God's Defenders: What They Believe and Why They Are Wrong

Rating:
Summary: a great approach, but not for everyone.
Review: "God's defenders" is an even more direct answer to "atheism: a reader". certainly i agree that the polite defernece of minorites to the disdain of the majority is unnecessary. "its just what i believe" isnt good enough, but "prove it" is an implausable plan of attack. if more flies are won with honey than vinegar, then joshi might never claim a sinlge convert. this book is not intended, i hope, for agnostics or those contemplating a godless existance. like "atheism: a reader," the book affirms the resolve of existing atheists- in some cases, only of the most elitist strain.
while extremely informative for an atheist, i do not think i would recommend this book to an even moderately religious person to explore their own beliefs or to represent the doctrine of atheism- simply because i know they would not have to determination of will to suffer so much verbal abuse. this i regard as truly unfortunate, because joshi attacks several of the contemporary doctrines of the judeo-christian faiths to show how it is human beings rather than the hand of god that change and manipulate the nature of a religion to adapt to the holes but punched in them over time by science or common sense.
provocative and direct, i enjoyed the questions raised by "god's defenders." if one has the gumption to withstand the least gentle and humanistic approach to atheism, or to really explore the tenets of faith that they may never before have challenge, then read this book: introduction and all.

Rating:
Summary: Straw Man, Ad Hominem, and Muddled Argumentation
Review: I picked this book up hoping for some serious critique. I myself, a religious person enjoy being challenged and questioning epistemologically, empirically, as well as anthropologically whether or not God's existence is in fact a demonstrable phenomenon. Unfortunately, instead of real challenge I got canned Bertrand Russellish answers that have been dealt with by philosophical theologians elsewhere.

This book again was a sad dissappointment. What Joshi lacked in argumentation he made up for with hostile prose and ugly comments. Many times I found myself wondering, why this guy cared to pen a critique of religious defenders when he clearly feels he is so much above them intellectually - something which can be definitively challenged. The type of argumentation Joshi takes up is essentially ad hominem. He spares no arrogant comment as he makes fun of the people he critiques. He clearly has no respect for people nor intellectual conversation. Also, I felt too often he misses the point. For instance, C. S. Lewis' argument that humankind is embedded with a sense of right and wrong. We all make rational decisions based on a sense of right and wrong. Lewis' suggestion is that this comes from God. Now whether you accept that or not is up to your own choice, but Joshi wants to dismiss it and write it off too cavilier like. If there is no right and wrong that we sense then why are you writing this book Joshi? What's the point of claiming that your views are right and Lewis' are folly? I believe his own hostility proves Lewis' point and in fact if he read Lewis right he would realize this.

Another disappointing fact is how he continually plays up peoples emotions. Joshi is under the assumption that people who believe in religion are essentially emotional and not rational. COnstantly he claims that the defenders he critiques were too emotional and not clear thinkers. But the problem is that with the unabashed hostility towards religious thinkers that Joshi demonstrates in his writing, he is clearly being emotional too. It is plain to see that Joshi is just as emotive in his passion for atheism as religious peoples are in their religion. It's time we stopped ignoring emotions in favor of Enlightenment rationalism.

Too, Joshi completely and utterly is a modern thinker not taking into consideration the weight of postmodern critique. His argumentation is essential modernistic and is therefore subject to the same defeat as modernity itself.

Lastly, the defenders that Joshi supposively defeats are not philosophical defenders with exception to WIlliam James. It is easy for me to critique a five year old boys decisions and convictions at my age now. Essentially this is what Joshi does. He applies pop-philosophical rigour to people who are not trained philosophers nor claim to be. Certainly Joshi's terrifying defeat would not be so decisive if he dealt with philosophers like Alvin Platinga, William Lane Craig, J. P. Moreland, John Caputo, Richard Swinburne, or even John Hick. What Joshi does is set up popular defenders, and show weaknesses in their arguments and then claims victories. Too often these weaknesses are his own straw man constructions.

This book is a great dissapointment and if you want a hostile, arrogant, but fundamentally flawed argument then buy it. If you want a real challenge or critique, read good philosphers atheist or religious.

The moral of the story, a journalist is not a good source and shouldn't claim to be one especially when he critiques self-proclaimed popular level writers. The only thing Joshi demonstrates is that he knows little of science, physics, postmodern philosophy, and good philosophical theology.

Rating:
Summary: Damning! If you'll excuse the expression...
Review: I really can't add that much to some of the reviews listed here. If you are religious, then this book will have you convinced that all atheists will find you beneath contempt & will gleefully vomit abuse at you. Incidentally, this perception would be incorrect. If, like me, you agree with Joshi's conclusions & share his views, then you will be very pleased & stimulated by his reasoned arguments. Also, if you are like me, you will soon tire of the puerile invective of the kind Joshi excels.

As one reviewer stated, one need not be a Universal Genius to see through the facade that is religion. I applaud Joshi's efforts in dismantling the lame arguments endorsed by the likes of T. S. Eliot, Buckley, and William James, but you needn't use a shotgun on a housefly. The pro-God arguments are, in and of themselves, so shaky that Joshi doesn't need to resort to calling James "poor Willie" or Buckley a "fool". In resorting to these tactics, Joshi has sadly miscalculated.

Don't get me wrong, sometimes invective is very amusing & effective. Nietzsche, Mencken and Schopenhauer all loved to hit below the belt, but then all three were literary geniuses and genuinely funny! Joshi isn't either. His humor is either condescending (due to his self-importance) or self-pitying (due to his lack of cash).

Books by David Hume, Carl Sagan or Daniel Dennett would all make better introductions to agnostic/atheistic thought for the novice. Not only do they make their points as well as Joshi does, they understand how human fear & frailty leads to theism.

That said, Joshi's arguments destroys his opponents'. Although Falwell & Chesterton are easy targets, Joshi wonderfully reduces the arguments of (pseudo) intellectuals like Stephen Carter, William F. Buckley and William James to bits. He is equally able at rebutting Christian sacred cows like T. S. Eliot & the ridiculously influential C. S. Lewis. It is because of Joshi's effective arguments that I give this four stars. If he had toned-down some of the personal abuse, I would have easily given it five.

Incidentally, Joshi makes a lame joke about dour Scotsmen. Hmmm. I don't think David Hume or John Stuart Mill would appreciate that...

Rating:
Summary: Straw Man, Ad Hominem, and Muddled Argumentation
Review: I really can't add that much to some of the reviews listed here. If you are religious, then this book will have you convinced that all atheists will find you beneath contempt & will gleefully vomit abuse at you. Incidentally, this perception would be incorrect. If, like me, you agree with Joshi's conclusions & share his views, then you will be very pleased & stimulated by his reasoned arguments. Also, if you are like me, you will soon tire of the puerile invective of the kind Joshi excels.

As one reviewer stated, one need not be a Universal Genius to see through the facade that is religion. I applaud Joshi's efforts in dismantling the lame arguments endorsed by the likes of T. S. Eliot, Buckley, and William James, but you needn't use a shotgun on a housefly. The pro-God arguments are, in and of themselves, so shaky that Joshi doesn't need to resort to calling James "poor Willie" or Buckley a "fool". In resorting to these tactics, Joshi has sadly miscalculated.

Don't get me wrong, sometimes invective is very amusing & effective. Nietzsche, Mencken and Schopenhauer all loved to hit below the belt, but then all three were literary geniuses and genuinely funny! Joshi isn't either. His humor is either condescending (due to his self-importance) or self-pitying (due to his lack of cash).

Books by David Hume, Carl Sagan or Daniel Dennett would all make better introductions to agnostic/atheistic thought for the novice. Not only do they make their points as well as Joshi does, they understand how human fear & frailty leads to theism.

That said, Joshi's arguments destroys his opponents'. Although Falwell & Chesterton are easy targets, Joshi wonderfully reduces the arguments of (pseudo) intellectuals like Stephen Carter, William F. Buckley and William James to bits. He is equally able at rebutting Christian sacred cows like T. S. Eliot & the ridiculously influential C. S. Lewis. It is because of Joshi's effective arguments that I give this four stars. If he had toned-down some of the personal abuse, I would have easily given it five.

Incidentally, Joshi makes a lame joke about dour Scotsmen. Hmmm. I don't think David Hume or John Stuart Mill would appreciate that...

Rating:
Summary: A clear but brutal attack on God's defenders
Review: I was looking for a writer that explained the atheist position clearly and logically. I especially enjoyed the Introduction and Conclusion as providing a concise description of the problems with religion. Yes he could have been more diplomatic but when you're telling people the emperor has no clothes you will offend people. And if you shout it out loud and point out they have been fooled you may really upset them.

Rating:
Summary: Almost as boring as Religion
Review: Let's face it -- the religious establishment doesn't spare its invective, or its power. It's time for sane people who reject the fairy-stories of religion to stand up, and stop the vaccilation around the subject of gods and religion.

Either there is a god, or gods, or there isn't. Either one system of religion is fully correct, or none is. There is no other way around it. These are simple, direct questions. Humanity has solved many which are far more complex.

Either God created Adam and Eve and the Flood and Jesus and all that, or he did not. Either Mohammed is God's prophet, or he is not. Either Zeus is the father of all gods and hurls down thunderbolts from Mt. Olympus, or he does not. There is no room for misinterpretation, nor allegory, nor error: all of the books, bibles and traditions of all those religions and beliefs teach perdition, hell, torment and death for those that challenge their beliefs. There is no way around it. The tenets of a religion are either true or false. If true, prove it so. Put up, O Deities, or shut up.

On all of these points Mr. Joshi is sound, well-researched and well-informed. He dispatches his victims eloquently and well, he picks his fights, defines his terms and marshalls his arguments very well.

I would much prefer, however, to see Mr. Joshi's treatment of the people who really *matter* -- those who formulate policy and dominate the airwaves, rather than the professional opinion-havers.

Rating:
Summary: Militant; then again, the truth is the truth.
Review: S. T. Joshi is in true militant form in his new book. In the introduction, Joshi avers that religion persists in the face of overwhelming contrary evidence for one simple reason: "People are stupid" (12). The rest of the book appears to be an extended commentary on that point, taking to task a whole slew of figures the popularity of whose ideas on religion presumably can only be accounted for by human stupidity. The range Joshi covers is sweeping: William James, G. K. Chesterton, T. S. Eliot, C. S. Lewis, William F. Buckley Jr., Stephen L. Carter, Jerry Falwell, Reynolds Price, Anne Dillard, Elisabeth Kubler-Ross, Neale Donald Walsch, and Guenter Lewy. It is by no means incidental that Joshi at one point goes off on a tangent about arguments for why it might be a good thing for humanity to die out entirely.

Joshi's tone is about what you would expect: mostly entertaining if you agree with him, mostly offensive if you disagree, but over-the-top either way. However, as far as his analyses go, he always provides a fundamentally cogent critique of the ideas he is dealing with, which makes his book worthwhile even if you really wish he would please be just a little bit less combative.

Rating:
Summary: At last, religion exposed for what it really is!
Review: There has long been a curious notion abroad that it is somehow "tacky" to criticize anyone else's religious beliefs. Structuralist critic Jonathan Culler once wrote an essay taking issue with this notion, and S. T. Joshi now takes the initiative to attack the vagaries of religion with full vigor. Ascribing the explanation of religion's prevalence to the inability of most people to muster enough intelligence to break out of the metaphysical brainwashings they have undergone in childhood, Joshi follows an approach that allows him to examine the topic both in breadth and depth--he meticulously dissects the religious pronouncements of several leading proponents, people as varied as the astute T. S. Eliot and the absurdly comical Jerry Falwell. Joshi argues with great cogency that organized religion has no fair claim to have promoted ethical or moral uprightness and in fact has stood in opposition to these qualities throughout history. Joshi's logic is so incisive that the slippery claims of theism fall readily by the wayside, and I find it hard to imagine that any fair-minded and perceptive reader could work his or her way through this astonishing volume without finding the experience unsettling, but unsettling in a productive and mind-opening way. Joshi's book is an invigorating read, one that can be undertaken in a random-chapter-order fashion due to its structure as a collection of connected but essentially independent essays. Once in a rare while, a book that makes a whole lot of sense comes along, and this is one of those times. Read it. Remember it.

Rating:
Summary: Religion Doesn't Add Up
Review: This book is really smart and hard-hitting, but also can be pretty funny as the author exposes the many ways in which religion just doesn't stack up. In this book S. T. Joshi, chiefly known as a literary critic and editor, tackles some contemporary religious "thinkers" and shows that these emperors have no clothes. It is true he heaps abuse upon his victims, but only after pointing out the ways in which they deserve such attacks.

Joshi doesn't buy into the standard view that it isn't fair play to point out the problems with religion. He uses a logical approach and finds holes in religious doctrine. For instance, he talks about problems with William F. Buckley's Catholicism, T. S. Eliot's belief that religion must be the foundation of civilization, Elisabeth Kubler-Ross's belief in the afterlife, and Neale Donald Walsch's multi-volume "conversations with God." Along the way, the book brings other atheistic or secular thinkers into the discussion, drawing upon the likes of Bertrand Russell, H. L. Mencken, H. P. Lovecraft, and A. J. Ayer, all of whom had similar opinions to Joshi's.

One contemporary example is about fundamentalism, and how today's fundamentalists seem to feel free to pick and chose those portions of the Bible they will adhere to, thus not truly being fundamental at all but somewhat self-serving and opportunistic. What is sad, the book finds, is where so many people allow religion to hold them back from realizing their full potential, whether artistic, intellectual, athletic, etc. If God gave man a brain, why doesn't he use it? After all, Jesus talked about being a Good Shepherd; not being a Good Sheep.

So basically this book will be a hard pill for many to swallow, but the truth can hurt sometimes. It can only be hoped that other thinkers will come forward who have the courage and boldness to confront religious quacks as candidly as Joshi has done. His final conclusion, that "religion is of no value in modern society," seems about to sum up the reality of today. We 21st-century civilized folks just need to start growing up emotionally and get on with saving the world, because no One is going to do it for us.