The Devil's Delusion Criticism

1893 Words4 Pages

Emily Rodriguez Professor Marshall Berlinski Review 4/22/14 The Devil’s Delusion Review The Devil’s Delusion: Atheism and Its Scientific Pretensions by David Berlinski uses clever and unique critiques of militant atheism and its devotion to scientism. Ten in depth chapters shed light on the dogmatic stance of many of today’s popular “new atheists.” According to Berlinski new atheism poses itself as the sole holder of truth through science, “And like any militant church, this one places a familiar demand before all others: Thou shalt have no other gods before me” (10). Berlinski (a secular Jew) approaches ideas with his own mixture of intelligence and thought filled logic; exploring the world as well as important philosophical questions pertaining to “new atheism”. Thus providing the information needed to explore the sides for both and existence and nonexistence of God. Berlinski opens up by giving an introduction to the scientism of the new atheists and presents his own critique on a common slogan of the party: religion as a primary cause of evil in the world. Berlinski explains that the issues atheism has caused in the world cannot be ignored. Fundamentally because what atheistic regimes did not believe is more important than what they did believe in. Therefore, this is the real cause of many twentieth century problems. Berlinski explains: “What Hitler did not believe and what Stalin did not believe and what Mao did not believe and what the SS did not believe and what the Gestapo did not believe and what the NKVD did not believe and what the commissars, functionaries, swaggering executioners, Nazi doctors, Communist Party theoreticians, intellectuals, Brown Shirts, Black Shirts, gauleiters, and a thousand party hacks di... ... middle of paper ... ... uses the lack of proof of Gods existence for God’s existence. This then essentially leads to a battle between science and religion on the idea of whether or not God can be proven to exist and whether that proof is essential to determine if science or religion has the right answer. Overall, I felt that Berlinski did a good job of exploring the idea of God’s existence or nonexistence in an unbiased and thoughtful way. Although Berlinski’s thoughts seemed to jump around and often stray off course, the writing was thoughtful and engaging as well as complex enough to place the reader into deeper thought than what was just being written. Berlinski used both logical and critical thinking to explore many subjects in depth and provide the reader with a better understanding of how to explore the question of whether or not God exists, in a thoughtful and philosophical way.

Open Document