A Manual for Creating Atheists

Peter Boghossian's new book marks a turning point in the "New Atheism" movement from (if I may quote Hamlet) "Words, words, words!" to action. However, this comes with a criticism: it's far too narrow of a sell.First off, the book really is quite something. Perhaps the best thing I can say about it is that it is cleverly designed to function both as a 'manual' and as an argument. That is, the book does exactly what it says it does: it teaches people how to talk others out of their faith. But additionally, the book is designed so that someone of faith who reads it, could potentially recognize why there are people who desire to talk others out of their faith. Essentially, a person of faith could easily 'play Boghossian's hand' and realize through the various examples and analyses that their faith should not be held so resolutely.The 'manual' aspect of the book is also well designed. The book uses clear and concise language, though Boghossian uses a 'big word' every now and again, it is clearly interpretable using a basic dictionary. After all, expanding your vocabulary sheerly can't be seen as a bad thing, right? The book also is laid out in such a way that you can intensely study each individual chapter separately, since the notes are at the end of the chapter instead of at the end of the book. Though this particular format bothered me at first, I soon saw its practicality given its designation as a 'manual.' Each chapter also has a 'dig deeper' section which comes fully supplied with extra sources to expand your education. In addition, there is also three well designed appendices, a glossary, a full set of references (which I believe a young philosophy undergraduate spent many careful hours compiling into perfect APA formatting), and an index. This is truly a book to study, rather than to passively read.The most informative chapter by far appears to be 'Enter Socrates' where Boghossian draws on a wealth of knowledge on how to use the Socratic Method to bear on contemporary issues. His exposition of the method is clear, and throughout the entire book gives examples of how he has used it in the past, which makes applying it in the future that much easier to accomplish. However, that is not a recommendation to skip to chapter five, for Boghossian seems to have taken care to give exactly what is necessary in terms of background information to accomplish his goal. No more, no less.Secondly, though, I have an issue with how it is framed. I myself am an atheist. I also have no vehemence towards those who try to convince others of their position. Growing up as a fundamentalist, I understand that it is indeed a natural propensity to try and convince others of your position, and quite honestly the act of doing so is how one learns. It is through dialogue with those who hold different positions, that you can truly learn. Boghossian does recognize this by underlining his methodology with inquisitiveness, and an openness to learn yourself. Despite all of this, I believe the focus on making this a book about 'atheism' instead of 'critical thinking' is flawed. Though I definitely think all the content applies, it seems far too easy a subject, even if religion is definitely a problem in contemporary society.What this book truly teaches is how to engage in reflective critical thinking, and dialectical critical thinking. Essentially, how to be a socratic teacher. Though, I honestly can see the marketing advantages of putting this within the "New Atheism" movement, instead of the skeptic movement, or critical thinking literature. My concern, however, is that it will not be picked up by enough people because of it. Though hopefully Boghossian's future "street epistemologists" will not stop at the faithful, but continue on to critically question the purveyors of pseudoscience and other silliness.My one other point of detraction lies in the lack of care in handling certain subjects, such as the chapter on faith in academia. Though under a careful reading of his book, I can tell that he does not mean to make sweeping generalizations. Despite this, I cannot help but think others could misinterpret some of his statements as such. Boghossian definitely has skills as an educator and writer, this does not change that (at least upon my observation) some of his fans lack the ability to recognize nuance in arguments and statements, which leads to an over confidence in certain beliefs and positions. Though I do recognize the errors of others cannot be a burden placed upon the shoulders of Boghossian, and it might be wrong of me to mention it here, I do believe it is a necessary caution to future readers.Overall, I find the book to be a great success in the trajectory of Boghossian's literature. It builds upon years worth of work and experience and culminates all of his passions, except perhaps his passion for science fiction, unfortunately. I strongly recommend it to skeptics and atheists, as much as I recommend it to christians and muslims, and of course every person in-between. The words should be mulled over and considered, if not adopted and put into action.(I believe it is necessary to give a brief post-review note of the fact that I did considerable work on this book with Boghossian. This is partly due to the fact that it would take much less than a genius to come to this knowledge via a quick google search, but also due to a desire for complete transparency with my reader. Boghossian is a mentor and a friend, though I can assure you we disagree on many things. I've tried to give an objective analysis of this book, which I hope I accomplished. Furthermore, despite my working with him, I'm not privy to any special knowledge about any 'secret' intentions of this book or his work; everything he says to me, he says to the public at large.)

Boghossian explains that his book intends to create a generation of what he calls “Street Epistemologists”, people ho are equipped with an array of dialectical and clinical tools to help the religious abandon faith and embrace reason. He writes that Street Epistemology embraces the same values as the ancient philosophers: tough-minded, plain-speaking, known for self-defence, committed to truth, unyielding in the face of danger and fearless in calling out falsehoods, contradictions, inconsistencies and nonsense.The job of the Street Epistemologist will be to pick up where the “Four Horsemen of the Non-Apocalypse” left of. Dawkins, Dennett, Harris and Hitchens made clear how religion is harmful. Now, the Street Epistemologist will go further using the tools Boghossian gives in this book. He or she will actively go out and inoculate people who have been infected with the “faith virus”, faith being defined as “pretending to know things you don’t know”. These are lofty ideals but Boghossian then begins to do just that: to equip the reader with a set of tools that helps in dissecting faith and its truth claims.What is very helpful in this book, is that it not only has theory but it also has frequent examples from Boghossians’ own experience as an educator and philosopher. He includes both failed and successful interventions with notes, so it is possible to learn from his successes and failures. He also demonstrates how to successfully refute often heard arguments from believers, such as “you can’t prove God doesn’t exist” or “you have faith in science”. While these refutations probably aren’t new to people familiar with atheist arguments, these refutations could certainly help people who still have faith or are on the fence about their belief.Boghossian includes plenty of sources to bolster his argument and includes a lot of references for further study to help deepen your understanding as a Street Epistemologist. The more familiar you are with apologetics and the better versed you are in philosophy, the more effective you become at exposing the falsehood of faith-based truth claims.Much of the book is rooted in the Socratic method (elenchus), a way of examining what someone believes and to help people become aware of their own ignorance. Boghossian argues that this method is effective at exposing that faith is a failed epistemology, seeing as it not based on reason and logic. Through the Socratic method, believers are supposed to realise that they actually don’t know what they thought they knew, for instance “The Bible is the word of God”.I particularly enjoyed chapter 8, where Boghossian argues against the validity of cultural relativism, especially in academic circles. I tend to agree with him that in the current climate, it is frowned upon to judge cultural practices and ideas as if somehow, all practices and ideas are equally valid. It should be obvious that this is not the case and that some ideas are worse than other ideas. It shouldn’t be frowned upon to say that but unfortunately many people these days seem unable to differentiate between criticism on an idea and an attack on a group of people.So is there nothing I don’t like about this book? There is one thing. It’s not much but I do have some issue with the fact that Boghossian not only refers to faith as an actual virus but poses that we should treat it as such, containment protocols and all. Let me be clear here: I have no problems with suggesting ways to combat the influence of religion on the world and I agree that this is necessary.However, a virus is an actual, physical agent, a pathogen which makes people (usually) physically ill. Calling faith a virus is, in my opinion, a statement that weakens his argument because it misrepresents what faith is: a set of ideas that is not based on reality, thus making it more akin to a delusion than to a disease of the body. If we are going to argue against faith and use reason and logic as our weapons, we should not use comparisons that misrepresent faith.That being said, this is perhaps more a matter of taste than a real objection because faith does share some characteristics with viruses.Overall, I think “A manual for creating atheists” is a well-written and very helpful book for anyone who is dedicated to reason and logic and is not afraid to follow them, wherever they lead. I haven’t tried any Street Epistemology yet per the instructions outlined by Boghossian but I am not unfamiliar with the Socratic method so I think they will prove helpful.I also appreciate the way Peter Boghossian bolsters the morale of his Street Epistemologists to be, warning them that they will face adversity by exposing faith as a failed epistemology but encouraging them to speak plainly and boldly, just like the philosophers of old.

Peter Boghossian's "A Manual for Creating Atheists," is a well written, thought-provoking and intellectually stimulating exploration of critical thinking, skepticism, and the art of reasoning. This book is a valuable addition to the discourse on atheism, philosophy, and the role of faith in our society.Boghossian's approach in this manual is meticulous and enlightening. He advocates for the cultivation of the Socratic method as a means to engage in constructive dialogues with individuals of differing beliefs, particularly those grounded in religious faith. He emphasizes the importance of asking probing questions, challenging presuppositions, and fostering a spirit of intellectual curiosity. In essence, Boghossian encourages readers to become "street epistemologists" – individuals skilled in the art of helping others scrutinize their beliefs.One of the strengths of this work is its ability to bridge the gap between academia and the broader public. Boghossian's writing style is accessible and engaging, making complex philosophical concepts comprehensible to a wide range of readers. This accessibility is particularly crucial in a world where discussions about belief systems and atheism can often be polarized and emotionally charged.Furthermore, Boghossian's manual underscores the importance of promoting reason and evidence-based thinking, which are essential components of any open and pluralistic society. By encouraging individuals to examine the foundations of their beliefs, he promotes a culture of critical thinking and self-reflection, ultimately contributing to a more rational and informed public discourse.In closing this is a thoroughly commendable work that encourages critical thinking and intellectual engagement. It provides valuable insights into the realm of atheism and faith, offering a compelling guide for those interested in exploring these topics further. An important contribution to the ongoing conversation about belief, reason, and the pursuit of truth.

If you are reading this, you definitely should read it. I should have read it when I was in my twenties.

Eine der besten Bücher zum Thema. Viele (Richard Dawkins) nehmen Religionen analytisch und argumentativ auseinander. Peter Boghossian bietet einen weniger konfrontativen und allgemeineren Ansatz: Woher wissen wir, was wir zu wissen glauben? Das ist nicht nur in der Auseinandersetzung mit Religionen sondern mit allem ohne weiteren Nachdenkens übernommenen "Wissen" sehr hilfreich.

Love this book, bought as an ebook because seems to be a delay on the paperback still got that on order though to share with friends and family. I'm not sure on the title think it'll put some religious people off. But the contents is absolutely mind blowing. It really does change your way of thinking. I was an atheist before now even more so which I didn't think possible. I'm on chapter 7 so far, and I now am absolutely astounded anyone could have a religion and have faith in it. A real game changer should be made free like the polio vaccine.

Not only for those interested in ideas about Gods. This is a brief and accurate guide for anyone interested in cutting through poorly constructed arguments generally and gaining the confidence to navigate our own way through a complex, modern and often confusing world.