What do you think?
Decoding the Language of God: Can a Scientist Really Be a Believer?
Fellow geneticist George C. Cunningham presents a point-by-point rebuttal of Francis Collins'
The Language of God
, arguing that there is no scientifically acceptable evidence to support belief in a personal God and much that discredits it.
310 pages, Paperback
First published December 1, 2009
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 7 of 7 reviews
February 23, 2010
Decoding the Language of God is a geteticist's point-by point refutation of Francis Collins' bestseller, The Language of God. In that book, Collins gave comfort to believers by arguing that a scientist can combine belief in science with belief in God. To say that Cunningham thinks that's nonsense would be an understatement. He firmly believes, and argues, that science cannot be used to support the existence of God or the supernatural. For him, science and religion are contradictory worldviews, and only one has truth, reason and evidence to back it up.
This no doubt puts Cunningham in the scientific mainstream, especially if by God one means the personal God of the Western theistic religions. Whether science and religion can be reconciled is an old debate, but Cunningham looks at it in the light of recent scientific advances in genetics and the intelligent design movement.
Cunningham writes that "the hard truth that I have accepted and Collins has not, is that there is no supernatural reality....Science cannot be harmonized or reconciled with religious faith." Cunningham asserts that "atheisim or agnosticism appears to be the most rational worldview." He ends his book by saying that he hopes he has convinced the reader "that belief in God and the supernatural is based entirely on faith without evidence."
But somehow, I get the feeling that Cunningham knows that he is either preaching to the choir or to those turning deaf ears. In other words, his book is unlikely to change many minds, perhaps offering further proof that there really are two camps with differing worldviews, and never, or rarely, will the twain meet.
This no doubt puts Cunningham in the scientific mainstream, especially if by God one means the personal God of the Western theistic religions. Whether science and religion can be reconciled is an old debate, but Cunningham looks at it in the light of recent scientific advances in genetics and the intelligent design movement.
Cunningham writes that "the hard truth that I have accepted and Collins has not, is that there is no supernatural reality....Science cannot be harmonized or reconciled with religious faith." Cunningham asserts that "atheisim or agnosticism appears to be the most rational worldview." He ends his book by saying that he hopes he has convinced the reader "that belief in God and the supernatural is based entirely on faith without evidence."
But somehow, I get the feeling that Cunningham knows that he is either preaching to the choir or to those turning deaf ears. In other words, his book is unlikely to change many minds, perhaps offering further proof that there really are two camps with differing worldviews, and never, or rarely, will the twain meet.
July 17, 2011
The "she said" to Francis Collins's "he said" on the compatibility of faith and science, Cunningham presents a nearly page-by-page refutation of Collins's popular book.
Ultimately he wastes our time in exactly the same way that Collins does. Each of them asserts, "I know I'm right and here are the reasons you
don't prove me wrong."
The core problem here is that nobody can seem to prove a positive; they're all busy refuting the arguments against their worldviews.
At the base of each of these worldviews seems to be an unshakable faith that's vigorously defended against challengers. Each fails utterly, however, in proving the core truth of his beliefs.
The end result is just schoolyard taunting with bigger words.
Ultimately he wastes our time in exactly the same way that Collins does. Each of them asserts, "I know I'm right and here are the reasons you
don't prove me wrong."
The core problem here is that nobody can seem to prove a positive; they're all busy refuting the arguments against their worldviews.
At the base of each of these worldviews seems to be an unshakable faith that's vigorously defended against challengers. Each fails utterly, however, in proving the core truth of his beliefs.
The end result is just schoolyard taunting with bigger words.
December 25, 2018
Not spectacular, not bad. This book is designed to be a point-by-point refutation of Francis Collin's claims about his faith in a personal god as being compatible with science. Well, many people, including a very vast majority of the world's scientists, that the two are not compatible. I don't think Cunningham has to make much effort to show the flaws, holes, logical fallacies, etc, that Collins presents in his book and thinking. Really don't need to make much of a stretch here. Unfortunately, I do think a couple of Cunningham's points tend to be weaker than preferable and he should have elaborated or made more of an effort to finish Collins off. Not as good as Dawkins and some of the other current intellectuals addressing these issues, but I think the author went out of his way to "dumb it down" and make his thesis and evidence as accessible to all laypeople as possible, thus making his book seem less intellectually impressive. That still doesn't diminish the authenticity and truth behind the points he makes. Solid, above average effort. Recommended.
November 2, 2017
This was an excellent book that is a great read after finishing Francis Collins', "Language of God". The chapters are carefully designed to analyze and critique Collins' attempt to harmonize scientific theory & a personal God. I think it is critical in any debate to give both sides of the issue at hand a fair chance to discuss and refute their viewpoints, and this book provides that critical counterbalance.
Read
April 11, 2011This is an atheist scientist's response to Francis Collins, a prominent American scientist who published the popular book The Language of God attempting to reconcile his evangelical Christian worldview with his scientific worldview, a book which was in turn influenced by Collins's readings of C. S. Lewis's Christian philosophy such as Mere Christianity. Therefore, Cunningham spends a significant amount of time arguing against Lewis as well as against Collins.
I have not read Collins's book; I did, however, read some C. S. Lewis in my spare time in college. It was not Lewis's religious ideas that frustrated me (I was rather intensely "seeking" and willing to be credulous) so much as his flawed argumentation and the fact that he is nevertheless beloved as a philosopher. To this day I remember how Lewis used the rules of football as an analogy for unchanging, universal, divinely ordained moral law. It was gratifying to see Cunningham call out this piece of illogic in particular, as well as many others. He has a footnote pointing to a wider body of literature that finds flaws in Lewis.
Overall this is a straightforward, clean, well-organized, as-brief-as-possible presentation of dozens of classic atheist arguments against classic Christian theology. I was impressed by how compact it was, where other writers might easily have drawn it out for many more pages. There's allegations that God and the afterlife are just manifestations of wishful thinking. There's examinations of the irresolvable problem of evil. There's references to scientific investigations into DMT, a psychedelic chemical found naturally in the brain that can trigger hallucinations of contacting other beings; into the brain's dorsolateral prefrontal cortex which is at least partially responsible for our concern with fairness; and into the vasopressin 1a receptor gene which is at least partially responsible for how altruistic we are. The handful of places where I had slight possible disagreements were really only places where I wished Cunningham would elaborate more. This could serve as a good introduction to the subject for someone who's curious about atheism. For someone who's already read extensively on the subject, though, there's no brand new ideas here, except some references to some interesting psychological studies and opinion polls. Also, this is a rationalist book through and through, and it doesn't seem to come from a place of understanding about religious feeling, community, etc. It is limited to addressing the coherence of belief in God; it doesn't delve into the psychological and sociological experiences of religion except to suggest that rational people should be able to see through such illusory phenomena. Within this necessarily limited scope, it covers its territory well.
I have not read Collins's book; I did, however, read some C. S. Lewis in my spare time in college. It was not Lewis's religious ideas that frustrated me (I was rather intensely "seeking" and willing to be credulous) so much as his flawed argumentation and the fact that he is nevertheless beloved as a philosopher. To this day I remember how Lewis used the rules of football as an analogy for unchanging, universal, divinely ordained moral law. It was gratifying to see Cunningham call out this piece of illogic in particular, as well as many others. He has a footnote pointing to a wider body of literature that finds flaws in Lewis.
Overall this is a straightforward, clean, well-organized, as-brief-as-possible presentation of dozens of classic atheist arguments against classic Christian theology. I was impressed by how compact it was, where other writers might easily have drawn it out for many more pages. There's allegations that God and the afterlife are just manifestations of wishful thinking. There's examinations of the irresolvable problem of evil. There's references to scientific investigations into DMT, a psychedelic chemical found naturally in the brain that can trigger hallucinations of contacting other beings; into the brain's dorsolateral prefrontal cortex which is at least partially responsible for our concern with fairness; and into the vasopressin 1a receptor gene which is at least partially responsible for how altruistic we are. The handful of places where I had slight possible disagreements were really only places where I wished Cunningham would elaborate more. This could serve as a good introduction to the subject for someone who's curious about atheism. For someone who's already read extensively on the subject, though, there's no brand new ideas here, except some references to some interesting psychological studies and opinion polls. Also, this is a rationalist book through and through, and it doesn't seem to come from a place of understanding about religious feeling, community, etc. It is limited to addressing the coherence of belief in God; it doesn't delve into the psychological and sociological experiences of religion except to suggest that rational people should be able to see through such illusory phenomena. Within this necessarily limited scope, it covers its territory well.
June 25, 2011
Decoding the Language of God: Can a Scientist Be a Believer? by George C. Cunningham
"Decoding the Language of God..." is a wonderful, well-written book by geneticist George C. Cunningham who rebuts Francis Collins' best-selling book, "The Language of God..." It's a book that cogently, and with lucid logic effectively destroys all of Mr. Collin's main points. The book is composed of the following nine chapters: 1. From Belief to Atheism, 2. Evidence and Rules of Engagement, 3. The War of Worldviews, 4. What's Wrong with The Moral Argument?, 5. Cosmology Origins of the Universe, 6. The Bible, 7. Naturalism (Atheism and Agnosticism), 8. Supernaturalism (Ethical, Monotheism, Spirituality) and 9.A Personal God?
Positives:
1. A gem of a book! Well written, researched, and reasoned book that was a treat to read.
2. Elegant conversational prose that uses a direct yet respectful tone in destroying Mr. Collin's main points.
3. This book is critical thinking at its best. Profound without being unintelligible.
4. More wisdom for your buck! I've learned so much from this book.
5. Great explanations for knowledge...worth the price of the book!
6. Great defense of science.
7. Reason versus faith, a one-sided battle.
8. Mr. Cunningham obliterates Mr. Collins' main defense of his religious beliefs. No contest!
9. How religious dogma do more harm than good.
10. Omnipotence and free will discussed.
11. The inconsistency of hell with "God's" infinite power of forgiveness. Compelling arguments throughout.
12. The problem of evil.
13. Unreliable biblical accounts and related matters. No evidence for the great Flood, the exodus or the existence of Abraham, Job, and Moses.
14. Miracles debunked...
15. Great arguments concerning morality.
16. How brain injuries impact humans.
17. The imperfect universe.
18. Biblical immorality.
19. Great quotes, "Science deal with reality, and religion with supernatural unreality".
20. Compelling arguments throughout made by Mr. Cunningham are a staple of this great book.
21. Great conclusion section.
Negatives:
1. No formal bibliography.
2. Having to wait for Mr. Cunningham's next book.
In summary, I loved the "Decoding the Language of God..."! This book was pure brain candy.
I can't recommend this book enough!
Further recommendations: "50 Reasons People Give for Believing in a God" by Guy P. Harrison, "Godless..." by Dan Barker, "Christian No More..." by Jeffrey Mark,"Atheism Explained..." by David Ramsay Steele, and "Why I became an Atheist" by John Loftus.
"Decoding the Language of God..." is a wonderful, well-written book by geneticist George C. Cunningham who rebuts Francis Collins' best-selling book, "The Language of God..." It's a book that cogently, and with lucid logic effectively destroys all of Mr. Collin's main points. The book is composed of the following nine chapters: 1. From Belief to Atheism, 2. Evidence and Rules of Engagement, 3. The War of Worldviews, 4. What's Wrong with The Moral Argument?, 5. Cosmology Origins of the Universe, 6. The Bible, 7. Naturalism (Atheism and Agnosticism), 8. Supernaturalism (Ethical, Monotheism, Spirituality) and 9.A Personal God?
Positives:
1. A gem of a book! Well written, researched, and reasoned book that was a treat to read.
2. Elegant conversational prose that uses a direct yet respectful tone in destroying Mr. Collin's main points.
3. This book is critical thinking at its best. Profound without being unintelligible.
4. More wisdom for your buck! I've learned so much from this book.
5. Great explanations for knowledge...worth the price of the book!
6. Great defense of science.
7. Reason versus faith, a one-sided battle.
8. Mr. Cunningham obliterates Mr. Collins' main defense of his religious beliefs. No contest!
9. How religious dogma do more harm than good.
10. Omnipotence and free will discussed.
11. The inconsistency of hell with "God's" infinite power of forgiveness. Compelling arguments throughout.
12. The problem of evil.
13. Unreliable biblical accounts and related matters. No evidence for the great Flood, the exodus or the existence of Abraham, Job, and Moses.
14. Miracles debunked...
15. Great arguments concerning morality.
16. How brain injuries impact humans.
17. The imperfect universe.
18. Biblical immorality.
19. Great quotes, "Science deal with reality, and religion with supernatural unreality".
20. Compelling arguments throughout made by Mr. Cunningham are a staple of this great book.
21. Great conclusion section.
Negatives:
1. No formal bibliography.
2. Having to wait for Mr. Cunningham's next book.
In summary, I loved the "Decoding the Language of God..."! This book was pure brain candy.
I can't recommend this book enough!
Further recommendations: "50 Reasons People Give for Believing in a God" by Guy P. Harrison, "Godless..." by Dan Barker, "Christian No More..." by Jeffrey Mark,"Atheism Explained..." by David Ramsay Steele, and "Why I became an Atheist" by John Loftus.
February 16, 2012
A solid point-by-point refutation of Francis Collin's claims about his faith in a personal god being compatible with science. Thorough and easy to read, with only minor mistakes. I did find the author's repeated attempts to contrast his approach with the so-called militant atheists, particularly Dawkins, to be self-congratulatory and excessive.
Displaying 1 - 7 of 7 reviews