The Atheist Afterlife: p17-36Today's post covers pages 17-36 of The Atheist Afterlife, by David Staume.
The Atheist Afterlife: p1-17Today’s post covers the Introduction and Chapter 1 of The Atheist Afterlife, by David Staume. In a nutshell, the book aims to demonstrate the plausibility of, well.. an atheist afterlife (as if you needed my review to tell you that, right?).
As stated, my initial reactions about the book are largely positive. Overall, I’d say the author takes the road less traveled, and tends towards conservatively stated beliefs and secure premises. I guess when one is used to online (a)theist discussions, those virtues tend to stand out more. As an example of some statements I appreciated or agreed with,
The Atheist Afterlife: Why I’m An IdiotSo, I don't check the email associated with this blog nearly as often as I check other emails, which means I'm about a month-and-a-half late in paying David the gratuity of posting the preface he'd taken the time to write and include back when he sent the book. Better late than never I suppose, but at least now you know where this post's title came from. Sorry David, and thanks for not being one of those people who expresses offense at such things. Sometimes TWIM's email just doesn't get checked for 6 weeks!
Anyways, without further adieu, David Staume's preface, open for comments and considerations:
The Atheist Afterlife: IntroductionA few weeks back, I discovered a most pleasant surprise in the mailbox: a copy of philosopher David Staume's The Atheist Afterlife. If nothing else, it ought to catch one's attention for the title alone.
Like many other things, I first heard of Staume's book on Common Sense Atheism, which in my opinion is probably the best all-around atheist blog out. David also comments at CSA and on one occasion, I responded favorably to a comment of his that hit on some of the ideas in TAA, which led to him offering me a copy of the book. Much obliged, David!
News, AnnouncementsIn case anybody actually missed them, I apologize for the absence of posts, but the month-long break felt great! I don't know about you, but I prefer feeling refreshed and full of new ideas to write about (as opposed to feeling burnt out and writing about the same old things).
I imagine the new addition to our family – a cute, sweet and healthy baby girl – has certainly contributed her share to my enhanced interest in all things human. So far, many of the clichés I'd heard about parenthood have proven true, while others, not as much so. Either way, I definitely foresee some posts and arguments referencing the parent-child relationship in TWIM's immediate future. I've always felt the parent-child relationship has significant import to (a)theist debate, and it's not an angle you hear argued often.
On So-Called “Vacuum” FluctuationI'm going to put off further development of the CCH's competitor in favor of this short post about so-called "vacuum" fluctuation.
Furthermore, the uncertainty principle implies that a particle can never be at rest, but is subject to constant fluctuations even when no measurement is taking place, and these fluctuations are assumed to have no causes at all. In other words, the quantum world is believed to be characterized by absolute indeterminism, intrinsic ambiguity, and irreducible lawlessness.
–David Pratt, Consciousness, Causality, and Quantum Physics
In recent attempts to mitigate the apparent necessity of the Unmoved Mover, D has posited creation ex nihilo as a viable alternative:
Rebutting Atheist Universe 1.2Last week, we stopped in the middle of page 34, and Atheist Universe had already racked up 4 hasty generalizations, 2 rhetorically bolstered arguments, 1 epistemological nightmare and 2 strawman arguments. In the positive, the chapter also aspires to a worthy cause, and contained 1 well-spoken observation that everyone can agree on. Let's return to see how the next ten points go…
Rebutting Atheist Universe 1.1So, the first chapter in David Mills' Atheist Universe is titled, "Interview With An Atheist."
As I was reading, I quickly realized I was making lots of red marks in the margins and body copy. Of those marks, I include the strongest and most relevant arguments, and discard weaker, less persuasive ones. Even so, I could see as early as page 31 that my critique of Chapter 1 was going to take multiple posts. The chapter itself is over 40 pages long, and as a general custom, I'm won't critique more than ten points in any one post in this series. Ten is probably too many already.
I suspect much of this chapter's purpose was to rebut common misconceptions people have about atheists. This is a noble cause. I sympathize with any misunderstood minority party, because there's perhaps nothing more frustrating in life than having people insult you based on what they think you believe, which is often wrong. All in all, Mills does a good job setting some things straight, but unfortunately, he also affirms just as many common misconceptions about Christians. Nonetheless, considering that religious tension and distrust of atheists was still considerably high in this country when Atheist Universe was published (2004), I'd say the chapter was appropriate. Nobody deserves to be on the receiving end of ignorance, especially in a religio-political climate of hostility such as the first few years after 9/11.
Still, that doesn't mean "Interview With An Atheist" was without problems, and in my opinion, the first one worth mentioning comes on page 28.
Rebutting Atheist Universe: An IntroductionI've decided to do a book review post series, and should you choose to follow along with me, the first book we'll be taking a look at is David Mills' Atheist Universe (Ulysses Press, 2006, 978-1-56975-567-9).
From the backcover: "Using simple, straighforward logic, this book rebuts every argument that claims to 'prove' God's existence."
Really? Every argument? I already smell an inflated claim and we haven't even peeked inside, but I suppose if we are to call ourselves rationalists, we'll have to suspend judgment until further evidence appears.
In the Forward by Dorion Sagan, we get a small taste of what Atheist Universe might be about. Sagan begins with some blanket statements about creationists – always fun to shoot fish in a barrel – then moves swiftly into personal views of the biblical God as a, "2,000-year-old petty Middle Eastern tyrant." Sagan concludes, assuring us that Mills' work represents, "impeccable logic, intellectual bravery and professional clarity," and these will be part of the criteria by which I judge the book.