Gift Guide
Customer Reviews for

Good without God: What a Billion Nonreligious People Do Believe

Average Rating 3.5
( 29 )
Rating Distribution

5 Star


4 Star


3 Star


2 Star


1 Star


Your Rating:

Your Name: Create a Pen Name or

Barnes & Review Rules

Our reader reviews allow you to share your comments on titles you liked, or didn't, with others. By submitting an online review, you are representing to Barnes & that all information contained in your review is original and accurate in all respects, and that the submission of such content by you and the posting of such content by Barnes & does not and will not violate the rights of any third party. Please follow the rules below to help ensure that your review can be posted.

Reviews by Our Customers Under the Age of 13

We highly value and respect everyone's opinion concerning the titles we offer. However, we cannot allow persons under the age of 13 to have accounts at or to post customer reviews. Please see our Terms of Use for more details.

What to exclude from your review:

Please do not write about reviews, commentary, or information posted on the product page. If you see any errors in the information on the product page, please send us an email.

Reviews should not contain any of the following:

  • - HTML tags, profanity, obscenities, vulgarities, or comments that defame anyone
  • - Time-sensitive information such as tour dates, signings, lectures, etc.
  • - Single-word reviews. Other people will read your review to discover why you liked or didn't like the title. Be descriptive.
  • - Comments focusing on the author or that may ruin the ending for others
  • - Phone numbers, addresses, URLs
  • - Pricing and availability information or alternative ordering information
  • - Advertisements or commercial solicitation


  • - By submitting a review, you grant to Barnes & and its sublicensees the royalty-free, perpetual, irrevocable right and license to use the review in accordance with the Barnes & Terms of Use.
  • - Barnes & reserves the right not to post any review -- particularly those that do not follow the terms and conditions of these Rules. Barnes & also reserves the right to remove any review at any time without notice.
  • - See Terms of Use for other conditions and disclaimers.
Search for Products You'd Like to Recommend

Recommend other products that relate to your review. Just search for them below and share!

Create a Pen Name

Your Pen Name is your unique identity on It will appear on the reviews you write and other website activities. Your Pen Name cannot be edited, changed or deleted once submitted.

Your Pen Name can be any combination of alphanumeric characters (plus - and _), and must be at least two characters long.

Continue Anonymously
Sort by: Showing all of 5 review with 1 star rating   See All Ratings
Page 1 of 1
  • Posted November 21, 2009

    I Also Recommend:

    leftist, reactionary and philosophically weak

    i'm a philosophy undergrad at Rutgers University. i attended a public reading and discussion of this book by Mr. Epstein here at the uiversity. the basic thing a critical scholar comes away with from the book (and the public reading) is a sense that the humanist position is "How to be a good christian [or reform jews, in the author's case] without believing in god." one also gets the impression that the humanists are a victim cult who are tired of being beraitted by the religious right. the humanist response leaves much to be desired. i expected a biting epistemological aguement against faith as a source of moral knowledge and and extrapolating from that a sound secular moral arguement. This was not so. i also take issue with epstein's claim that secular morality is subjectie. Kant, Rand and others reject this. In a similar vane, the humanist morals seem just the "slave morals" of altruism and collectivism-no different than jesus- that Rand and Neitzsche spent lifetimes fighting. The sole star i grant for the author's quoting an arguement by plato for the splitting of moral and religious philosophies. This work is also very liberal and reinforces th stereotype that atheists are all liberals (im an atheist and a conservative and so was Rand, basically). My final objections come from the author's crticism of the "New Atheists" (Dawkins, Harris, Hitchens,Dennett, Maher)as dangerous and not representing all atheists. While they don't represent me (and Hitchens seems to only represent the voices in his head), neither do the humanists, and at least the "New atheists" have the courage of their convictions. What happened to the "Old" atheists (russell, schopenhauer, and especially Nietzsche and Rand)who did represent me. i recommend Kant for a general secular ethics primer (a christian, by the way) levay for satire, and the rest for a truely dfferent and genuinely atheistic moral approach.

    1 out of 11 people found this review helpful.

    Was this review helpful? Yes  No   Report this review
  • Posted November 12, 2009

    more from this reviewer

    Horrible on so many levels

    Horrible on so many levels

    0 out of 16 people found this review helpful.

    Was this review helpful? Yes  No   Report this review
  • Anonymous

    Posted January 31, 2011

    No text was provided for this review.

  • Anonymous

    Posted January 12, 2010

    No text was provided for this review.

  • Anonymous

    Posted June 25, 2011

    No text was provided for this review.

Sort by: Showing all of 5 review with 1 star rating   See All Ratings
Page 1 of 1