Sense and goodness without god pdf download

As a reader, I was rewarded with an ambitious book that delivers the goods. The philosophy of Secular Humanism is one I endorse and live by and so it is always good to read a book that articulates my way of thinking cogently. The book deserves five stars for its depth and consistency. Feb 10, Eric rated it really liked it Shelves: philosophy. An excellent book. The title misled me a bit -- I picked the book up thinking it would be more of a crack at theistic ideas, a smart version of something like The God Delusion, but it's more than that.

It's a case for Metaphysical Naturalism, which is a convoluted title for something but basically just accepts that the natural world is all there is, and it's more of an explanation of an alternative worldview than an apologetics work.

It's a great worldview-in-a-box as Luke Muehlhauser puts it An excellent book. It's a great worldview-in-a-box as Luke Muehlhauser puts it if you're not sure what to believe philosophically any more after figuring out that Christianity doesn't match up very well with reality. Some of my favorite quotes: - "Philosophy is therefore no idle pastime, but a serious business, fundamental to our lives. It should be our first if not our only religion: a religion wherein worship is replaced with curiosity, devotion with diligence, holiness with sincerity, ritual with study, and scripture with the whole world and the whole of human learning.

And vice versa: the more predictions a claim entails that actually fail to transpire when investigated, the less reasonable it is for us to believe it.

However, though belief on faith alone may be comforting, it is wholly arbitrary and thus does nothing to ensure that you are more correct than anyone else. So it cannot properly be described as knowledge, but rather as a mere wish, a desire that something be true or false, or else it is a naive trust in guesswork or hearsay.

If we lacked that, we would certainly be miserable and our lives pointless, even if we lived forever. It is rarely taught in public schools—in fact, it is barely even taught in universities unless a student specializes in the field. The books available in stores or libraries are often dry, and almost as often polluted by unsound thinking, or obscured behind high-brow jargon and symbols, or divorced from any relevance to everyday life.

Rarely are complete and understandable philosophies of life available by the book, clearly written, to be studied, compared, selected. Of course, so few people even bother to look. Religion does not benefit by teaching its pupils to investigate other philosophies, nor does religion prosper by giving people the tools to think, but only by giving them the tools to believe.

And that requires suppressing freethought. After all, if everyone found and embraced reasons to be good and enjoy life without the religious superstitions claimed to be necessary, religion would become obsolete—a fate, I imagine, that believers and their churches cannot emotionally or economically afford. No other worldview, including theism generally or Evangelical Christianity in particular, is supported by any evidence of any of the sciences.

Sep 13, Francis Bezooyen rated it it was amazing. I absolutely loved this book. If I were to direct someone to a source from which they might gain a good understanding of my own way of thinking, other than to my own writings I would send them to this book, which covers topics ranging from the mea I absolutely loved this book.

If I were to direct someone to a source from which they might gain a good understanding of my own way of thinking, other than to my own writings I would send them to this book, which covers topics ranging from the meaning of words, to the nature of reason, to the nature of the universe how it came to be and why the theory of a naturally occurring universe fits the evidence better than that of one created by a God , to the question of Free will, to the nature of the human mind, the meaning of life, and of course - the origins and nature of genuine morality, plus other topics you might not expect, such as why we find some things beautiful and not others, and a commentary on politics.

I enjoyed it all immensely. Perhaps you will too. This was a great book on Naturalism. While there are a number of good books that cover the various subjects and disciplines that are addressed in this one, none of them knit everything together like Richard Carrier does.

There is a lot to get through and you will want to read it more than once. After each section is a bibliography for further exploring the topic being discussed. Aug 11, Corey Alan rated it really liked it. The content in this book will require much writing and discussion. I was already a "metaphysical naturalist" upon reading this book, and already very familiar with Carrier and his thought.

Ethics are not my focus in philosophy for me it's epistemology, aesthetics, and politics , so his discussions there are a little over my head, but I believe I understood them. I have some studying to do on the subject, but I must admit that what Ca The content in this book will require much writing and discussion.

I have some studying to do on the subject, but I must admit that what Carrier presents in those chapters is strongly convincing. The chapter on aesthetics is mostly well-argued and accurate, even as he takes shots at Picasso and abstract art that I think are unfounded, simply because he doesn't have an appreciation for them. Yet, he himself describes beauty as relying in part upon many things that make Picasso and others appealing to many people. He argues that if intelligent aliens came to visit us, he would hope that we would show them DiVinci and not Picasso, but this is a false dichotomy.

I would hope we would show them the best examples of every form so they could see what really makes us--not just lovers of classical art-- tick. The chapter on politics falls apart. Take the first few weeks of any intro to poly-sci class, and also imagine this class is taught by a dedicated populist who seems to believe that the truth lies at the midpoint between to opposing parties, and you can probably guess at the content of this chapter.

Carrier divies up points between "conservative" and "liberal" his definitions there need refinement like he's splitting up candy between two bratty and whiny children. This isn't really helpful. For example, should we teach creationism "half of the time" in public school science classes? Certainly, Carrier doesn't think so, but as a philosopher Carrier is well versed in science and epistemology and so he in that context knows that this kind of moderation is simply not constructive.

It is usually the case that one side of a conflict is more correct often, much more correct than the other. Conservatism, like it or not, is in every society the name given to the group of people who defend and support the property rights of the upper class all the way to the point of feudalism which was once a "liberal" cause in relation to the "conservatives" at that time: monarchs.

So these political terms are relative, and it does not help to assign platforms and virtues to relative political stances that change drastically over time.

The only common denominator between the two is the class struggle: "Liberals" are always for the spreading around of power in society, "conservative" are always for keeping it in the hands of a privileged few.

There is no other common thread. So Carrier misses the mark here, and unfortunately, for me this made his book 4-stars instead of 5. And that's a shame, because I really want to give it 5. What i'm wondering is, what on earth does Carrier Populism have to do with Metaphysical Naturalism? I understand it's a part of a philosophical worldview, but we all must choose our specialties and should be humble when we wander away from them see my discussion of ethics above.

I should also say that Carrier is one of my favorite intellectuals on the internet, and I follow him quite regularly. But history is really his strong suit, and I must say i'm most impressed when he is writing on the subject of ancient history and religion. I feel like I should praise this book more, but i'm sure he'll live without my back-patting. Jan 02, James Johnson rated it really liked it. The author did a very good job of building his case.

He used logic and reason to demonstratrate that metaphysical naturalism is the only worldview that is supported by the evidence. Carrier also made an honest effort to present a Christian refutation to his views; and convincingly debunked dissenting points. I didn't necessarily like that he focussed so much time on the writings of JP Moreland but I would have to assume that he did so to give a consistent Christian perspective which was aimed at The author did a very good job of building his case.

I didn't necessarily like that he focussed so much time on the writings of JP Moreland but I would have to assume that he did so to give a consistent Christian perspective which was aimed at actively criticising his own work. There were certainly positions with which I would not be in full agreement with the author but I got the feeling that we could have a great time discussing our differences over a few beers. All in all, this book was well worth the considerable time it took me to read it.

Jan 05, Jt rated it liked it Shelves: philosophy. Excellent discussion of metaphysical naturalism. It is unfortunately an overly broad discussion with regards to specific applications. I followed all of his logic and arguments until the very end, when he gets into his personal political views. Somehow there is a disconnect between the evidence he demands of religion, and the evidence he demands for government policies.

He understands the misery brought on by all collective socialistic regimes, except the modern liberal ones. He also describes a Excellent discussion of metaphysical naturalism. He also describes all the programs he endorses as being good, without offering any evidence to that respect. I will, however, have to read the supporting material he lists at each chapter.

The first part of the book I would have given 4 stars, the last section 1. Jul 02, Fox rated it really liked it Shelves: atheism. I'd rather give it 3. I skipped a bit and wish I skipped more. The text reads like a textbook. The best part in the entire book is the forward by the author.

This book attempts to be an all-inclusive read on every aspect of living a secular humanistic life--giving you the answer to every question which may be asked. This leads a very long, drawn out book. His "Defense of a Metaphysical Naturalism," defends all things defendable.

His material is good. He also does a great job of very accuratel I'd rather give it 3. He also does a great job of very accurately responding to questions. However, I think it would best used a reference guide rather than a sit down read cover-to-cover. View 1 comment. May 07, Allison rated it really liked it Shelves: philosophy-or-metaphysics.

Richard Carrier has obviously done a lot of thinking about the Big Questions: who are we, why are we here, what does it mean to love, to be a good person, to matter. And, by and large, his answers are sound and well thought out, especially in the realm of morality and the origin of the universe.

His views on the scientific method, art and politics I either quibbled with or outright disagreed with. But he did get me to confess that yes, I am an atheist. And I care about what it means to be a good Richard Carrier has obviously done a lot of thinking about the Big Questions: who are we, why are we here, what does it mean to love, to be a good person, to matter. And I care about what it means to be a good person anyway.

Jan 07, Perpetualstudent rated it really liked it. By existing, and making of ourselves something good, we give ourselves and each other value, we create purpose and meaning. Neither existing by accident nor existing only a short while changes anything about the value of existing, the value of getting to be, to behold and to know the universe, to create something.

Even if you are an atheist, you will not agree with every point he makes and he isn't expecting agreement. The book could be thought of as a case study. Richard Carrier takes his own assumptions and shows how to validate and verify the assumptions as best as possible and from those assumptions create a world view. He starts out with an overview of the purpose of his book and a brief biographical sketch.

Next he launches into a discussion of how we know, starting with a very concept of what is language. He takes the reader through different methods of knowing and discusses there relative strengths and weaknesses of each method. Of course scientific investigation and logic is ranked highly, personal experience is less trusted, and faith the least trusted method of all.

After establishing method he takes the reader through a tour of the current state of scientific thought and his implications. Next he uses this basis to argue against positions that contradict the evidence. He basically points out that all investigation of supernatural claims when investigated using more trusted methods turn out to be incorrect. Lastly he takes his foundation and builds on it. He presents a naturalistic case for morality, feelings of beauty, and how society should be structured.

High points. Richard carrier does well during his discussion of language and knowledge. Also his background as a historian shows when he is discussing historical material especially ancient Rome.

Also he makes a good case for morality and beauty. Low points. When arguing against specific positions, I feel that he overstates his case. Typical argument would take an opponent's position and discuss its undesired implications. However the implications did not seem to logically follow from his opponent's position. His section on politics is very idealistic no taxation, legislature determined by lottery,.. Overall I found the book engaging and I enjoyed reading it.

It will challenge your thought and hopefully prod you in to developing your own world view. Since my rating of the book is higher than I expected, I'll point out the shortcomings I perceived and why they mostly haven't turned out so bad.

Standard Mod Since my rating of the book is higher than I expected, I'll point out the shortcomings I perceived and why they mostly haven't turned out so bad. Standard Model quantum field-theoretic explanations; multiple realizability claims in philosophy of mind.

But he does implicitly admit a degree of non-reductionism by saying that special sciences can have specialized methodologies. He does implicitly rectify this by discussing qualia as distinct from self-awareness, and distinguishing sensation vs.

I would really like more extensive research into relativism which on internal moral realism grounds is the claim that moral facts hold in virtue of the specific human nature and thus are not binding for non-human beings vs. Richard Carrier quite nicely exposes his theory in the book, but doesn't sufficiently defend it, for example I don't see how his arguments favor internal moral realism relativized to human nature vs.

Carrier delegates the procedural aspects of moral constructivism to the political theory. Actually, he splits moral normativity into ethics and politics in a non-standard but quite elegant way. Apr 24, Kahawa rated it liked it. There are some really good spots, and quite a few weak parts. I think the thing that will stay with me most, which I don't think is Carrier's original thought, is that Reason requires Motivation for it to be applied to something, ie.

I think this addresses the problem of confirmation bias, and hit counting, etc. But how do you want to do what you don't want to do? And how do you get someone else to apply Reason when they don't want to, especially when they're not aware that they don't want to? Humans are strange, and it makes me wonder how human-like intelligence could be implemented in AI.

Would AI have to have motivated reasoning a recognised cognitive bias? His section on beauty and simplicity was quite good. I hadn't heard a good discussion before now on what beauty is, scientifically, and Carrier had some decent thoughts. I might look up some of the books he mentioned in that section. Anyway, I've read most of Carrier's other stuff and liked it.

This, to me, just wasn't the book that will go down in history as the best representation of Metaphysical Naturalism. Mar 04, Aaron Gertler rated it really liked it.

Three and a half stars. Almost all the content was highly redundant, since I've read widely on similar topics. In particular, Rationality: From AI to Zombies covered much of the same ground, often with more style but perhaps less rigor. That said, Carrier's introductory autobiography was very intere Three and a half stars. I can imagine recommending it as an introduction to humanist or naturalist philosophy to someone I don't think would get much out of Yudkowsky. Best bits: The autobiography, musings on the role of philosophers, the discussion of free will's nonexistence, the reasonably charitable portrayal of mainstream Christian philosophers.

Mar 20, Mike rated it really liked it. Carrier has spent his entire adult life formulating the material that went into this book: a secular worldview based on logic and observable fact.

I applaud his effort and conclusions. However, he seems a bit naive in thinking that most people are going to be inclined to undertake a similar lifetime journey of rational freethinking, questioning everything they hear and read, in order to logically construct their own personal philosophy from the ground up.

Most just can't be bothered. And while I Carrier has spent his entire adult life formulating the material that went into this book: a secular worldview based on logic and observable fact. And while I wish that his conception of a rational democracy could someday exist, I'm far too cynical to think that it ever will.

A dense work, but generally well written and understandable for a interested reader who is not an expert in philosophy. It needed better editing, however. The text has numerous typographical and spelling errors.

I've just started to re-read this book as I read it a few years back in dead tree format. I love the way this guy thinks and writes, and as I read it the first time I discovered that someone had managed to write the book I would have always wanted to write, but Richard Carrier has done a far superior and more coherent task than I could ever have done. Sep 05, John rated it liked it. But really, years later I realize that he's really a velvet glove atheist. This book is as stated-- a defense of Metaphysical Naturalism.

The book does a good job explaining away the 3. The book does a good job explaining away the need of God as a first cause--and points to our univses propensity for Black Holes and advocates for some various multiverse theories.

The best meat of this book is the morality that can derived from logic and philosophy--without the moral arbiter of a godhead needed. Apr 01, Dustin rated it really liked it Shelves: read Richard Carrier attempts to do a lot with this book, which is namely to describe and defend his entire worldview: metaphysical naturalism. As such, he succeeds at the former and fails somewhat in the latter. Do to the sheer amount of subjects he covers, there were bound to be mistakes and his last two essays, natural beauty and natural politics, more rooted in opinion than science, are definitely his weakest points.

Instead of painting a bibliography at the end of the book, he puts each referenc Richard Carrier attempts to do a lot with this book, which is namely to describe and defend his entire worldview: metaphysical naturalism.

Instead of painting a bibliography at the end of the book, he puts each reference at the end of its pertinent section, at times even listing opposing voices to his own. As such, this is also a good starting point to begin an investigation into many subjects. Nov 21, Kylie rated it really liked it Shelves: faith-relationship. Richard Carrier is a PhD student at Columbia University who wrote this simple, consistent and jargon-free book about free will, and the nature of the universe, arguing from a naturalistic perspective that there is only a physical world without God, gods or spirits, but that human beings can still live a life of love, meaning, and joy.

Even though I myself am a believer in God, this is my favorite book on naturalistic philosophy and ethics. Jul 15, Lance rated it really liked it. Proving History. The author demonstrates that valid historical methods—not only in the study of Christian. Jesus from Outer Space. The earliest Christians believed Jesus was an ancient celestial being who put on a bodysuit of flesh, died at the hands of dark forces, and then rose from the dead and ascended back into the heavens.

But the writing we have today from that first generation of Christians never says. Science Education in the Early Roman Empire. Throughout the Roman Empire Cities held public speeches and lectures, had libraries, and teachers and professors in the sciences and the humanities, some subsidized by the state. There even existed something equivalent to universities, and medical and engineering schools. What were they like?