Product Description

In this book, Michael J. Buckley investigates the rise of modern atheism, arguing convincingly that its roots reach back to the seventeenth century, when Catholic theologians began to call upon philosophy and science-rather than any intrinsically religious experience-to defend the existence of god. Buckley discusses in detail thinkers such as Lessius, Mersenne, Descartes, and Newton, who paved the way for the explicit atheism of Diderot and D'Holbach in the eighteenth century. "[A] capaciously learned and brilliantly written book...This is one of the most interesting and closely argued works on theology that i have read in the last decade."-Lawrence S. Cunningham, Theology Today

Product Details

• Amazon Sales Rank: #825296 in Books
• Published on: 1990-08-29
• Released on: 2009-09-04
• Original language: English
• Number of items: 1
• Binding: Paperback
• 253 pages

Customer Reviews

A Masterly Study
In an age where atheism is generally taken to be the 'default' or 'neutral' position and where the burden of proof is presumed to rest with theism, it is invigorating to read a book that treats atheism as a theory or school with its own intellectual history. Buckley's concern is not to trace atheism to its very origins but rather to explore the way in which early modern thinkers such as Descartes in their attempts to place theism on secure 'scientific' foundations unwittingly gave rise to exactly the opposite position. Buckley's study is a major achievement in the history of ideas.

Brilliant. Mandatory reading!
This is probably the most influential book I've read, and I've read quite a few. It is a trenchant bit of historical work, explaining how the question of the existence of God became translated out of theology and ultimately into physics and science. This book will rock any atheist's world.

The Persistence of Erroneous Definitions of Atheism
A correction like this should not necessary, but in the interest of truth, it must be made yet again--atheism is not a theory. In its strong form, it is an ontological consequence of some theories, e.g. metaphysical naturalism. But the consequence itself is not a theory in any sense of the word. In its weak form, atheism is neither a theory nor a belief.