The Last Superstition: A Refutation of the New Atheism [NOOK Book]

Overview

The central contention of the “New Atheism” of Richard Dawkins, Daniel Dennett, Sam Harris, and Christopher Hitchens is that there has for several centuries been a war between science and religion, that religion has been steadily losing that war, and that at this point in human history a completely secular scientific account of the world has been worked out in such thorough and convincing detail that there is no longer any reason why a rational and educated person should find ...
See more details below
The Last Superstition: A Refutation of the New Atheism

Available on NOOK devices and apps  
  • NOOK Devices
  • Samsung Galaxy Tab 4 NOOK 7.0
  • Samsung Galaxy Tab 4 NOOK 10.1
  • NOOK HD Tablet
  • NOOK HD+ Tablet
  • NOOK eReaders
  • NOOK Color
  • NOOK Tablet
  • Tablet/Phone
  • NOOK for Windows 8 Tablet
  • NOOK for iOS
  • NOOK for Android
  • NOOK Kids for iPad
  • PC/Mac
  • NOOK for Windows 8
  • NOOK for PC
  • NOOK for Mac
  • NOOK for Web

Want a NOOK? Explore Now

NOOK Book (eBook)
$10.99
BN.com price
(Save 42%)$19.00 List Price

Overview

The central contention of the “New Atheism” of Richard Dawkins, Daniel Dennett, Sam Harris, and Christopher Hitchens is that there has for several centuries been a war between science and religion, that religion has been steadily losing that war, and that at this point in human history a completely secular scientific account of the world has been worked out in such thorough and convincing detail that there is no longer any reason why a rational and educated person should find the claims of any religion the least bit worthy of attention.
     But as Edward Feser argues in The Last Superstition, in fact there is not, and never has been, any war between science and religion at all. There has instead been a conflict between two entirely philosophical conceptions of the natural order: on the one hand, the classical “teleological” vision of Plato, Aristotle, Augustine, and Aquinas, on which purpose or goal-directedness is as inherent a feature of the physical world as mass or electric charge; and the modern “mechanical” vision of Descartes, Hobbes, Locke, and Hume, according to which the physical world is comprised of nothing more than purposeless, meaningless particles in motion. As it happens, on the classical teleological picture, the existence of God, the immortality of the soul, and the natural-law conception of morality are rationally unavoidable. Modern atheism and secularism have thus always crucially depended for their rational credentials on the insinuation that the modern, mechanical picture of the world has somehow been established by science.
     Yet this modern “mechanical” picture has never been established by science, and cannot be, for it is not a scientific theory in the first place but merely a philosophical interpretation of science. Moreover, as Feser shows, the philosophical arguments in its favor given by the early modern philosophers were notable only for being surprisingly weak.
      However, not only is this modern philosophical picture rationally unfounded, it is demonstrably false. For the “mechanical” conception of the natural world, when worked
out consistently, absurdly entails that rationality, and indeed the human mind itself, is illusory. The so-called “scientific worldview” championed by the New Atheists thus inevitably undermines its own rational foundations; and into the bargain (and contrary to the moralistic posturing of the New Atheists) it undermines the foundations of any possible morality as well. By contrast, and as The Last Superstition demonstrates, the classical teleological picture of nature can be seen to find powerful confirmation in developments from contemporary philosophy, biology, and physics; moreover, morality and reason itself cannot possibly be made sense of apart from it.  The teleological vision of the ancients and medievals is thereby rationally vindicated – and with it the religious worldview they based upon it.
     Winner of the 2008 Book of the Year in Religion from ForeWord Magazine and the only 2008 Editors’ Choice for Religion from the American Library Association’s Booklist, The Last Superstition remains the most cogent and powerful refutation of the New Atheism extent.
Read More Show Less

Product Details

  • ISBN-13: 9781587314537
  • Publisher: St. Augustine's Press
  • Publication date: 8/15/2012
  • Sold by: Barnes & Noble
  • Format: eBook
  • Sales rank: 244,145
  • File size: 537 KB

Meet the Author

Called by National Review “one of the best contemporary writers on philosophy,” Edward Feser teaches philosophy at Pasadena City College in Pasadena, California. He is the author of On Nozick, Philosophy of Mind: A Short Introduction, and Locke, and editor of The Cambridge Companion to Hayek. He has also written for such publications as City Journal, Crisis, National Review, and New Oxford Review.
 

Read More Show Less

Table of Contents

Table of Contents 1. Bad Religion The "New Atheism" The old philosophy The abuse of science Religion and counter-religion Things to come 2. Greeks Bearing Gifts From Thales to Socrates Plato's Theory of Forms Realism, nominalism, and conceptualism Aristotle's metaphysics A. Actuality and potentiality B. Form and matter C. The four causes 3. Getting Medieval What Aquinas didn't say The existence of God A. The Unmoved Mover B. The First Cause C. The Supreme Intelligence 4. Scholastic Aptitude The soul Natural law Faith, reason, and evil 5. Descent of the Modernists Pre-birth of the modern Thoroughly modern metaphysics Inventing the mind-body problem Universal acid A. The problem of skepticism B. The problem of induction C. Personal identity D. Free will E. Natural rights F. Morality in general Back to Plato's cave 6. Aristotle's Revenge How to lose your mind The lump under the rug Irreducible teleology A. Biological phenomena B. Complex inorganic systems C. Basic laws of nature It's the moon, stupid Notes Index
Read More Show Less

Customer Reviews

Be the first to write a review
( 0 )
Rating Distribution

5 Star

(0)

4 Star

(0)

3 Star

(0)

2 Star

(0)

1 Star

(0)

Your Rating:

Your Name: Create a Pen Name or

Barnes & Noble.com 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 & Noble.com 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 & Noble.com 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 BN.com 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

Reminder:

  • - By submitting a review, you grant to Barnes & Noble.com and its sublicensees the royalty-free, perpetual, irrevocable right and license to use the review in accordance with the Barnes & Noble.com Terms of Use.
  • - Barnes & Noble.com reserves the right not to post any review -- particularly those that do not follow the terms and conditions of these Rules. Barnes & Noble.com 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 BN.com. 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 7 Customer Reviews
  • Posted July 21, 2011

    Highly recommended fot its presentation of Aristotelian Thomism

    In "The Last Superstition: A refutation of the new atheism", Charles Feser presents an excellent historical and philosophical review of the arguments for the existence of God as established by Aristotelian Thomism. It is worth reading for that alone.
    The most prominent of the new atheists is Richard Dawkins. His basic premise in "The God Delusion" is that mathematical probability can be inferred from the observation of material phenomena. If this is true, material reality is irrational and, by default, the source of intelligibility is the individual human mind. Voila, relativism!
    In the context of Aristotelian Thomism, Feser delineates the errors of early modern philosophy, namely those of Descartes et al, the predecessors of the modern atheists. However, Feser does not address the specific arguments of Richard Dawkins. In "The God Delusion", Dawkins reviews three mathematical problems of mathematical improbability. They are the problems of the improbability of evolution in a one-off event, the improbability of the origin of life and the improbability of God. To Dawkins' satisfaction, mathematical analysis leads to solutions to the first two problems. However, mathematical analysis demonstrates that there is no solution to the improbability of God. Feser's implicit position is that the conclusion of Dawkins is incompatible with the valid conclusion of Aristotle and Aquinas that God exists. Therefore, both the conclusion and the argument of Dawkins must be false. Should Feser be given a pass from directly facing his opponents?
    Feser notes that metaphysics starts with both empirical and conceptual premises from which metaphysical conclusions necessarily follow. He attributes the necessity of the truth of metaphysical conclusions to the fact that the empirical premises of the sort used by Aquinas in metaphysics are obviously true. Mathematical arguments start with conceptual premises and draw necessary conclusions. In contrast to both of these epistemological routes is that of science. Scientific arguments start from empirical premises and draw merely probabilistic conclusions.
    In the epistemology of science, it would appear that for Feser, probabilistic is probabilistic in the sense of human certitude. If so, it is a very strange word to refer to human certitude when the crux of an opponent's arguments is the inference of mathematical probability from material phenomena, not only generally, but particularly in empirical science. Feser shares the same fault with Richard Dawkins, the failure to cite the distinction between probability in the sense of human certitude and in the sense of mathematical probability. In light of that failure the studious reader must conclude that Feser would be fully agreeable to equating the probability of the conclusions of empirical science to the probability of mathematics. In other words, Feser has implicitly conceded to Richard Dawkins.
    In spite of his excellent presentation of Aristotelian Thomism, it cannot be said that Feser has refuted modern atheism, because he has avoided the central issue in contention, the inference of mathematical probability from material phenomena and the specific mathematical arguments alleged by Dawkins to flow from that inference.

    1 out of 1 people found this review helpful.

    Was this review helpful? Yes  No   Report this review
  • Posted November 12, 2014

    We owe a debt of gratitude to Edward Feser for sharing with clar

    We owe a debt of gratitude to Edward Feser for sharing with clarity the insight of his penetrating analysis of materialism. Feser has three distinct advantages: a) he obviously knows the subject better than Dawkins, Dennett, & Co., b) he has the proficiency and honesty to follow its precepts to their ultimate conclusions, and c) he has an unrivaled grasp of Aristotelian/Thomistic Metaphysics.

    Thomas Aquinas cautioned us that a small error in the beginning is a large one in the end. It is left to our imagination to comprehend the consequence of a large error in the beginning. This is the embarrassing problem confronting Dawkins, Dennett, & Co. Any freshman in Philosophy 101 should be able to see through their simplistic and unprofessional knowledge of Thomism, which sets them off on the path to absurdity.---James A. Termini, retired Aerospace Engineer

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

    Posted November 5, 2009

    No text was provided for this review.

  • Anonymous

    Posted April 27, 2009

    No text was provided for this review.

  • Anonymous

    Posted January 20, 2009

    No text was provided for this review.

  • Anonymous

    Posted June 27, 2009

    No text was provided for this review.

  • Anonymous

    Posted September 23, 2009

    No text was provided for this review.

Sort by: Showing all of 7 Customer Reviews

If you find inappropriate content, please report it to Barnes & Noble
Why is this product inappropriate?
Comments (optional)