Scan barcode
djrylo's review
3.0
Don't misunderstand such a high rating as a sign of my allegiance to this book's blatant conservative-Christian agenda. Despite my disagreement with many of Wiker's arguments — most of which I consider unfinished due to the lack of information on how the selected texts "screwed up the world" — I thoroughly enjoyed furthering my understanding of the 15 selected texts and their alleged relationships to one another and our world.
labunnywtf's review
1.0
Got one chapter into the audiobook, realized this is gentleman is a thinly veiled religious zealot, and took the CD out.
I want to read Machiavelli now, so I guess it's not a total loss.
I want to read Machiavelli now, so I guess it's not a total loss.
bookish_al's review against another edition
informative
fast-paced
4.25
Helpful introduction to different philosophers and their main work, from a Christian perspective. He doesn’t go very deep, but it’s a good starting place.
The only thing that kept this book from five stars is the author’s tone. He often tries to make puns and jests but they come across as trite, condescending, and pretentious. He would have done better to maintain a more objective and serious tone.
The only thing that kept this book from five stars is the author’s tone. He often tries to make puns and jests but they come across as trite, condescending, and pretentious. He would have done better to maintain a more objective and serious tone.
claire2024's review
religious dogma. didn’t realise until i picked up the book and it felt very off but oh well
fleur_de_lisa's review
1.0
This book may as well be called ‘How Atheism Screwed Up The World’. The time it would take to comb through the author’s own biases and logical fallacies is almost incalculable. At the root of every argument in this book is the idea that if you don’t believe in God there’s no way you can have any sense of morality since there is no supreme being to hold you accountable for your actions, in this life or the next. It confounds me that even as he describes religion as having the ability to control our behavior, and that for some people that’s the only thing keeping them from being raping, murderous assholes, that he can’t comprehend that religion is a human/social construct in itself to control others. No one can truly know what is the ‘one, true religion’, but in my opinion if there was a one, true religion then god would not make it so difficult to discern.
The whole time I’m listening to the audio book though I’m thinking to myself, what is a workable alternative in the author’s point of view? To live in a theocracy? Does he comprehend even the evils that religion has unleashed upon the world in its name over the course of history? It was no surprise to me that in the afterward he makes a call for us to turn to God for answers and to forsake science and technology as inherently evil.
To be clear, I’m not just giving this book 1 star because I disagree with the author. There are some good points here and there, but overall this book is a massive contradiction. He makes the claim that some of these authors merely wrote their books on the topics of their choosing to further whatever personal ideology they adhered to - is he not doing the same? The self-righteous attitude that’s prevalent throughout this whole book is nauseating, especially when it’s clear that he can’t comprehend other interpretations of these works or history itself as being valid, since his is the one, true interpretation.
The whole time I’m listening to the audio book though I’m thinking to myself, what is a workable alternative in the author’s point of view? To live in a theocracy? Does he comprehend even the evils that religion has unleashed upon the world in its name over the course of history? It was no surprise to me that in the afterward he makes a call for us to turn to God for answers and to forsake science and technology as inherently evil.
To be clear, I’m not just giving this book 1 star because I disagree with the author. There are some good points here and there, but overall this book is a massive contradiction. He makes the claim that some of these authors merely wrote their books on the topics of their choosing to further whatever personal ideology they adhered to - is he not doing the same? The self-righteous attitude that’s prevalent throughout this whole book is nauseating, especially when it’s clear that he can’t comprehend other interpretations of these works or history itself as being valid, since his is the one, true interpretation.
pagesandcc's review against another edition
medium-paced
2.0
I can't believe I am rating the first book I read this year this low. But oh well, I should've researched more and looking at the author's other works must've clued me in already. That extra star was for the entertainment value. This is full of conservative BS and anti-atheism sentiment. At some point it almost seems that the author equates atheism = amorality = evil, or at least doing whatever you can to achieve your goal regardless if it is right or wrong. Granted I haven't read most (if not all) books mentioned here, I kind of expected most of the books in this list. Bottom line is: ideas have power. And when these ideas are expressed and consumed by a certain type of person, it has the potential to blow up and cause havoc to a lot of people's lives. So yeah: words can literally kill.
colorfulleo92's review
1.0
The title and the blurb had be extremely intrigued and excited to read this book. Such an interesting concept and I think if it would have been written by someone else that didn't include a heavy hand of his own opinions it could have easily been a 5 stars. I thought this was going to look at some of the more controversial books and look how it changed and/or challenged our views during the times from when they where written and now. How they were viewed then and how they are seen now. But it wasn't much of that. Felt it was much more of Benjamin Winkers opinions om different works with was not as interesting to read about
blossomgarden's review
4.0
Briefly- this includes books I had never heard of as well as some I had. At first I felt Wiker was more attacking than arguing how these books had affected the world, but it was simply because it was books I wasn't familiar with. When the chapter covered books I knew, the arguments made much more sense. I appreciate how Wiker is able to sum up the thesis of the book, the intended purpose as well as why it was flawed and the effects that have come.
I gave it four stars instead of five because in some chapters Wiker's opinion takes over much and it may not have matched mine, or I couldn't get past his 'attack' tone.
There are many quotes from the books he includes, except for one person- and I for one am rather glad I didn't have the opportunity to read that person's twisted thoughts posed as science- which gave more insight as I read. This is definitely not a G rated book! Not suitable for teens unless gone through with an adult.
I gave it four stars instead of five because in some chapters Wiker's opinion takes over much and it may not have matched mine, or I couldn't get past his 'attack' tone.
There are many quotes from the books he includes, except for one person- and I for one am rather glad I didn't have the opportunity to read that person's twisted thoughts posed as science- which gave more insight as I read. This is definitely not a G rated book! Not suitable for teens unless gone through with an adult.