The New Atheism
10 Arguments That Don't Hold Water
by Michael Poole
GoodBookStall Review:
In some respects I have found it a challenge to review this book.
Michael Poole is in favour of the old earth approach and seeing God as either directing or initiating evolution, also he does not see the opening chapters of Genesis as a literal description of Creation. This enables him to take a liberal view of the Bible.
Michael Poole’s book addresses arguments raised by the new atheists from a largely philosophical standpoint. He shows several examples of faulty reasoning in their philosophy of the new atheism. In addition he highlights inaccuracies and distortions in their books. For example Dawkins does not mention in The Root of All Evil any Christians who have done good works for society, i.e. Wilberforce, or atheists who have done evil, i.e. Hitler, Stalin and Pol Pot.
Michael takes a position of fairness towards Dawkins, Dennett and Hitchens.. He notes that Dawkins titles his book The Root of All Evil , but later in print Dawkins says he dislikes the title as no single one thing could be the root of everything. Michael notes this as a point of fairness to Dawkins, yet as far as I understand, Dawkins has not changed the title of the book or put a disclaimer regarding the title in the book.
I would recommend reading this book in order to have an understanding on the New Atheists and the weakness in their views, however this goes with the warning that Michael does write from a liberal view of the Bible.
Reviewer: Barbara Stoneham (23/08/10)
In some respects I have found it a challenge to review this book.
Michael Poole is in favour of the old earth approach and seeing God as either directing or initiating evolution, also he does not see the opening chapters of Genesis as a literal description of Creation. This enables him to take a liberal view of the Bible.
Michael Poole’s book addresses arguments raised by the new atheists from a largely philosophical standpoint. He shows several examples of faulty reasoning in their philosophy of the new atheism. In addition he highlights inaccuracies and distortions in their books. For example Dawkins does not mention in The Root of All Evil any Christians who have done good works for society, i.e. Wilberforce, or atheists who have done evil, i.e. Hitler, Stalin and Pol Pot.
Michael takes a position of fairness towards Dawkins, Dennett and Hitchens.. He notes that Dawkins titles his book The Root of All Evil , but later in print Dawkins says he dislikes the title as no single one thing could be the root of everything. Michael notes this as a point of fairness to Dawkins, yet as far as I understand, Dawkins has not changed the title of the book or put a disclaimer regarding the title in the book.
I would recommend reading this book in order to have an understanding on the New Atheists and the weakness in their views, however this goes with the warning that Michael does write from a liberal view of the Bible.
Reviewer: Barbara Stoneham (23/08/10)
