Arguing for Atheism: An Introduction to the Philosophy of Religion

Rating:
Summary: A book of paradoxes
Review: *Arguing for Atheism* is a strange book. The title suggests that the book is an attempt to argue for the truth of atheism. Its subtitle, *An Introduction to the Philosophy of Religion* suggests that it is meant to introduce the reader to issues in the philosophy of religion. To the book's credit, it attempts to do both, but as a result, it does neither adequately.

First for the title. This book is not *really* an argument for atheism. Atheism is the denial of God's existence. Le Poidevin does not really do this. In part 3 of the book, he defends an instrumentalist view of religion. This is fine and dandy, but given his view that religion is analogous to involving oneself in a work of fiction, Le Poidevin should not be an atheist. If his instrumentalism about religion is correct, then "God does not exist" is no more a candidate for literal truth or falsity than "God exists". (In his defense, Le Poidevin is not the first to make this error. Antony Flew has claimed both that God-talk is meaningless and that God does not exist.) Le Poidevin is really arguing for a God-less religion akin to Don Cupitt, whose work he discusses. If Le Poidevin is an atheist, he is an atheist in the biblical sense of one who denies God in his heart.

As for his arguments for "atheism", I find that most of them move way too quickly. He spends much of the chapter on evil discussing why the theist must adopt libertarian free will; very little time is actually spent on using evil as an argument for atheism. His discussion of how evolution explains apparent design is only one paragraph long, and no mention is made of the importance of "mis-design". Focusing here will actually allow him to argue *for* atheism rather than *against* theism. In fact, his arguments *for* atheism (as the title suggests) are primarily rejections of theistic arguments. His only real sustained attempt to argue for atheism is perhaps the rather befuddling chapter "Does the Universe Have a Purpose?" where he never does come to a clear conclusion.

I called *Arguing for Atheism* a "book of paradoxes" for several reasons: it never does argue *for* atheism, and it doesn't really argue for *atheism*. But perhaps the biggest paradox is the way in which it simultaneously moves rapidly over a great deal of territory and follows this up with interesting and insightful metaphysical analysis. His discussions of chance (and why we can't assign probabilities to such things as the fundamental constants being what they are) and different theories of time (in his discussion of the rationality of fearing death) show the intellectual sophistication that Le Poidevin needs to make the arguments he does successful, but in a way that decreases the book's suitability as an introduction. (He often seems to assume enough familiarity with basic issues in metaphysics that he can move rather quickly through difficult theories and concepts--I'm not sure the glossary is enough to make up for this.)In general, Le Poidevin both moves too quickly at timesfor his book to be a sustained defense of atheism, and too deeply at times for it to serve as an introduction.

Le Poidevin does, however, raise serious issues and presents interseting and often insightful criticisms of arguments for theism; and these stand as the redeeming features of this book. (And sometimes a book is better measured by the questions it raises than by the answers it gives.) He gives us a fair deal of meat on which to chew; I think, however, that it would have been a better book had he himself chewed a bit longer. I suspect that a future book where he dealt with these issues in more depth would be excellent.

Rating:
Summary: From an atheist: Blatant Subjectivism and Misrepresentation
Review: I would not recommend this book to anyone. The author misrepresents atheism and also religion. Le Poidevin is also an outright subjectivist as is shown by entertaining the ideas of "Why something rather than nothing?" and "Possible Worlds" to name just a few.

I would recommend George Smith's "Atheism, The Case Against God" instead. Smith takes on most of the same questions, but in a much more straight forward, to the point, objective way.

Rating:
Summary: Best philosophical introduction to atheism
Review: Robin LePoidevin has produced the best philosophical introduction to atheism. While ARGUING FOR ATHEISM is technical compared to most other introductions to atheism, it more than repays any effort the reader puts into it, as LePoidevin very clearly shows how the problems in philosophy of religion are firmly connected to other deep and complicated philosophical problems. Were everyone to read LePoidevin's book, far more people would approach philosophy of religion with humility, and the average level of discourse on the subject would be raised substantially.