Customer Reviews
Disappointing - By: Sour Sprout, 31 Aug 2008 
I wanted this to be an inspiring book but I was disappointed. The subject of atheism, & criticism of religious belief is, for my money, not covered in sufficient depth. The arguments put forward are not as intellectuallly rigorous as they need to be, perhaps not so surprising given the background of the author. Coupled with the author's rather selective use of reference material there is much that the religious believer could poke holes in.
The text could also have done with being run under the eye of a proofreader - the use of punctuation is often imprecise & there are numerous typos that have slipped in past the word processor's spellchecker.
In summary, I would have to say that it's probably not worth the money. Do what I did, & borrow it from your local library instead.
If you've already read Dawkins et al, don't bother - By: Oolon Colluphid, 11 Aug 2008 Most disappointing, this. 'New Atheism Lite' should be its subtitle.
Having already read Dawkins, Hitchens, Grayling & Dennett (and having been arguing with 'faithheads' for years), I came to this book hoping for a new angle on the subject. No luck. Harding simply repeats -- no, merely summarises -- the material these others have covered, & in considerably less involving prose. Hardly a page passes without him recommending you read more on the subject in one of the usual suspects' books. Simple answer: forget this one & cut to the chase! To me, it read like a cheap cash-in on the New Atheism.
Then again, I suppose it might be useful as an introduction, so if you're new to this stuff it might be a reasonable place to start; if so, add another two stars to this review. But you'd still be better off with Dawkins, reallly. For something novel on the topic, I'd suggest Martin Rowson's 'The Dog Allusion'.
Not bad, but... - By: T. Croft, 06 Aug 2008 
I found this book interesting; not remotely in the class of 'The God Delusion', or 'God is not Great', but then it doesn't claim to be. However, a problem plagued me throughout the entire read: I felt that, intentionallly or otherwise, Harding suggested anyone leaning more to the right than left is a fully paid up rabid church goer. I come from a Christian family background, but pretty early in life I realised the whole faith concept was nonesense. I have no doubt the world would be a better place if everyone used their brains & consigned religion to the bin. Still, I consider myself more right wing than left; a conservative liberal if you will. I uagree that neo-conservatism & the religious evangelical nuts are a dangerous problem, but that doesn't mean everyone can be lumped together. Believe me, I know what allleged religious extremism can create (I live in Northern Ireland) Anyway, that's neither here nor there. The book iteslf was well written, interesting & easy to followand amusing in places. Quoting 'Family Guy' made amusing reading & summed things up very well, but ,for me, using anything from Michael Moore was a mistake. In general this is not a bad read, but there a superior books in the same vein.
A little disappointed - By: Mr. Rd Green, 01 Aug 2008 I've got to admit, I'm a little disappointed. This book shown promise, but too many of the points seem repeated on a number of occasions. There is also a heavy reliance on previously published authors materials. A lot of the time it seems to rant rather than express. There are much better books on the market about Atheism. This doesn't reallly say anything new & what it does say, it does so in a rather contrived manner.
A very good place to start - By: R. Sargent, 01 Apr 2008 
These days there is a lot written & spoken, usuallly in the form of spluttering indignation, about the so-callled New Atheists. But what is new about them? They have attained a higher public profile as a reaction to increasingly strident & assertive religiosity & not because of any deep need to eradicate religion (a surely impossible task). Triggered by the rise of militant Islam more & more religious groups are claiming the right to influence legislation at a time when, in the UK, fewer & fewer people align themselves with any organized religion. In the USA, a country half-choked on its own religiosity, the term atheist, to the majority at least, is anathema & a sure bar to political office & yet few people in either country reallly know anything much about atheism itself. Nick Harding's book, How To Be A Good Atheist, is an excellent introduction for those who wonder just what makes someone an atheist - & particularly those that who find no comfort in religion. & feel alienated. As Harding's dedication states "For font dodgers everywhere - there are more of us than we think". In the first chapter he defines the term (you may be surprised to know there are several different shades of atheism) & also takes on the claim that not to believe in a deity somehow makes you immoral. In doing so he, as in the other chapters, offers further reading. His book is short & to the point but if anyone wishes to further discuss the points he makes these reading recommendations are invaluable.
In the second chapter he offers a brief history of atheism that is concise & informative. As in the rest of the book Harding leavens his writing on what could be quite heavy subjects with a waspish sense of humor. In Defending Atheism, chapter 3, he brings us to the present day & includes an interesting sidelight on the lack of evidence for a historical Jesus, although here he slips up by not including Earl Doherty's excellent The Jesus Puzzle in his recommendations for further reading. He also demolishes the old Nazism/atheism connection which religionists repeat (with no shred of evidence) ad nauseam. One interesting item he includes is Hitler's fascination for Catherine Emmerich the visionary/loony whose idiosyncratic & anti-semitic version of the Passion story was the basis for Mel Gibson's deeply unpleasant & inaccurate movie. The penultimate chapter, What Is Wrong With Religion?, quite rightly finds nothing admirable in faith - that unsubstantiated belief which religionists seem to think trumps evidence-based inquiry. He uses a courtroom analogy to show that blind faith should have no place in serious deliberations of any kind. Throughout the book Harding takes the commonsense position that religion is a human construct & should be no more immune to criticism, rational inquiry & ridicule than any other cultural artifact.
The book ends with a short list of prominent atheists past & present. In a book of this length one cannot expect an exhaustive study but the amount of information contained belies the volume's 150 odd pages & can be used as springboard for further study enabled by Harding's inclusion of further reading. Any quibbles about the book concern minor errors of fact (Galileo did not invent the telescope & images of a beardless Jesus were certainly around before the eighth century) & are of no great consequence. If someone were to ask me for a good introduction to the subject I would not hesitate in recommending Harding's book as easy to read & effortlessly informative.
