Feel free to comment and contribute.
>---===--- Introductory works.
For those that are "new" to atheism or are just engaging their atrophied literacy for the first time. If you're still in high school and/or attempting to overcome a lifetime of indoctrination, these are the books for you.
>John Shook - The God Debates (2010)
If you run into a lot of clowns on Facebook or just want a fresh start on what this whole "God" thing is all about, this is the book you're looking for. Shook lays out the full spectrum of theology and philosophy here with an up-to-date and comprehensive account of the God debates yet manages to keep it accessible, and whoever you are, you're likely to learn from this book. This is an excellent book for high schoolers and philosophy first-timers.
>J.L. Mackie - The Miracle of Theism (1983)
As the oldest book on this list, this is probably the first "modern" atheist book. Mackie lists almost all of the common theist arguments here in this extremely thorough tome and goes through the whole gallery of philosophers, from Kant, Kierkegaard, Descartes, etc. all the way up to the likes of WLC or Plantinga. I would call this book the Elements of Style of atheism. A great introductory work to the God debate.
>>7523108
>---===--- General works.
For works pertaining to theism in general, or addressing a wider spectrum of topics.
>Jordan Howard Sobel - Logic and Theism (2009)
This book is a beast. Sobel's (very expensive) doorstopper here is like a cluster bomb upon theology - a kind of upgraded T-1000 version of The Miracle of Theism. In this vast tome, Sobel lays out the complete range of theist arguments, from ontological to cosmological to Pascalian to miracles and the fine tuner. The only criticism I can level against Sobel's work here is that it is not written in a very accessible style and the sometimes mathematical language can turn off a layman reader.
>Graham Oppy - Arguing about Gods (2009)
Continuing in the "cluster bomb" tradition, this recent work is another extremely up-to-date collection and analysis of theist works. Oppy runs the full gamut here and addresses not just classical philosophers, but keeps it modern with the inclusion of the likes of Dembski, Dawkins, and Plantinga.
>Michael Martin - The Impossibility of God (2003)
Martin is one of the most prolific atheist authors of our time. In this anthology, he provides a veritable treasure trove of essays attacking the full range of theist conceptions of God. Martin sets out to prove that not only do the common theist definitions of "God" all contradict each other and even sometimes themselves, but that there is simply no adequate explanation of a theistic God. This is an incredibly strong book; a collection of 32 essays that might contain arguments and concepts you have never even considered before.
>>7523111
>---===--- Advanced works.
Advanced as in addressing certain arguments or certain aspects of philosophy and theology.
>J.L. Schellenberg - Divine Hiddenness and Human Reason (1993)
In this book, Schellenberg advances one principal argument - the argument from nonbelief. He attacks the main theist conception of God as a loving, anthropocentric deity and attempts to defend this argument with a range of analysis. This is a very interesting if dated book.
>Nick Trakakis - The God Beyond Belief (2006)
Another "one shot" book focusing on a singular argument, this work concerns an all-time champion - the problem of evil. He attacks the existence of an anthropocentric God with the evidential existence of moral evil, and addresses all the common defenses against this argument from the appeal to mystery to the legion of free will theodicies.
>Theodore M. Drange - Nonbelief and Evil (1998)
This is an oldie but a goodie. In this book Drange attempts to advance the atheist position from "I don't believe in a God" to "I disbelieve in God" and defend it as a rational and logical conclusion through a direct attack on theism with two polished showstopper arguments - the problem of evil, and the argument from nonbelief. This is a very persuasive work attacking the most common conception of "God" that people hold.
>>7523113
>---===--- For a technical perspective.
These books have less to do with theology and philosophy and more to do with a real-world analysis of religion.
>Karen Armstrong - A History of God (1993)
It always saddens me a little when people don't know about this book. In this carefully-researched tome, Armstrong details the intricate history of the Abrahamic faiths, outlining how the religions evolved over time. Meticulously researched and thoroughly explained are many common religious topics, such as the evolution of paganism into monotheism, the notion of polytheism and a Trinity, the inception of Islam and the antics of Muhammad, and even the role of Eastern philosophy and the influence of Hinduism and Buddhism upon the Middle East. This is a one-stop education of history by itself.
>Robert Wright - The Evolution of God (2010)
In this ambitious book, Wright launches a historical analysis of the three monotheisms, tracking the concept of a theist God from its original inception to its modern-day usage, in all of its many forms and explanations. He applies evolutionary psychology and game theory to explain the rise of theism, and outlines the evolution of monotheism and what form it may exhibit in the future.
>Darrel W. Ray - The God Virus (2009)
This book seeks to use science to analyze the nonsensical and oftentimes bizarre reasoning of religious people. For those of you who have always been atheist, such as myself, this is an invaluable resource. Ray addresses the many gaps in religious reasoning and attempts to explain them, using the metaphor of religion as a virus of the mind to display how religions are self-propagating ideas that have evolved over time to survive in light of mounting philosophical, historical, and now scientific objections. Next Ray details the influence of religion upon modern society, showing how civilization is awash in the undercurrent of religious thought, permeating all of politics and popular culture.
>>7523117
>---===--- Concerning Christianity.
This is what probably most people care about, given that the majority of 4chan users are from Western countries.
>Dan Barker - Godless (2008)
Those of you who have encountered the jaw-droppingly stupid No Scotsman fallacy concerning "ex-Christians" have need of this book. The author is a well-known former fundamentalist and even Christian songwriter, and in this book he details his switch from devotion to freethought, as well as launches an extremely thorough critique of the Bible, addressing the myriad of contradictions and inconsistencies, the historicity of the Biblical Jesus, and the absurdity and improbability of many Biblical claims such as the resurrection.
>Bart Ehrman - Jesus Interrupted (2010)
In this deliciously satisfying book, the author, a New Testament scholar, carefully reviews and assesses the New Testament with a detailed and extremely thorough analysis of the figure we call Jesus. This is not a rant, not an attack on Christianity, this is an objective and critical analysis of the New Testament, showing how the entire Jesus myth and indeed, all of Christianity is a purposely-designed fabrication rife with contradictions, inaccuracies, and sometimes outright falsehoods.
>John Loftus - Why I Became an Atheist (2008)
If you want a one-stop total critique of Christianity, this is the book you're looking for. The author is a former Christian apologist turned extremely angry and prolific atheist. In this book Loftus attacks the full span of Christianity, addressing the philosophical arguments against theism, the historical incompatibilities and inaccuracies of the Bible, and the contradictions between creationism and modern science, and throughout it all is an undercurrent of personal experience as Loftus explains his own deconversion from devout evangelicalism to enraged atheist.
>>7523119
>---===--- Concerning atheism.
"Well, I'm an atheist. Now what?" There's more to atheism than eating babies and wearing fedoras. There's much more truth, beauty, and value in a universe without a celestial supervisor, where humans are free to make our own purposes and dictate our own paths. Thinking for yourself and recognizing the natural wonder of the universe is far greater than the false consolation any religion can provide you.
>Michael Martin - Atheism: A Philosophical Justification (1989)
In this book, Martin attempts a two-pronged defense of atheism: first by attacking theistic arguments regarding the implausibility of morality and purpose without God, second by defending against attacks specifically on atheism. In such a manner he makes a strong case for both negative and positive atheism. Though extremely dated, this book is a classic and a must-read for any atheist.
>Erik J. Wielenberg - Value and Virtue in a Godless Universe (2005)
In this book, Wielenberg advances a naturalist philosophy and addresses the problem of nontheistic morality as weakly espoused by the likes of Dostoevsky and C.S. Lewis. First he challenges the claims of theistic morality, next he advances naturalistic ethics and displays how theological justification is unnecessary for a good and moral life. Concepts such as intrinsic morality, inherent human tendencies such as charity and altruism, and the idea of moral obligations are all addressed.
>Richard Carrier - Sense and Goodness Without God (2005)
In this book, Richard Carrier, perhaps most well-known as one of the major modern debunkers of the Jesus myth, continues the trend of expanding metaphysical naturalism, but this is a more complex and thorough work covering the full spectrum of a developed worldview, addressing nearly every topic beyond just morality, and presents a complete philosophical outlook on life that is easy to comprehend and evaluate. A solid starting point for the newly atheist.
you again
>>7523119
>In this deliciously satisfying book
>deliciously
STOP USING DELICIOUS TO DESCRIBE ANYTHING EXCEPT FOOD DAMN IT TO FUCK.
Music, poetry, cinematography, architecture, etc, ARE NOT DELICIOUS.
FUCK.
>>7523146
Delicious can also mean delightful. Words have multiple meanings
>>7523175
He wasn't questioning its technical correctness, only its faggotry
>>7523184
Then he should of said that instead of stating that music cannot be delicious
Jesus. You don't need all these books to come to a perfectly logical and rational conclusion.
The God Delusion (yes, I recommend a Richard Dawkins book) is sufficient for someone wanting to ditch religion or are curious about atheism. It was written way before his Twitter meltdown and it holds up. Read the arguments, ignore whatever grudges you have against the man.
>>7523357
The God Delusion is a perfectly good book for what it aims to be. It is aimed at the masses, people that think about football more than theological arguments. And it has proved quite successful and popular. But you will learn more from any of these books
A good one for anyone that thinks Acts is historically credible
why would anyone read this shit there's no point
I find the Christian conception of an intervening divine agency implausible, but do not discount the possibility that there are mechanisms in the universe, outside the berth of mine or any present knowledge, which behave in manners evocative of "spiritual" descriptions and wonderment.
What theological camp do I belong to? The coward school?
>>7525400
Though most people assume being “spiritual” entails being “religious,” this isn’t a necessary connection. When people talk about a spiritual life, they point to someone who has his mind on higher things, who is not obsessed with property or gain, and who is passionately devoted to a belief about the meaning of life and the path to happiness. But this describes any devoted philosopher. When people talk about a spiritual “experience” they point to the combined sensation of awe, inner peace, and enlightenment, which culminates in a reverence for life and nature, and a sincere self-reflection about these things and oneself. And yet that, too, is the experience of any true philosopher. I live a spiritual life, because I live a self-examined life of the mind, I care deeply about my beliefs, I care more about my ideals and human happiness than about material things, and I experience awe, inner peace, and enlightenment when I fathom human minds and the natural world.
Meditation as a secular path to spiritual enlightenment is perhaps unequaled, and ought to be mastered by all. It does have beneficial effects on health and self-understanding. But the most common path to godless spirituality is through an appreciation of science: by truly taking in the awe of nature and her complexity, many a scientist has had a spiritual awakening that had nothing to do with God, but everything to do with profound reverence and amazement in the face of tremendous beauty, fearsome power, and the unimaginable depth and complexity of space and time. It sparks the realization of how tiny and insignificant we are, yet how wonderful we are despite this.
Atheism is dum
>>7525488
How so?
Fuck off with your normie degenerate reading list.
>>7523108
Put it on the wiki
Seems pretty underwhelming.
>>7525989
How do I do that?
>>7526052
Have any books to suggest?
>>7525400
The Being Honest school
>>7523108
Please leave, friend.
>>7526096
No, just seems bad that intellectual legacy reaches only 30 years.
>>7526191
Go read epicurean works if you give a shit how old letters are
>>7526136
>>7525400
It's also possible that baba the unicorn puked up the cosmos. Don't discount that idea either!
This is a good one on ethics
>>7523190
>should of
>>7525819
Please explain this image.
It seems like the more religious places are messed up
>>7528335
Pretty much. Just take https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_Development_Index and https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Importance_of_religion_by_country and notice the negative correlation
>>7523190
>>should of
*cringe*
I like this one, just let's you appreciate how beautiful reality is in light of science
>>7525400
Deism/not an idiot
>>7529909
How is it deism to accept the possibility of something without believing in it?
More like agnostic
*tips fedora*
I just don't understand how a material being whose whole understanding of reality is restricted by biology, I.E. composed of sensory information collected and sorted by a squishy pink monkey brain, could sit down and write an entire book about how there's no higher power and not catch onto stupidity of it all. Of course the majority of organized religions and the people who submit to said organizations are full of shit; Anybody with at least a modicum of intelligence could see that from a mile away. A great deal of atheists spend all day picking apart an easy target, and then congratulate themselves and call it a day, in doing so closing themselves off to the awesome mystery of the universe. We know nothing, and to me the human quest to make sense of All This is the most beautiful thing about our species.
>>7525446
underrated post
>>7530279
>Of course the majority of organized religions and the people who submit to said organizations are full of shit; Anybody with at least a modicum of intelligence could see that from a mile away.
You say that, but if you look at the catalog you will see several Christianity threads up at any given time, and then you recall that much of the US government is run by even more religious versions of the posters in those threads, and then it should be obvious why atheists bother to write books.
Not directly an 'atheism book' but this one has a lot of stuff about religious strife and negative correlation like >>7525819 is talking about. In general Pinker reminds me of Dawkins back in the day, but more sociology focused.
>>7530289
Using the Christian symbolism to interpret the world isn't inherently bad, as a free thinking human being you're allowed to pick and choose what works for you.
As for the majority of fundies who have already decided to buy into all the bullshit wholesale, books that they'll never read aren't really going to have much of an effect, are they?
>>7523108
>are just engaging their atrophied literacy for the first time. If you're still in high school and/or attempting to overcome a lifetime of indoctrination, these are the books for you.
I honestly can't tell if this is masterfully crafted bait or sincere.
>>7526533
>>7530334
If you can convince enough people to not be fundies, or even not be moderately religious, they'll be less inclined to elect fundies.
>>7530370
>fundies
Am I on 2011 reddit?
>>7530376
Most Fundamentalists are idiots who don't understand the Bible correctly.
>>7530383
Not what I was getting at, but sure fundamentalists are not exactly the most theologically adept group of Christians; however, I think calling them fundies or using other derogatory jargon like "sky-fairy" is juvenile.
>>7530392
Fundamentalism has done a great disservice to Christianity in America by making non-fundamentalist Christians look like idiots by association, so they deserve derision. Fundies are responsible for fedora tippers that everyone on here is becoming Christian as a reaction against nowadays.
>>7530407
Maybe I am just touchy. Southern Catholic background with relatives who are "fundies"; my grandfather actually converted after my grandmother died because he wanted to marry a divorced woman, dad never forgave him really. Many are good, simple folk, but you and I are in general agreement as to the intellectual merits of fundamentalism.
At least Catholicism, Orthodoxy, Calvinism, and Lutheranism all have a fairly robust intellectual corpus with the former two having a 2000 year history of discourse, a fairly impressive and nearly unrivaled asset. That's probably why I'd never abjure the Catholic label, although I don't really practice.
>>7530367
At least atheists don't build pretentious buildings for their circle jerking every Sunday
The Bible
>>7527166
and the spaghetti monster too lol
Skeptics annotated Bible is great
>>7532390
What do they base the projections on, though? Not that I wouldn't love that to be true, but it seems a bit dodgy.
>>7534084
Here is the methodology they use http://www.pewforum.org/2015/04/02/appendix-a-methodology-2/#estimating-religious-switching
>>7534524
>>7523108
I highly definitely suggest the LessWrong Sequences by Eliezer Yudkowsky. A lot of philosophy of science stuff, and it's the best justification I've seen of exactly WHY science is materialist, reductionist, etc. Plus why any epiphenomenal or dualistic models of consciousness are non-scientific. (Also, it talks a lot about rational thought and biases, stuff that is just a good idea for everyone to learn about, so seriously, read them)
>>7532842
I'm an athiest but that comic is cringe as fuck
You'd have to actually be illiterate to not know the tower of babel is a story that warns against hubris, not working together
The skyline of a fucking financial district isn't exactly emblematic of the human unity
>>7523108
>or are just engaging their atrophied literacy for the first time.
Why do atheists always have such clumsy prose? It makes you look like a massive pseud.
>>7525400
A rational, respectable human being.
>>7535989
>warns against hubris
The why didn't god say this instead of what he said? Also, why is god fucking killing people over symbolic hubris?
>>7536078
I'm praying for your sake that this was an ironic shitpost.
>>7525446
> science -------- spirituality
You gotta be shitting me. Science is against spirituality.
>>7536003
>>7536243
Strongly disagree. Appreciating the beauty and intracricies of scientific truths is deeply spiritual. Even just knowing we are literally made of atoms forged in the belly of a giant star that exploded is moving.
>>7536256
I will assume this is b8.
>>7536256
You know why /lit/ is by far more retarded than /b/?
Cause /b/ is conscious about its own lack of quality, of anything great, of reason, sense, judgment; you name it. You go there expecting shit, and shit you get.
/lit/, on the other hand, is full of pretentious anons and kids of all ages trying to live "a literary lifestyle" and argue about "deep subjects", trying too hard to explain nothing and seem intelligent, when in fact you're not better in any sense. Its exactly the same shit, just that it comes in a different envelope.
tl;dr /b/ is honest shit and /lit/ pretentious shit.
>>7536852
Are you lost, friend? Cool blog.
>>7536852
I only come on this board to shitpost memes
>>7536852
I literally don't even put effort in my posts. I'm just here to crack jokes about books I've read with likeminded anons between each reading sesh.
>>7536852
I can't even read.
I may need Adderall. I dunno. Help
