God Is Not Great: How Religion Poisons Everything
A literary manifesto that will excite and offend all the right people.
God is Dead
- Nietzsche
God’s not dead, (no) he’s alive
- Christian song
Opinions are like assholes. What I want are facts- cold, hard facts. Like Antonius Block in The Seventh Seal, I want knowledge, not belief.
God Is Not Great offers a little bit of both. But it is more an argument against religion than a scientific study on the existence of god. So if you are of a similar opinion, Hitchens will be preaching to the choir. The book contains a handy (but short) list of references, but otherwise assumes a certain amount of knowledge on the reader’s part. If you are not familiar with things like 16th century philosophy, the history of astronomy or the Burgess Shale, you will learn little here other than names and dates. Hitchens doesn’t go into much scientific detail. He cites and moves on.
Hitchens is like a one-man debate team. To him, religion is the turgid corpse being dragged by humanity in Barthelme’s The Dead Father. His argument is completely one-sided, but it is an entertaining one. The man has a way with words, and is not afraid to turn a hyperbolic phrase. His reputation as a provocateur (he once referred to Mother Teresa as a fanatic, a fundamentalist, and a fraud) is what drew me to the book in the first place. Maybe I have been desensitized by years of South Park, which has the subtly of a two-by-four to the face, because I did not find Hitchens as controversial as described. His reasoning, which could easily be construed as insensitive in the wrong hands, comes off as evenhanded. At least to me. I was expecting (hoping for) more ranting and raving. A little fire and brimstone, if you will.
Don’t get me wrong; there is an undercurrent of impish glee beneath the literary sheen of his writing. But Hitchens is first and foremost an intellectual. This might alienate those not already offended, as some tend to confuse a strong, articulate opinion with condescension. When it comes to such a sensitive subject, there are bound to be emotional casualties. But not as many casualties as claimed by The Crusades! Ba-zing!
In the end, Hitchens doesn’t have all the answers. Let us not forget that in The Seventh Seal, even the character of Death did not know whether god truly existed. Those searching for hardcore scientific “truth” should look elsewhere. But if you are in the mood for some good old-fashioned religion bashing, this is your book. Of course, this is just the opinion of one asshole, so feel free to disagree.
Comments
Good review.
This Dawkins wannabe is an interview whore - he's always on t.v. damning God. How pathetic. It's like if I were to write a book condemning the Tao because it contains paradoxes. Paradoxes exist in the scientific world as well but guys like Hitchens still insist that everything is knowable.
What I really don't understand is the "religion causes the world's problems" argument this douche is so found of. I think the review's South Park comment is ironic considering they're the ones who really ripped this argument a new asshole (our science is greater than your science!). As writers we should be well aware of the inevitability of conflict and blaming religion because it's always been an important part of society is a half-assed, lazy argument.
In the end, Hitchens falls under the Nietzsche paradox: "Nothing matters but it's really important that you understand why!" He expects me to give up my paradoxes of hope and mysticism in exchange for a paradox of meaninglessness and despondency? Give me a break. Furthermore, this guy wants me to believe that guys like Jesus, Ghandi, the Dali Lama and Mother Teresa are poison? People who devote their lives to spreading a message of love are supposed to be discounted because this guy intentionally misinterprets their doctrines and refutes his own misinterpretation?
Here's why religion is so important: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_100_Most_Influential_Books_Ever_Written
To me religion is much like music theory. The patterns one must follow to make music are known and recorded but it's music theory because we don't necessarily know why music is so enjoyable and meaningful (or sometimes just one or the other). I've heard lots of abstract theories as to why we connect with music, both scientific and aesthetic, but knowing how music works and understanding how to manipulate it are entirely different things. One can ignore how music physically functions and focus on the scaler relations and become a brilliant musician. Similarly one can focus on the lessons religion teaches us and become a better person without ever considering how God (or Tao, or Allah, or the divine, or righteousness, ect.) is physically composed.
As far as I'm concerned guys like Dawkins and Hutchens are nothing more than fools trying to convince me that the Trojan War never existed because of all the supernatural occurrences within the Illiad. The skeptic's argument in a nutshell: "I doubt it."
Interesting thoughts, Razor, if not a bit angry sounding.
I'm curious, are you religious yourself? Do you believe in god? Or do you just feel religion itself is important to humanity and should not be disregarded?
Thanks for reading.
This is a fantastic book, I would suggest getting the Audiobook, it's much more powerful when Mr. Hitchens reads you his own words.
Razor you make some good points, I've read both Hitchens and Dawkins, and though I much prefer the approach Dawkins takes, I think you are mistaken about a few things.
This is an interesting point, but if there is one thing science has proven time and again is that given time, most things are eventually explained scientifically. That is where science and religion really diverge. As scientists figure out how something works, other concepts are adjusted to incorporate those findings. Religion, not so much.
It's not really all that difficult to understand. Many of the problems the world faces are a result of religious issues. If you read his or Dawkin's books, it's not that they blame all of the world's problems on religion, just many of them. It is factually true many world-issues are religious based.
Comparing religion to music is a bit of a stretch. As you point out, we know a lot about music theory. We also know a lot about the effect different tones and such have on a listener. This is stuff that has been and continues to be studied. Just because we don't have a complete break down of how it works, doesn't mean we never will. Not to mention that a large part of the psychology of music is attached to personal preference.
You may be partially true in this assumption, and I don't think Hitchens or Dawkins would disagree with you entirely. But you're forgetting the flip side. Religions, particularly western religions, can also teach us to become worse people.
If you want to think that Jesus was all about love, that is great. But you're conveniently skipping over the parts bad parts of the bible.
If you want to think that belief can't be hurtful, try explaining the recent string of cases where parents have let their sick children go without treatment, in some instances ending in death, because of religious beliefs.
Visit Whats the Harm to see the negative impact irrational beliefs are having TODAY in the world.
Ultimately, THAT is what Hitchens and Dawkins are talking about. You might not have people getting killed by the thousands on a daily basis simply because of religious beliefs, but there are tons of other equally bad things happening as a result.
Sorry, I'm not sure how to use the quote function. In reference to this-
To me religion is much like music theory. The patterns one must follow to make music are known and recorded but it's music theory because we don't necessarily know why music is so enjoyable and meaningful.
-the word theory does not mean a proposed explanation whose status is still conjectural, it means a body of principles, theorems, or the like, belonging to one subject. It is not the same thing as the theory of evolution or the theory of relativity.
Josh,
Just paste the text you want to quote into the text box, hilight it, then press the button with the quote symbol in the bar right above.
Thanks!
I for one cannot see the intellect in blaming God for religion. That's like blaming a capable teacher for slacker students.
This book is proof that myopia isn't just a heretical affliction.
Do I think that the VAST majority of organized religion is BAD for the world? Yes. Do I think that it is God's fault versus man's? No.
This boils down to the simple reason(s) most backfire their belief in God:
Why does he allow this kind of behavior to exist, and the more alluring but less televised, why should I be accountable to anyone but myself? If I *believe* there is no God, and can placate those beliefs with books such as these, and can finger point to atrocities *man* has committed in the name of God, then I release myself from any and all culpability on the matter.
Do any amount of cursory research on the matter, arm yourself with a bit of sub-patina knowledge, and the answer is crystal.
*steps off soapbox*
All in all, mechanically, a good review. Poor grounds for a book, let alone a life's work, but a good review.
Always love thought/discussion on this, the hottest of topics.
Christians follow the teachings of Jesus Christ - parts of the new testament tell his story from various writers. The Old Testament (#2 on Wiki's most important list) is the oldest detailed account of western civilization and set the standard for many Jewish traditions which are practiced to this day. Yes, there are Evangelical preachers and Zionists who completely misinterpret these teachings and cause a great deal of harm. Nonetheless, I would argue that the world would be much worse if not for religion. There have been many wars throughout history but they have usually been inspired by greed rather than religion. In fact, when most of Europe was Catholic the Popes often prevented wars. It's easy for Hitchin's to criticize religion while he's plugging his book but many communities here in the U.S. would collapse if not for the support of churches. If the local churches didn't take care of the homeless (many of whom have mental illnesses and the state won't take care of them) in my community, crime would become rampant and it would be an unsafe place to live. Jesus taught people to take care of the unfortunate and that's what churches do - and our lives are much safer because of it! You can call it karma or welfare or whatever you want, but knowing God is feeling good because your time has been spent making the world a better place. It's not believing in some man in the clouds who touches clay and brings it to life - that's what Michelangelo painted because how else could it be explained without personification?
Kant, St. Thomas, Kierkegaard, and others are for the priest or artist while Jesus' parables as depicted by renaissance painters is how they explain so people they can understand without knowing.
People are so passionate about things they will never ever have a chance of proving or disproving.
der
Great book. Highly recommended. Clearly shows both in argument and example why all religions (he doesn't just focus on one) are ridiculous and hurt society. Everyone (religious and otherwise) benefits from reading this book.
poorness, racism, violence and wars has always been an important part of society (bad, but important). so, should we stop criticizing those to?
I think he could have written a more convincing moral argument about religion by interviewing or finding statistics from people who have suffered/been abused under the name of a faith.
Think about the massive extent of human history, and how much of it has been utterly fucked by someone using the name of God to conquer, kill, and humiliate.
He could have made a five thousand page document just recounting instances of child abuse in the Catholic Church. It riles just about everyone up, religion or no.