1. Comment #111168 by Matt7895 on January 13, 2008 at 8:53 pm

AT LAST! I was holding off on buying this until it came out in paperback (the local bookshops charge extortionate prices for the hardback version of this). I liked The End of Faith, I love Sam's lectures and debates, I've always wanted to read this. I trust it will also be released in the UK?

Other Comments by Matt7895

2. Comment #111169 by Andrew Stich on January 13, 2008 at 8:53 pm

20 pages, eh? It might be worth the repurchase just for that.

Other Comments by Andrew Stich

3. Comment #111172 by Barbara on January 13, 2008 at 9:38 pm

Several months ago I loaned my copy of Letter to a Christian Nation to someone and never got it back. I'll gladly buy this paperback for the 20-page afterword and to replace the other book.

Other Comments by Barbara

4. Comment #111173 by bouwe on January 13, 2008 at 9:48 pm

A little book like that should be out in paperback straight away. It is the ideal book to have in every motel bedroom drawer right next to the ubiquitous and inevitable Gideon's Bible. Hits all the nails on the Christian coffin (crucifix?) on the head and straight to the point. Being brief, it is more likely to be actually read right through (in this age of short attention-span and the predominance of TV culture), and therefore possibly the best thing to hand to a fundy nutjob and actually get through to him/her.

From the sample paragraph, the new twenty-odd pages are a few more sharp nails to be hammered into the dying corpse (ouch!!)

Long live the Nail Gun of Logic.

Other Comments by bouwe

5. Comment #111178 by Zakie Chan on January 13, 2008 at 10:25 pm

I agree with Andrew Stitch. Its apparently like 20% longer now haha.

Other Comments by Zakie Chan

6. Comment #111182 by Aussie on January 13, 2008 at 11:05 pm

Several months ago I loaned my copy of Letter to a Christian Nation to someone and never got it back.

It was obviously successful in convincing them that there is no afterlife where they will have to attone for their sins.

Other Comments by Aussie

7. Comment #111191 by Slyer on January 14, 2008 at 1:12 am

I was waiting for an excuse to buy this! My list of books to read is getting bigger. :)

Other Comments by Slyer

8. Comment #111198 by CJ22 on January 14, 2008 at 2:13 am

I Ebayed my hardback copy (along with many other books) in an attempt to make some space. As a book fetishist, I've regretted it ever since. So I expect I'll get the paperback, especially as it has 20 extra pages of Harrisy goodness.

@Matt7895: Postage rates from Amazon US are very reasonable.

Other Comments by CJ22

9. Comment #111206 by Tyler Durden on January 14, 2008 at 3:17 am

Comment by CJ22:

Ebayed my hardback copy (along with many other books) in an attempt to make some space.

It's not exactly "War and Peace" ;-)

Other Comments by Tyler Durden

10. Comment #111218 by robaylesbury on January 14, 2008 at 3:57 am

Its truly a remarkable book. I read it along with The End Of Faith last August. It pretty much bought my 12 year daliance with Christianity to an end.

Other Comments by robaylesbury

11. Comment #111244 by prettygoodformonkeys on January 14, 2008 at 6:10 am

Someone where I work "shared" with me the anti-evolution "In Six Days" book because of our conversations about it, and because he is "born-again", but oddly, a good friend, and a talented electronics technician. So I read the 384 pages and made notes with my researched rebuttals for their ridiculous claims, and gave the book back in two weeks. And yes, I did bring up the fact that electronics is based on "theories", like evolution, and they are "proved" in the same way.

When Letter to a Christian Nation came out, I thought it was fair to "share" it with him. Three months later I asked for it back and he was only about 1/3 the way through it, but he "could see where it was going". I said that it's basically written on a napkin, and he said he's been pretty short of time.

At least I won't have to read anything like "Six Days" again.

*shivers*

It was horrible.

Other Comments by prettygoodformonkeys

12. Comment #111247 by Atanu on January 14, 2008 at 6:31 am

Thanks, Sam.

You are the best.

I just wrote a blog post that quotes extensively from your "The Problem with Atheism". The post is long only because of the quotes from you but the initial part of the post includes my characterization of you. I would be much obliged if you would tell me if I have you wrong.

Here's the link to my blog post: http://www.deeshaa.org/2008/01/14/the-problem-with-atheism/

If I have made an error in my description of you, I would be much obliged if you would correct me.

Thanks.
Atanu
atanudey@gmail

Other Comments by Atanu

13. Comment #111250 by JamieR on January 14, 2008 at 6:35 am

I don't own any books as i carn't read very well but a book comes along like this and god delusion that makes me wish i could read better

Other Comments by JamieR

14. Comment #111253 by Paula Kirby on January 14, 2008 at 6:54 am

All books purchased through the above link will help support the work of Sam's new foundation, The Reason Project, whose advisory board now includes: Peter Atkins, Jerry Coyne, Richard Dawkins, Daniel Dennett, Rebecca Goldstein, Ayaan Hirsi Ali, Harry Kroto, Steven Pinker, Lee Silver, Ibn Warraq, and Steven Weinberg.

I can't decide whether I think it's a good thing or not that so many leading atheists seem to be setting up their own charitable foundations for the promotion of reason/atheism. Anything that spreads the word is very welcome, of course, but I have to admit that I'm very unclear about the differences between them. Mightn't they be more effective if they all joined forces and really pulled together? Just a thought.

Other Comments by Paula Kirby

15. Comment #111258 by JFHalsey on January 14, 2008 at 7:00 am

Three months later I asked for it back and he was only about 1/3 the way through it, but he "could see where it was going".

Ha! At least he got that far. I gave my copy to my sister almost a year ago and she still hasn't gotten past the Introduction because it mentioned "evolution," so, of course, she can't trust the rest of what the book says. >.<

Other Comments by JFHalsey

16. Comment #111260 by Tyler Durden on January 14, 2008 at 7:07 am

Comment by Paula:

Mightn't they be more effective if they all joined forces and really pulled together? Just a thought.

Ah, but Paula, isn't it like RD always says - that would be like trying to "herd cats" :)

Other Comments by Tyler Durden

17. Comment #111262 by robotaholic on January 14, 2008 at 7:12 am

I think I expect Harris to pump out books like one a month which is completely unrealistic. I have been rereading the God Delusion and I'm surprised that there is so much I had forgotten. I'm sure the same thing will happen with The End of Faith. For example I had forgotten that Dawkins quotes Gore Vidal. Also there are many people that Dawkins quotes which I'm sure have great books that I intend to investigate. Anyway, thanks for such great books both of you.

Other Comments by robotaholic

18. Comment #111265 by Geoff on January 14, 2008 at 7:26 am

I think Tyler's right, Paula (and it's very rarely, if ever, that I disagree with any of your comments).

It's a bit like all the different atheist/humanist organisations; some will prefer the Rational Response Squad approach, others the BHA or the NSS, for example.

Also, the books [of the 4 horsemen and others] are quite different in style, despite the message being basically the same. Personally, I prefer TGD, but others will prefer Hitchens' "in your face" style, or Dennett's more philosophical approach.

They do pull together where it's important.

Other Comments by Geoff

19. Comment #111267 by Paula Kirby on January 14, 2008 at 7:38 am

Geoff: I think Tyler's right, Paula (and it's very rarely, if ever, that I disagree with any of your comments).

It's ok, Geoff - it is allowed. And, sadly, not unprecedented ;-)

You're right: the books are all very different in style, but when it comes to campaigns differences in style and approach can be a strength, not a weakness. You notice that the names on the advisory panels overlap anyway, so it's not that they can't or won't work together.

I should confess I haven't yet followed the link to find out more about Sam's "Reason Project", and it could be that it's incompatible with, say, RDFRS, in some way. Or maybe Sam's project covers areas that are not included in the RDFRS charitable objectives - charities law is very strict on what organisations can and cannot do with the money they raise.

I'm sure there will be a good reason why they're ploughing their own furrows - it just seems a little counter-intuitive to me.

Other Comments by Paula Kirby

20. Comment #111269 by Paula Kirby on January 14, 2008 at 7:49 am

OK, I've looked at the links now. This is what Sam's Reason Project is for:

The Reason Project will soon be a 501(c)(3) charitable foundation devoted to spreading scientific knowledge and secular values in society. The Reason Project will draw on the talents of prominent and creative thinkers in a wide range of disciplines — science, law, literature, film, journalism, information technology, etc. — to encourage critical thinking and wise public policy. It will convene conferences, produce films, sponsor scientific research and opinion polls, award grants to other non-profit organizations, and offer material support to religious dissidents and public intellectuals — all with the purpose of eroding the influence of dogmatism, superstition, and bigotry in our world.

... and this is the link to the RDFRS mission statement: http://richarddawkinsfoundation.org/foundation,ourMission

Sam's seems to be broader in remit whilst narrower in geographical scope, so the two are clearly not doing exactly the same thing. Beautifully complementary to each other, though, so hopefully there'll be plenty of collaboration between them on specific projects. In fact, I feel sure there will be.

Back to the level of us individual atheists, I agree that trying to co-ordinate us IS rather like herding cats ... but I also think we need to challenge ourselves to grow out of that. People simply are more effective when they're pulling together. That doesn't mean we have to be homogenous or that differences in approach need to be suppressed - just that a little co-operative spirit can go a long way.

Other Comments by Paula Kirby

21. Comment #111272 by Steve Zara on January 14, 2008 at 7:58 am

Back to the level of us individual atheists, I agree that trying to co-ordinate us IS rather like herding cats ... but I also think we need to challenge ourselves to grow out of that.

Perhaps, but I really hope it is not under the label of "atheist", otherwise we fall into the trap that the religious have prepared for us if we end up saying "as atheists, we feel..."

Dawkins has a foundation for Science and Reason. That is a good name, as is "The Reason Project".

Other Comments by Steve Zara

22. Comment #111275 by Diacanu on January 14, 2008 at 8:00 am

*Lays on the couch, yawns, stretches, curls up into fetal position, snuggles in, purrs, tunes rest of world out*

Other Comments by Diacanu

23. Comment #111277 by j.mills on January 14, 2008 at 8:02 am

"I also think we need to challenge ourselves to grow out of that. People simply are more effective when they're pulling together."

Sounds like an announcement of candidacy to me. Paula for PM! :)

(How d'you do quote boxes in this bit?)

Other Comments by j.mills

24. Comment #111279 by Tyler Durden on January 14, 2008 at 8:08 am

Put your text between the words "blockquote" and "/blockquote" with < > instead of quotes.

Other Comments by Tyler Durden

25. Comment #111291 by frederikan on January 14, 2008 at 8:35 am

it's already released in Singapore.. i'm sure the paperback version would be released in the UK too..

Other Comments by frederikan

26. Comment #111293 by gnarl on January 14, 2008 at 8:42 am

I tried to contact Sam but no response so far.
I've translated The Letter to Chinese. The original intention was to share it with some friends. If Sam or his publisher wants to publish it in Chinese, please contact me at gnarl.perches@gmail.com I can send you the manuscript.

Other Comments by gnarl

27. Comment #111298 by al-rawandi on January 14, 2008 at 8:55 am

A must read. The dumbest 100 things ever posted on Christian chate sites. I like the one saying Atheist are just another sect of Muslims


http://209.85.165.104/search?q=cache:http%3A//www.fstdt.com/fundies/top100.aspx%3Farchive%3D1

Other Comments by al-rawandi

28. Comment #111302 by ianmkz on January 14, 2008 at 9:00 am

that would be like trying to "herd cats"

It's a bit like all the different atheist/humanist organisations; some will prefer the Rational Response Squad approach, others the BHA or the NSS, for example.

Given the number of organizations it seems that cats can be herded, but for now cat herds can't.

Other Comments by ianmkz

29. Comment #111305 by Paula Kirby on January 14, 2008 at 9:14 am

A must read. The dumbest 100 things ever posted on Christian chate sites. I like the one saying Atheist are just another sect of Muslims

Thanks for the link, al-rawandi. Some of the quotes are hilarious; others are truly heart-breaking.

I've just skimmed the first few so far, but this one is just wonderful:

I can sum it all up in three words: Evolution is a lie

Priceless :-)

Other Comments by Paula Kirby

30. Comment #111306 by Paula Kirby on January 14, 2008 at 9:16 am

Oh, no, wait - they get even better:

several million years for a monkey to turn into a man. oh wait thats right. monkeys dont live several million years.

Why didn't I think of that?

Other Comments by Paula Kirby

31. Comment #111308 by Steve Zara on January 14, 2008 at 9:17 am

This one has been doing the rounds for a while now, but is truly wonderful:

One of the most basic laws in the universe is the Second Law of Thermodynamics. This states that as time goes by, entropy in an environment will increase. Evolution argues differently against a law that is accepted EVERYWHERE BY EVERYONE. Evolution says that we started out simple, and over time became more complex. That just isn't possible: UNLESS there is a giant outside source of energy supplying the Earth with huge amounts of energy. If there were such a source, scientists would certainly know about it.

Other Comments by Steve Zara

32. Comment #111320 by The Architect on January 14, 2008 at 10:44 am

This one has been doing the rounds for a while now, but is truly wonderful:


One of the most basic laws in the universe is the Second Law of Thermodynamics. This states that as time goes by, entropy in an environment will increase. Evolution argues differently against a law that is accepted EVERYWHERE BY EVERYONE. Evolution says that we started out simple, and over time became more complex. That just isn't possible: UNLESS there is a giant outside source of energy supplying the Earth with huge amounts of energy. If there were such a source, scientists would certainly know about it.

Now I'm not a physicist, or biologist, or in any way remotely qualified as a scientist of any sort, but I would wager a guess to say that this giant source of energy is...the Sun?

Or maybe it's Jesus. They're both "just theories", right? :P

Other Comments by The Architect

33. Comment #111321 by Patrick McArdle on January 14, 2008 at 10:45 am

I like Sam's invocation of blood sacrifice. Christians and Jews don't like to recall just how much blood stains the roots of their religions. It's a wonderfully unsubtle reminder of how inappropriate such religions are to our modern world.

On the side thread, I'm always amused by the creationists, who proclaim, "I did not evolve from a monkey." They never see the implied self-judgement in that statement, and I'm happy to walk away without pointing it out...

Other Comments by Patrick McArdle

34. Comment #111326 by al-rawandi on January 14, 2008 at 11:28 am

As a rocket surgeon, I object to the criticism of the 2nd law of Thermodynamics which says evolution doesn't exist. Evolution doesn't exist because monkeys don't live to be 1,000,000. Duh.

Can't you stupid atheists read :-)

Other Comments by al-rawandi

35. Comment #111327 by Steven Mading on January 14, 2008 at 11:29 am

On the "herding cats" comments - Note that THEISTS ALSO have large "splintering" into vastly different groups, for example, some have names like "Christians", "Jews", and "Muslims". What you need to remember is that in EXACTLY the same way that merely knowing someone is a theist doesn't tell you enough information to figure out their entire worldview, neither does merely knowing that someone is an atheist. It's just ONE property, one ingredient (or lack thereof) in the big picture.

Other Comments by Steven Mading

36. Comment #111328 by al-rawandi on January 14, 2008 at 11:31 am

The best quotation of the bunch...

Everyone knows scientists insist on using complex terminology to make it harder for True Christians to refute their claims.

Deoxyribonucleic Acid, for example... sounds impressive, right? But have you ever seen what happens if you put something in acid? It dissolves! If we had all this acid in our cells, we'd all dissolve! So much for the Theory of Evolution, Check MATE!

With the head so far up their asses...

Other Comments by al-rawandi

37. Comment #111331 by kaiserkriss on January 14, 2008 at 11:38 am

About time.. I have purchased 4 copies of the hard cover already and handed them out to some of my Christian friends.... jcw.

Other Comments by kaiserkriss

38. Comment #111340 by Matt7895 on January 14, 2008 at 11:53 am

I checked my local Waterstones for a copy today.

They had a hardcover edition, which was on sale for £10.00. I declined to buy it.

They had also run out of 'The Portable Atheist', something I've been wanting to buy since it was first released. They assured me they would be receiving new stock soon. All the while, flea books still sit on the shelves next to Bibles and Qur'ans.

Other Comments by Matt7895

39. Comment #111348 by The Truth, the light on January 14, 2008 at 12:13 pm

What's the deal with hardcover/paperback editions.

In New Zealand, I purchased TGD and End of Faith in 2007 in paperback editions.

Is it something about the New Zealand psyche that means we don't like hardbacks?

Other Comments by The Truth, the light

40. Comment #111411 by qster on January 14, 2008 at 2:30 pm

Perhpas if you had an infinite number of million year old monkeys typing on an infinite number of typewriters, they would have already written The God delusion and the bible.

Other Comments by qster

41. Comment #111422 by Goldy on January 14, 2008 at 2:40 pm

Is it something about the New Zealand psyche that means we don't like hardbacks?

The price? And the covers get funny if you leave them in the sun ;-)

Other Comments by Goldy

42. Comment #111446 by Veronique on January 14, 2008 at 4:08 pm

30. Comment #111305 by Paula Kirby

A must read. The dumbest 100 things ever posted on Christian chat sites. I like the one saying Atheist are just another sect of Muslims - al-rawandi

Did you keep reading:
This is gorgeous!

To say the Bible was written by men and may contain inaccuracies completely contradicts the word of the Bible.

No irony in this one.

But think about it, who is smart enough to write the Holy Bible? The answer, no one.

Thanks for that link al-rawandi
V

edit Just had to add this one:

Jesus is not a Jew. Jesus was Jewish.

V

Other Comments by Veronique

43. Comment #111447 by APPlet on January 14, 2008 at 4:18 pm

Herding cats is easy........make a sound like a can-opener.

Other Comments by APPlet

44. Comment #111454 by BAEOZ on January 14, 2008 at 4:38 pm

I often debate with evolutionists because I believe that they are narrow mindedly and dogmatically accepting evolution without questioning it. I don't really care how God did what He did. I know He did it.

Priceless irony. :)

Other Comments by BAEOZ

45. Comment #111470 by Goldy on January 14, 2008 at 5:19 pm

BAEOZ, remember this dude?
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml;jsessionid=0TBAZZAEIO0ZVQFIQMGCFFWAVCBQUIV0?xml=/news/2008/01/14/nchurch114.xml

Other Comments by Goldy

46. Comment #111488 by Veronique on January 14, 2008 at 7:21 pm

47. Comment #111482 by babrock

Compose your post in Word or another text editor and copy and paste into the comment box. Then it doesn't matter if you are timed out.

I suspect that was the problem:-)
V

Other Comments by Veronique

47. Comment #111492 by BAEOZ on January 14, 2008 at 7:39 pm

Goldy, if Wee Flea is one of the happy-go-lucky members of the Free Scottish church, what are the rest like. He was virulently nasty when he posted on this site. A real unhappy bigot.

Other Comments by BAEOZ

48. Comment #111499 by TonyA on January 14, 2008 at 8:10 pm

Comment #111326 by al-rawandi

As a rocket surgeon, I object to the criticism of the 2nd law of Thermodynamics which says evolution doesn't exist. Evolution doesn't exist because monkeys don't live to be 1,000,000. Duh.

Can't you stupid atheists read :-)

Duh? As a famous scientist and scholar of all things holy, I say with complete truthiness thoose munkees wooden had a ground to stood on top of and woodof fallen down the bottom of outer space, until Jesus created the earth for to stand up and wooden starve to death either with no food, OR EVEN ANY AIR!, for 94,000 years (1 million - 6,000 years old earth), even animals need AIR TO BREATH!!!! Iggnorant athiests!

Other Comments by TonyA

49. Comment #111504 by Teratornis on January 14, 2008 at 8:40 pm

In reply to comment #111327 by Steven Mading:

On the "herding cats" comments - Note that THEISTS ALSO have large "splintering" into vastly different groups, for example, some have names like "Christians", "Jews", and "Muslims".

And within these large groupings are literally thousands of distinct schisms, schools, sects, denominations, etc. Some of the disagreements between the various sects are far from trivial and have provoked many sectarian wars. Currently there's one raging in Iraq between Sunni and Shia Muslims.

Within the various Christian sects, there have been disagreements on issues such as whether slavery is allowable, whether women should be allowed to speak in church, which books belong in the Bible, and on and on the list goes. This is why it is so laughable when theists claim you can't have a moral code without God - even with the idea of God, Christians have disagreed on whether it is OK to own other people. If a belief system is not even capable of settling such a basic question, it simply provides no moral authority.

What you need to remember is that in EXACTLY the same way that merely knowing someone is a theist doesn't tell you enough information to figure out their entire worldview, neither does merely knowing that someone is an atheist. It's just ONE property, one ingredient (or lack thereof) in the big picture.

It is true that atheists disagree on many basic questions, such as whether invading Iraq was a good idea, but as long as you know someone tries to be a critical thinker, you know you can reason with that person. Which is to say, no matter how you might disagree with Hitchens or Dawkins on politics, or with Harris on the advisability of contemplating in a cave for three months, you know that given enough time to discuss your differences with them, you could determine exactly why you disagree, and what sort of evidence would be necessary to get either you or them to change your minds.

Theists exempt large subsets of their worldviews from reason altogether. If they believe, for example, that human souls exist in Petri dishes, you will have an extremely hard time dislodging that belief.

A critical thinker remains always aware that his views could turn out to be wrong and need correction. Because of this, critical thinkers would be unlikely to resort to (unilateral) violence to settle a disagreement - it would be bad to take the irreversible step of killing someone you disagree with, when your current beliefs are still subject to change. (Of course, killing someone who is actively trying to kill you is a different situation altogether.)

Theism provides no such structural inhibition, because theism claims to provide absolute, final truth. If someone's faith tells them to kill someone else, they have no basis to question the command; indeed, to question is to sin. Of course not every religion evolves in the direction of violence, but there is nothing about faith itself which discourages violence, and much which facilitates it.

To be fair, there is nothing about atheism which requires critical thinking. Stalin, Mao, and Pol Pot were atheists who soundly rejected critical thinking in favor of Marxist dogma. (For more on this, see Steven Pinker's The Blank Slate, which discusses how Marxist armchair intellectual speculation about human nature contradicts scientific findings.)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Blank_Slate

Critical thinking is a sufficient condition for atheism, but atheism is by no means a sufficient condition for critical thinking. In fact, history shows that atheism without critical thinking can be destructive almost beyond imagination.

In contrast, I'm not aware of examples of bloody warfare between any two groups of people who were fully dedicated to critical thinking. (This is not to say it could never happen, but if it did, I think one or both groups would have experienced a lapse in their critical thinking.) Of course it would be hard to find such examples in any case, because critical thinking is so rare. There probably has never been a culture fully dedicated to critical thinking. The nearest approximation would be the international scientific community, which has had a long history of cooperation and sharing even involving scientists who were separated into warring nations. But the scientists are always a tiny subculture within their host cultures.

A notable example is the meteorology community, which has to a large extent transcended the various political divisions between nations. Even nations which are at war with each other know they have a selfish interest in sharing weather data, because the weather over the hostile country could be heading your way.

Other Comments by Teratornis

50. Comment #111511 by tybowen on January 14, 2008 at 9:38 pm

damnit, stop publishing books! I have textbooks I should use my money on instead.

Other Comments by tybowen