Take a photo of a barcode or cover
tymgabriel 's review for:
The Bonobo and the Atheist: In Search of Humanism Among the Primates
by Frans de Waal
If you're tired of the "new atheist" approach to the discussion of science and religion, Frans de Waal offers a most compelling read. de Wall takes the reader on a journey of the facts surrounding the moral constructs of our closest genetic cousins among the great apes. Throughout the book, de Waal illustrates many differences regarding the source and function of such mores and morals using Bosch's "The Garden of Earthly Delights" and anthropological research into the societies of the great apes. While making no apologies for being an atheist, de Waal makes the crucial point that "there is no point getting all worked up about the absence of something, especially something as open to interpretation as [g]od."In the end, he reminds the reader that "humanism is nonreligious, not antireligious" and keeping this tolerant attitude in mind "allows humanism to focus on what is most important, which is to build a better society based on natural human abilities."
Having tired of the extremism of religion and its absurd demands, I refuse to take on the same in my unbelief. I find the message of this book to be very worthy in its refusal to bully but simply to state fact and promote the humanist - not the new atheist - agenda. Those reviews expressing disdain for de Waal's work in this book are by-and-large more militant atheists, who find the criticism of Hitchens, Dawkins, Harris, and Mill to be "misguided" or "soft." They should understand that a difference does exist between the definitions of atheism and humanism, and as the title of the book states, this book refers more to the latter. I enjoy many works by the aforementioned new atheists, but like my fellow reviews who refuse to get on board with de Waal - feeling he is apologetic, I refuse to adopt the idea that all religious people are less or ignorant or worthy of my criticism. I believe de Waal makes this point wonderfully in The Bonobo and the Atheist.
Having tired of the extremism of religion and its absurd demands, I refuse to take on the same in my unbelief. I find the message of this book to be very worthy in its refusal to bully but simply to state fact and promote the humanist - not the new atheist - agenda. Those reviews expressing disdain for de Waal's work in this book are by-and-large more militant atheists, who find the criticism of Hitchens, Dawkins, Harris, and Mill to be "misguided" or "soft." They should understand that a difference does exist between the definitions of atheism and humanism, and as the title of the book states, this book refers more to the latter. I enjoy many works by the aforementioned new atheists, but like my fellow reviews who refuse to get on board with de Waal - feeling he is apologetic, I refuse to adopt the idea that all religious people are less or ignorant or worthy of my criticism. I believe de Waal makes this point wonderfully in The Bonobo and the Atheist.