specific incident or of violence in general.

Note: In addition to Burns, a scholar who has argued against this attitude is Mark R. Cohen of Princeton University, who was quoted in 2010 in the Princeton Alumni Weekly (as quoted by Jeremy Ben-Ami in A New Voice for Israel) that, "from a historical standpoint, it is wrong to attribute anti-Semitism to Islam at its core. Once you say that anti-Semitism comes from the Quran, you are exonerated from doing anything about it--you don't have to make peace with the Muslims because they are inveterate anti-Semites."

Stenger also makes an uncharacteristically strident claim at the very end: "Religion is an intellectual and moral sickness that cannot endure forever if we believe at all in human progress." (p. 244) The last bit recalls to me Chris Hedges' When Atheism Becomes Religion, which made a pessimistic argument in favor of religion, claiming that atheism is full of hubris for believing in human progress.

[Todd Martin · Rating 3 out of 5]

In “The New Atheism”, physicist Victor Stenger performs a literary review of his own books of atheism as well as the works of Richard Dawkins, Sam Harris, Christopher Hitchens, Daniel Dennet. As such, the book mainly consists of summaries of arguments that are already in the public sphere, rather than any new information.

The book provides a good overview of the thoughts and positions of the new atheists, and is written in an highly readable style. It also covers many of the common charges heard from the theists: that science is a form of religion (it’s not, it is non-dogmatic and open to new evidence), that there is evidence of conscious design in evolution (all evolution is explainable through small random changes acted upon my the non-random process of selection), that morals can only be achieved through religion (primates and other non-human creatures exhibit altruism and many of the same moral traits as humans), that consciousness cannot be explained by the physical properties of the brain (there is no evidence of anything more than physical matter), that science has nothing to say about religious claims (it does when those claims can be tested, which is why we know that prayer doesn’t work) etc.

Stenger also suggests an eastern (non-spiritual) form of meditation as a means of coping with the biggest hurdle to atheism, the obvious (and scary to many) conclusion that no life exists after death. Though it may be a tough pill to swallow, ignoring this fact doesn’t change reality. Stenger proposes that through meditation, one may be able to better come to terms with death and reduce the anxiety that accompanies thoughts of non-existence.

[Josiah Miller · Rating 3 out of 5]

This is more of an extended Wikipedia entry than a solid argument or discovery of new thought. It can also be used as a bibliography for other works that may focus on their expertise in the field that relate to this new objective view of atheism. There is a fumbled switching of powers that is occurring with one of the most un-intellectually but entertaining controversies dividing the country. I close my eyes and think about what matters to me and the things that make me happy; unfortunately there is an inability to close your ears from the simple sentences of a stream of consciousness that comes from the reported facts or dreamed illusionary facts envisioned by the power and the pursuers of power. The blame for the inner and outer violence that we see, hear, feel and the violence that we begin to taste is laid on one group or entity and then shifts based on public forum requirements to be heard. Religion doesn't show empathy. Christianity doesn't put itself into Islam's shoes. Judaism doesn't try to understand the feelings of Hinduism. Islam doesn't try to feel what it's like when Christianity's mother is on her deathbed. One of the best sections of this book is the synopsis of Mormonism and the violence within. These are all the powers that control or less that we are supposed to live by, but Atheism does try to understand what it feels like when Christianity is facing death and why Islam feels the necessity to sacrifice itself and others to go to a sacred place of paradise and peace.

[Paul Fidalgo · Rating 2 out of 5]

Excerpt: Part of what makes this book less compelling is its lack of unity of purpose. There are chapters focused on debunking attacks from religionists and theologians, then sections summarizing some of the more influential religious and philosophical movements, all peppered with a surprising amount of synopses of his previous works as well as other people's. Though when tackling a subject, Stenger can be refreshingly succinct and sharp, the book as an experience lacks a flow that leads the reader anywhere in particular. Stenger also makes an odd habit of insinuating his own works into the existing New Atheist pantheon (pardon the term)--while I have no quibbles with him being considered a "Fifth Horseman," it was a little uncomfortable to read several times that he seemed to think that anyone else thought him so. This is not in any way to denigrate the value of his work and contributions, but merely a comment on his choice to write about them in this particular manner. Also somewhat jarring is Stenger's fairly awkward use of more colloquial language that often seems to come from nowhere, and feel out of place in the context of the grand ideas being discussed.

For the full review, visit my column at http://www.examiner.com/examiner/x-42...#

[Moses · Rating 2 out of 5]

There are a few interesting segments in The New Atheism: one is a strangely riveting tale of the sordid origins of Mormonism. Another is a rather weak segment criticizing the Old Testament which nevertheless seems to grasp a bit more of that book than most such passages.

Aside from these, this book is amorphous and doddering. Stenger summarizes arguments that he and others make elsewhere. Little new is contributed, certainly I was not left asking myself hard questions as I was after reading Hitchens and (to a lesser extent) Harris.

The quotes that begin each chapter are frequently vacuous name-dropping tidbits. I suppose the reason for these is, "Thomas Edison had no use for religion, clearly I shouldn't either!" One of the quotes was downright alarming, a little gem from Denis Diderot: “Man will never be free until the last king is strangled with the entrails of the last priest.” With that alarming sentiment, Stenger opens up a chapter on how man can be moral without God. Clearly, with men like Diderot leading the way, how can we fail at being good?

This is the weakest New Atheist book I have read so far.

[Tom · Rating 1 out of 5]

Reading this book is like listening to Rush Limbaugh. You wonder what the next ridiculous thing is going to be said.

New atheism is in-your-face atheism. It claims that because so many people were killed in the name of God/Allah/YHWH, etc., then religion must be bad. We must attack religion as being not supported by any evidence.


Stenger reaches the wrong conclusions. Religion and belief in the supernatural has also had a very positive influence on humankind. It has inspired great works of art. Early biologists studied the human body to see how God works. It also brings great comfort to believers in times of grief and adversity. It is immoral to say to a young kid whose mother just died, "You know, she's not in heaven because there is no heaven."

While I do feel that religion play far to great a role in American society, I'm not ready to throw out the baby with the bath water. Live and let live.

[Mark Gowan · Rating 4 out of 5]

Less physics and more philosophical and debate tactics are included in this book. The goal of the book, according to Stenger (and the title), is to help "accelerate the trend away from religion...", and I think that any honest and intelligent reader will agree that it is a step in the right direction. The book, compared to past reads of Stenger's, is a quick read albeit not necessarily an easy one. It includes subtle arguments and references to numerous texts that both strengthen and clarify the arguments that Stenger presents here. The tone of the book is typical of Stenger: a mix of incredulity that people still consider religious belief systems a viable source of knowledge, and frustration that the conversation concerning the overwhelming amount of evidence offered by science has not beheaded religion yet. It is perhaps this incredulity and frustration that makes the book a good read. It is definitely shared by many of Stenger's readers including myself.

[Bob Anderson · Rating 4 out of 5]

Stenger’s survey of the literature produced for and against the new atheistic revival is a quick read; he makes his points made concisely and clearly. He begins with a short recap of the recent history of atheism, and moves into chapters that discuss particular aspects of atheistic though, including evolution, the nature of the mind, and whether a god can be disproved. In each of these he accurately captures a particular point of view on the issue, though this volume’s slim size means he must leave out the mountains of supporting evidence for his positions; many entire books could be written giving heft to each of the points he makes. Fortunately he provides many such references and reading suggestions: this book becomes a portal into an entire realm of thought. This isn’t the last word, though it is a good word. It’s a fine place to start or continue an intellectual journey based on seeking truth instead of relying on trust.

[Chris A · Rating 3 out of 5]

I've read most of the "new Atheist" books over the years in the hopes of finding one that would be "believer friendly" enough to try to get my wife to read. Unfortunately, I've yet to find one that didn't have at least some passages that were sarcastic, condescending, or otherwise off-putting if I were to try to put myself in a believer's shoes.

I don't know if it's typical, but as my wife obviously knows where I stand on belief in a "God," she won't even discuss it with me. It isn't as if I'm trying to de-convert her, but as she is in all other ways a modern citizen of the universe, several college degrees, worked in research for many years so understands the need for peer-review, the scientific method, etc., so I just want to know how in the world she still clings to this belief in a fantasy world and being when there is no evidence...

Best I can tell after over 25 years is "She just KNOWS!"

So. Damn. Frustrating.

[Drchak · Rating 3 out of 5]

Stenger is a slightly overshadowed member of the "New Atheists" - he doesnt have the charisma of Hitchens or Dawkins, but he is a valuable addition to that gang - especially strong when he demolishes theistic arguments from a physics/origin of universe perspective. He is a good complement to the biology prof. Dawkinfs. This is a typical Stenger style book - parts of it are very well written and the book overall is engaging with some minor quibbles (I cringed when he says all Hindus he met have treated lower castes without respect!). The atheistic arguments have been presented in other books, but the focus of the book is to summarize the current state of the debate covering the latest in theist arguments and their "evolution". The book is worth it for the references alone - expanded my to-read list.

[John Gordon · Rating 4 out of 5]

• The twin towers in 2001 inspired Sam Harris to write "The end of faith" which was followed by a number of other works. The logical and consistent arguments within have been countered in turn by output from the religious side of the fence. In this book by Victor J. Stenger gathers together the material to date and discusses each topic and theme in detail. He provides solid rebuttals to the theist arguments while reviewing and the atheist position to date. While he may not be as entertaining to read as Richard Dawkins, his logical approach is very thorough and scientific. This book will not appeal to theists, I think they will find it a bit condescending, but to open minded readers this work is well worth the read.

[Adam · Rating 3 out of 5]

Pros: Stenger (on the coattails of Dawkins, Hitchens, Harris, et al) makes a hard-line case not just for atheism, but for the promotion of atheism. The general idea is akin to a civil rights movement with a lot of explanation and science talk to back up his claims.

Cons: Having a fellow non-believer preach to me is almost as bad as a believer spouting off all the time.

Overall: It would be interesting to see how "casual" Christians would react to this book. I might not have an appropriate way to gauge this book for others because I agreed with most of what is said. I'll just say, I recommend this book to anyone who feels like they have to hide their non-belief.

[Jc · Rating 4 out of 5]

Stenger has written a number of important works (e.g., God: The Failed Hypothesis), and certainly has been described as part of the "New Atheism" movement himself. Here, he examines what the "movement" is, discusses the views of its main proponents and opponents, and looks at how society has been affected by and responded to the movement. Important is a discussion of h0w "new" the "New Atheism" really is, and how it fits in with um..., old [?] atheism. At some points, this may read a bit too technical for some readers [e.g., his discussions of physics], but the book is well worth working through those bits and trying to understand what Stenger is trying to say.

[André Krüger · Rating 4 out of 5]

Since I stood up for science and reasoning as tools to improve us as a civilization, I have been trying to read at least 1 book per month about atheism and its morality. I can assure that this one is the best since The Demon-Haunted World: Science as a Candle in the Dark because the authors wrote so passionately about how faith in the evidence, that is, science and the scientific method, is better that faith in no evidence at all, that is, religion. I would highly recommend this book for anyone who wants to improve her arguments for science as a tool for improvement of the human civilization and against the dark shadows casted by religion and by the faith in pseudoscience.

[Christian · Rating 4 out of 5]

Clearly this book isn't written to convert, but to inform, debunk and perhaps to challenge those who are already atheists or nearly so. I wouldn't figure it would appeal to the religiously minded, except in the rare case where they are willing to be open to hearing alternate ideas. I enjoyed reading the book, and I picked up a few new discussion points and new perspectives, but there were few "wow" moments. For those who want to further explore the "spirituality" side of atheism, I recommend Andre Comte-Sponville's "The Little Book of Atheist Spirituality".

[Rich · Rating 3 out of 5]

Although I find little to disagree with in Stenger's books (and occasional insights and perspectives lacking in other New Atheists writings), they seem haphazardly written - lacking clear structure, filled with frequent digressions, sporadic commentary on other author's works, and frequent suggestions to read his other books. He's worth reading for what he says, but not particularly elegant or inspiring in how he says it.

[David · Rating 4 out of 5]

The United States is one of the most religious “first world” nations. This is a nation where the question of God’s role in the human endeavor has become a basis of many political and social discussions. So why do books on atheism flow to the top of the reading list? It may have something to do with our continued search for reason and the growth of the atheist/agnostic movement.

Read more: http://www.nyjournalofbooks.com/revie...

[Jeff · Rating 5 out of 5]

Victor Stenger's book, The New Atheism, is one of the best overviews of the subject I've read. His approach is somewhat unique in that he is both a scientist (physics) and a philosopher, and I like what he has to say about both. His cosmology allows for an infinite universe without beginning or end; and his philosophy of mind recognizes the reality of both self and free will. This is one I will recommend to anyone who wants to understand reality from a realistic, secular perspective.