Religion for Atheists: a Non-Believers Guide to the Uses of Religion Pdf

FREE RELIGION FOR ATHEISTS: A NON-BELIEVERS GUIDE TO THE USES OF RELIGION PDF

Goodreads helps you keep track of books you want to read. Want to Read saving…. Want to Read Currently Reading Read. Other editions. Enlarge cover. Error rating book. Refresh and try again. Open Preview See a Problem? Details if other :. Thanks for telling us about the problem. Return to Book Page. Preview — Religion for Atheists by Alain de Botton. What if religions are neither all true or all nonsense? The boring debate between fundamentalist believers and non-believers is finally moved on by Alain's inspiring new book, which boldly argues that the supernatural claims of religion are of course entirely false — and yet that religions still have some very important things to teach the secular world. Religion for Athei What if religions are neither all true or all nonsense? Religion for Atheists suggests that rather than mocking religions, agnostics and atheists should instead steal from them — because they're packed with good ideas on how we might live and arrange our societies. Blending deep respect with total impiety, Alain a non-believer himself proposes that we should look to religions for insights into, among other concerns, how to: - build a sense of community - make our relationships last - overcome feelings of envy and inadequacy - escape the twenty-four hour media - go travelling - get more out of art, architecture and music - and create new businesses designed to address our emotional needs. For too long non-believers have faced a stark choice between either swallowing lots of peculiar doctrines or doing away with a range of consoling and beautiful rituals and ideas. At last, in Religion for Atheists, Alain has fashioned a far more interesting and truly helpful alternative. Get A Copy. Hardcoverpages. Published February 12th by Hamish Hamilton first published September 1st More Details Original Title. Other Editions Friend Reviews. To see what your friends thought of this book, please sign up. To ask other readers questions about Religion for Atheistsplease sign up. Be the first to ask a question about Religion for Atheists. Lists with This Book. Community Reviews. Showing Religion for Atheists: A Non-Believers Guide to the Uses of Religion Average rating 3. Rating details. More filters. Sort order. Mar 04, Tulpesh Patel rated it did not like Religion for Atheists: A Non-Believers Guide to the Uses of Religion Shelves: religionethics-philosophy. Chapter one is titled Wisdom without Doctrine, yet one of the most common ideas presented throughout the rest of the book is that atheists should adopt the highly prescriptive approach of religions, which dictate precisely what, when and how we should learn, think, communicate and even eat. This is a book where papal edicts are seen as a good thing, as they create and ensure uniformity. Everyone thinking and doing things the same way because someone in a position of knowledge read power decrees it apparently trumps the plurality of ideas and practices that stem from individual, rational, scientific thinking. People thinking for themselves is apparently just too messy. How de Botton cannot see that adopting the dogmatic approach of the religious is the very antithesis of the ideal of free-thinking that he apparently loves, is beyond me. Just awful. Knowledge must be fed to us slowly and carefully, like food cut into manageable bites. Many, if not most, of his ideas are absurd, but there is one example I want to give because it genuinely made me laugh out loud. Hallelujah, Praise Goethe! The idea was swiftly, and rightly, torn to shreds as soon as it came to light but not before, of course, fuelling publicity for this book. London is full of sites — churches, synagogues, mosques and other places of worship — that are evocative of something beyond the human world. Better spend the money that is being raised for the new temple on religious buildings that are in disrepair than waste it on a monument to a defunct version of unbelief. A rant about poor university teaching accompanied by a picture of a student asleep at a desk, for those without the imagination to know what a bored student might look like. A few graphs aside, the illustrations add little or nothing to the text and prove to be little more than padding. Take the 90 or so superfluous illustrations away and the whole volume would be a third shorter and a much truer reflection of the flimsiness of the ideas within. The book would also be more accurately titled Judeo-Christian Religion for Atheists, as save for a couple of nods in the direction of Buddhism, all the other major world religions are completely ignored. That said, de Botton has stated many a time that he prefers a non-combative approach to discussing religion and I think this was just an excuse to avoid the inevitable overblown controversy caused by a small group of easily offended Muslims. The narrow, dictated wisdom of religion is precisely what has held us back and is the cause of much of the strife caused by the religious. Why would we want any of that? View all 28 comments. Sounds like a fun job. And when I say 'my fellow atheists', I include you lot over there who may believe in something in general but don't live actively religious lives. OK, hi. You know how life without religious faith is grey, stressful, depressive and focused solely on selfish personal gain? And we all a "Hi, my fellow atheists, my name is Alain and I'm a Philosopher. And we all agree that the world was better back when nobody was poor and everyone always helped each other out, and that religion - in particular catholicism, since they have shiny shiny robes - without exception brings out the best in man and would be the perfect basis of society if not for the annoying factual detail that God doesn't exist, am I right? Do you need a hug? And just because some of us don't believe in God anymore, those needs don't just go away overnight. Which is why we - " "So I came up with this brilliant idea! Since there is absolutely nothing in secular society to fulfill those needs, we can simply steal them wholesale from religions! Let's build atheist temples, let's introduce atheist saints - for instance, fashion designers and bankers - and Religion for Atheists: A Non-Believers Guide to the Uses of Religion new organisations with dogma that's as fixed and immutable as that of the Catholic church or McDonald's, to tell us how we should act towards ourselves and others. Clearly this 'freedom' thing isn't working out, as I'm sure we all agree, and what we need is a stern parent to tell us exactly what's good for us and what's forbidden. If it works for five-year-olds, it has to work for adult society too. And tell married women they're no longer allowed to say 'no' to us in the bedroom! And 'us'? Oh, and as a gold star for those who follow my rules, at the end of every year we get an ORGY where we get to have sex with anyone we want! Look at this picture in my book where a young woman blows an older man at a huge party. Look how happy he is! You're not joking. What kind of society are we building, anyways? Did you know - I couldn't believe it myself at first when I visited an actual university, I tell you, I was shocked - that we teach university students to think critically about things like literature and history? That's obviously got to go. Today's literature is completely, to quote myself, 'ungodly,' and all that modern culture teaches us is to think in abstracts and question structures rather than just give us clear and simple rules on how to live! Christianity, on the other hand, has realised that people must be told - " "Fine. So what do you, as an atheist philosopher, suggest we read? Oh, and artists and film makers and writers shouldn't be allowed Religion for Atheists: A Non-Believers Guide to the Uses of Religion think for themselves just because they know how to paint or photograph or turn a phrase, but just like when the Pope ordered the Sistine Chapel from Michelangelo, they should get all their motives handed to them from - " "Let me guess: self-appointed philosophers? So basically, you want to combat the increasing polarisation of society into various dogmatic cults by starting a dogmatic cult of your own? My suggestions are perfect for all. Uh, mothers. Honestly, Religion for Atheists: A Non-Believers Guide to the Uses of Religion have a few interesting points somewhere, but your argumentation is ridiculous. Your versions of both secular and religious society are as parodically exaggerated as those of any religious fundamentalist. You pull arguments from thin air and apply copypasted out-of-context bits of religions you happen to find personally appealing like you were selling snake oil, with no hint of acknowledgment of how well they've worked or gone wrong during the past few thousand years, or why a lot of us have put considerable effort into moving away from a society controlled by arbitrary rules made and imposed by the few. Basically, you come across as terrified that society might changeand that if people stop listening to the pope, they might stop listening to you as well, and you're making a hell of a good case for doing so without even realising it. Honestly, your Religion for Atheists: A Non-Believers Guide to the Uses of Religion for humanity at large doesn't bother me nearly as much as your contempt for your readers. Look, 'politeness' is number five. Now what do you have to say? Where are you going? What about my temple? View all 10 comments. Jun 18, BlackOxford rated it it was ok Shelves: britishphilosophy- theologycriticism. Literature For Religionists Like de Botton, I am an admirer of religion and a despiser of religious organisations. For me, religion is a primary motivator and source of ontological poetry, that is, language which seeks to relativise language by pointing out Religion for Atheists: A Non-Believers Guide to the Uses of Religion language does not capture what is not-language. Religion for Atheists - Wikipedia

Religion for Atheists: A non-believer's guide to the uses of religion is a book by Alain de Botton published in It argues that while supernatural claims made by religion are false, some aspects of religion are still useful and can be applied in secular life and society. Religion for Atheists was a New York Times non-fiction bestseller, and has been widely reviewed, with mixed results. Religion for Atheists has a general format in which de Botton describes a problem in society, discusses how religions particularly ChristianityJudaism and Buddhism have attempted to solve this problem, and proposes secular alternatives. Religion for Atheists particularly pays attention to the way religions draw people's minds to ideas through annual ceremonies and rituals such as Christmas or the Religion for Atheists: A Non-Believers Guide to the Uses of Religion of Atonement. Religion for Atheists asserts that religions know that people Religion for Atheists: A Non-Believers Guide to the Uses of Religion fundamentally children, in need of comforting and repeated guidance on how to live. In an interview with New Scientist, de Botton stated his aim for Religion for Atheists: A Non-Believers Guide to the Uses of Religion reading the book: "I want to make sure atheists are deriving some of the benefits of religion. The chapter on "Kindness" discusses the tensions between libertarianism and paternalism. It argues that freedom has become vital in Western political thinking, and discusses suspicion of the idea that the state should talk about how we should behave to each other. De Botton contrasts this with religions, which he describes as having ambitious ideals about how people should Religion for Atheists: A Non-Believers Guide to the Uses of Religion each other. He suggests that religious ethics grew out of pragmatic needs, and that because they were key to our survival that it became important to protect them by pretending that they were divinely inspired. He sums up by saying that people simply have to be reminded that "the most mature and reasonable parts of us" p. De Botton suggests the example of the Scrovegni Chapelwhich has paintings of the "cardinal virtues" and their corresponding vices. People sitting in the church would think about their own relationships to these virtues and vices while they sat under a painting of God. De Botton suggests that advertising for values should be displayed in public spaces. The chapter on "Pessimism" describes that modern society, with its continual message of progress and improvement, seems to promise permanent happiness, but that we are still vulnerable to heartbreak and despair, even as our ancestors were. De Botton argues that religious pessimism allows religious people to be grateful for small successes, whereas "the secular world is not well versed in the art of gratitude" p. In the "Institutions" chapter, De Botton describes organised religions as being efficient at spreading their message, having financial clout and enacting social change, and compares them to corporations. A Greek translation has been published by Patakiand a Swedish translation has been published by Brombergs. Critical reception of the book has been mixed. It was the most-reviewed book of the week in Januaryaccording to The Bookseller. Winkler finds the omission of positive psychology confusing in the book, and criticises De Botton's assumption that "because the mechanics used in a religious setting work, and have worked for thousands of years, they will work in a secular setting", and describes this assumption as naive at best and "slightly totalitarian" at worst. Despite his criticisms, Winkler recommends Religion for Atheists because he finds the book eloquent and thought-provoking. According to Payne, De Botton argues that religion provides useful boundaries, in addition to inspiring a sense of awe. Payne praises De Botton's prose and charm, but notes that De Botton seems to find libertarianism distasteful. Payne describes the book as being both prescriptive and optimistic, but sums it up in the book's central premise - the hope that religion can be made to 'really suit us'. Moore states that De Botton "has an instinctively religious grasp of the power of paradox" in that the concept of original sin is depicted in the book as "comforting". Moore suggests that De Botton knows that his suggested secular solutions to the problems of life are "mostly a bit silly", and notes that while De Botton discusses failed attempts at secular religionlike August De Comte's, De Botton 'does not seem to ask himself why' they failed. For Moore, religious 'uses' come from the 'truth' at the heart of religions, and De Botton does not recognise this. When published in the United States, the book placed on the New York Times' best seller list for hardcover non-fiction. The reviewer for Bookmarks notes that critics have considered de Botton to be closer to C. Lewis and Augustine in his views, rather than the atheists Richard Dawkins and Sam Harrisand that De Botton seems to delight in being subversive in Religion for Atheistsgiving the book three stars out of five. Wilsonwho had been an atheist but converted to Christianity, criticized first the amount of illustrations and blank pages in the book. Wilson sums up de Botton's argument as being that religion is too serious to be confined to the General Synodand describes this argument as attractive - although noting that the 'Education' chapter is the least convincing. Still, Wilson is glad for the optimism in the book. The reviewer describes De Botton's examples from religions as being 'cherry-pick[ed]', and states that De Botton's secular alternatives are less than persuasive, and 'insulting'. The reviewer notes that De Botton discounts the achievements of civic culture such as libraries, and regards it as a poorer work than De Botton's The Pleasures and Sorrows of Work and The Architecture of Happiness. Biles compares Religion for Atheists unfavorably to De Botton's The Consolations of Philosophysaying that Religion for Atheists seems at times "willfully blind" to aspects of reality, describing the book as a "hopeful fantasy". Biles criticizes the generalizations in the book, and De Botton failing to Religion for Atheists: A Non-Believers Guide to the Uses of Religion how "politics and power" keep the dogmatic parts of religion together with the parts of religion De Botton says should be emulated in a secular fashion. It is described as a book that will promote discussion between atheists and religious people. From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia. New Scientist. The Guardian. Retrieved God, it's embarrassing — Telegraph Blogs". The Independent. The Sydney Morning Herald. Archived from the original on The Economist. The Conversation. Literary Review. Literature Resource Center. N"Helping our unbelief. Categories : Books with atheism-related themes non-fiction books in religion British non-fiction books English-language books Books by Alain de Botton. Namespaces Article Talk. Views Read Edit View history. Help Learn to edit Community portal Recent changes Upload file. Download as PDF Printable version. Religion for Atheists: A Nonbelievers Guide to the Uses of Religion | Denver Seminary

Denver Seminary prepares men and women to engage the needs of the world with the redemptive power of the gospel and the life-changing truth of Scripture. Want to learn more about our academic degree programs? As you consider seminary, let us guide you through the process. We have a team of admissions counselors who are ready to assist you in any way you need. Here you will find one-stop shop for students to get connected to Religion for Atheists: A Non-Believers Guide to the Uses of Religion that will feed your spiritual and social life as well as equip you with resources to jump-start your academic career. Denver Seminary has a wealth of resources that are available to current students, alumni, and the local community. Here you will find access to the Denver Journal, Engage Magazineand the various initiatives organized by the Seminary. New York: Pantheon Books, Cultural Religion for Atheists: A Non-Believers Guide to the Uses of Religion and popular atheistic philosopher, Alain de Religion for Atheists: A Non-Believers Guide to the Uses of Religion, has a new angle on religion. No, there is no God. That, he thinks, is settled—although he gives no arguments to that effect. After all, a lot of religious things are pretty interesting and even inspiring although there is no Spirit behind any of it. This ambitious or quixotic endeavor has exposed de Botton some savage criticism from fellow God-bashers. The entire new atheist movement distinguishes itself precisely by not tolerating Religion for Atheists: A Non-Believers Guide to the Uses of Religion and particularly Christianity, which is routinely treated with enormous scorn and for wanting to exorcise all things religious from culture. Instead of saying that religion is false, but we have to put up with superstition in a free society, the New Atheists claim that religion is the source of all manner of evil. It must be expunged from any rational society. No pats on the head for religion; rather, bring the hammer. But de Botton who has several popular books under his belt, including Proust Can Change Your Lifeattempts to articulate a kinder, gentler atheism. He even proposes a religious atheism. This is not new. Moreover, The Secular Humanist Manifesto I, spoke of secular humanism as a religious endeavor—sans God, however. In the famous Torcaso vs. There is no need to describe much of de Bottons project as witty as some of it may be; he is British, after allsince it rests on an abject absurdity —or more than one, as we will see. The madman jumped into their midst and pierced them with his eyes. We have killed him you and I. All of us are his murderers. But how did we do this? How could we drink up the sea? Who gave us the sponge to wipe away the entire horizon? What were we doing when we unchained this earth from its sun? Whither is it moving now? Whither are we moving? Away from all suns? Are we not Religion for Atheists: A Non-Believers Guide to the Uses of Religion continually? Backward, sideward, forward, in all directions? Is there still any up or down? Are we not straying, as through an infinite nothing? Do we not feel the breath of empty space? Has it not become colder? Is not night continually closing in on us? Do we not need to light lanterns in the morning? Do we hear nothing as yet of the noise of the gravediggers who are burying God? Do we smell nothing as yet of the divine decomposition? Gods, too, decompose. God is dead. God remains dead. And we have killed him. What was holiest and mightiest of all that the world has yet owned has bled to death under our knives: who will wipe this blood off us? What water is there for us to clean ourselves? What festivals of atonement, what sacred games shall we have to invent? Is not the greatness of this deed too great for us? Must we ourselves not become gods simply to appear worthy of it? There has never been a greater deed; and whoever is born after us—for the sake of this deed he will belong to a higher history than all history hitherto. Death is the end of the individual and of the entire cosmos eventually. That is the implacable narrative of naturalism, like it or not. Or, to put it yet another way for hardheaded atheists who wants to steal from religion what atheism itself can never provide:. This argument restates the first one given, but with a different form. I need not go on with this logical theme, lest I suffer the charge of pedantry. But another absurdity needs a tongue-lashing. Thus, Buddhism can teach us about tranquility through meditation, and so on. But the problem mentioned above, with respect to Christianity, arises here as well. One cannot find Buddhist meaning without Buddhist truth. But that is not all. Buddhism and Christianity affirm different and antithetical worldviews at their very core. They both cannot be true, since they disagree on minor things like the existence of the soul, the afterlife, and the ultimate reality God or Nirvana. So, the absurdities multiply for de Botton who obliviously marches from chapter to chapter cherry- picking likeable aspects of false religions— whose meaning depends on their mutually-exclusive truths. Oh, my! How bad can it get? One must invoke the Apostle here:. For although they knew God, they neither glorified him as God nor gave thanks to him, but their thinking became futile and their foolish hearts were darkened. Although they claimed to be wise, they became fools Romans This means a lot of debauchery. Stunned, I ripped it out and disposed of it immediately after briefly seeing it. So, in the irresponsibly eclectic and illogical mind of Alain Religion for Atheists: A Non-Believers Guide to the Uses of Religion Botton one can equally draw from the practice of Holy Communion and from the unholy pagan bacchanalia, the likes of which the Apostle Paul explicitly condemns. I warn you, as I did before, that those who live like this will not inherit the kingdom of God Galatians This is how I articulated it in Christian Apologetics InterVarsity, when discussing the rational tests for a worldview. Criterion 5a: For a worldview to be a likely candidate for truth, its essential propositions must be existentially viable. Criterion 5b: If a worldview leads habitually to philosophical hypocrisy, it is rationally disqualified, since this indicates that it does not correspond to reality. Atheism Religion for Atheists: A Non-Believers Guide to the Uses of Religion not existentially viable or livablesince we are meaning-seeking beings supposedly lost in a meaningless world. As Francis Schaeffer said in The God Who is Therethis would be like a fish developing lungs in a world without an oxygen atmosphere. It is beyond pointless. This reality leads atheists such as de Botton to commit philosophical hypocrisy by vainly trying to purloin ideas from antithetical religious worldviews to give some meaning to an ultimately meaningless world. It melts down to these two logically incompatible propositions:. But obviously, if 1 is true, then 2 must be false. One must engage in vicious mystification to try to think otherwise. A logically consistent set of two propositions for Religion for Atheists: A Non-Believers Guide to the Uses of Religion atheist is as follows:. That man is the product of causes which had no prevision of the end they were achieving; that his origin, his growth, his hopes and fears, his loves and his beliefs, are but the outcome of accidental collocations of atoms; that no fire, no heroism, no intensity of thought and feeling, can preserve an individual life beyond the grave; that all the labours of the ages, all the devotion, all the inspiration, all the noonday brightness of human genius, are destined to extinction in the vast death of the solar system, and that the whole temple of Man's achievement must inevitably be buried beneath the debris of a universe in ruins—all these things, if not quite beyond dispute, are yet so nearly certain, that no philosophy which rejects them can hope to stand. Only within the scaffolding of these truths, only on the firm foundation of unyielding despair, can the soul's habitation henceforth be safely built. Russell, who drank the cup of atheism to the dregs, realized his godless fate. But that, of course, requires the abandonment of atheism, the embrace of theism and the Incarnation, and the end of pretending otherwise. Only then, will religious meaning become a reality for the thirsty soul. About Back. Contact Us Newsroom Employment Accreditation. Contact Us! Current Students Here you will find one-stop shop for students to get connected to activities that will feed your spiritual and social life as well as equip you with resources to jump-start your academic career. Library About the Carey S. Y does not exist. Therefore: X does not exist. Or it can be put thus: If and only if Y, then X.