Customer Reviews: Read 13 more reviews...
 Clear Analysis of Theistic Arguments October 15, 2007
1 out of 1 found this review helpful
The subtitle of this book pretty much sums it up: Arguments for and against the Existence of God. Specifically, Mackie presents detailed discussions on the ontological argument, cosmological argument, argument to design, moral argument and argument from consciousness as well as various theistic arguments from Descartes, Berkely, William James, Pascal and Kierkegaard. Mackie generally starts with the classical version of these arguments but will many times discuss modern variants presented by the likes of Richard Swinburne and Alvin Plantinga. Mackie also provides a discussion on some common arguments against theism such as Hume's argument against miracles, the problem of evil, and the natural history of religion.
I thought that this book might be rather boring but I gave it a shot anyway and found it surprisingly interesting and fairly engaging. I thought that Mackie was very even-handed throughout the discussion. There were places where he reasoned from the theistic position quite a bit further than I had previously encountered (such as in the problem of evil section). Many of these arguments for theism were familiar to me, but I have never seen them so thoroughly detailed, especially all together, as in this book.
This book does not have the feel of an atheist polemic although Mackie evidently writes from an atheistic point of view. Mackie states in the very first paragraph, "Neither the affirmative nor the negative answer [to whether or not there is a god] is obviously right, but the issue is not so obscure that relevant considerations of argument and evidence cannot be brought to bear upon it." I would recommend this book for those interested in a good description of some common theistic arguments along with the atheistic objections.
 Excellent philosophical critique of theism May 11, 2007
5 out of 6 found this review helpful
The Australian philosopher John Mackie, sadly now deceased, has always been one of my favorite philosophers, and when I heard from several religious people that this was in their view the best critique of religion, I decided to buy it at once. The book is indeed highly rewarding of its praise, for it is the most thorough philosophical (here as opposed to scientific) critique of all (mono)theist apologetics written so far.
Unlike such recent anti-theist writers as Dawkins and Dennett, Mackie is extraordinarily charitable to the theists' claims, making sure to mention every possible argument in their favor and using only counter-arguments that could not possibly be considered controversial or contingent on a given scientific theory, etc. In fact, he is much more charitable in some places than is really necessary; I would not have the same patience with the meaningless phrasings of Swinburne or Küng that Mackie has. In any case, Mackie diligently and cordially addresses each of the main issues surrounding theist apologetics: miracles, the ontological argument, the cosmological arguments (including Kalam), moral arguments, the issue of consciousness, free will, the argument from design, the argument from faith alone (Kierkegaard), the argument from popularity (William James), the problem of evil, the possibility of atheist morality, and so on.
Mackie shows himself at his best here - an impressive array of arguments and decisive counterarguments, even against such modern superstars of apologetics like William Lane Craig and Alvin Plantinga, are dealt with in sequence with seemingly no effort at all. Not a single theist argument remains standing, and Mackie is sure to remind us at all times that not only is the burden of proof on the theists, but they also have to show their view more likely than not as well as more likely than naturalist explanations, if their view is to succeed. As Mackie makes abundantly clear, this is a bar far too high for any theology whatever to achieve.
This book is strongly recommended for everyone interested in religion and philosophy, although the work is written at a high level and is not easy or 'popular' reading. To further dig into the issue of ethics and atheism, I would also recommend reading Mackie's defense of ethical anti-realism: Ethics: Inventing Right and Wrong.
The Right Way to Do It October 26, 2006
16 out of 22 found this review helpful
I don't agree with Mr. Mackie's ultimate conclusion, but that is not the point of my review. Mackie has addressed the question in the proper fashion. He shows proper respect for the arguments of those with whom he differs and he lets the case stand or fall on its ultimate merits. Were I an atheist this book would be my model for argument. Compared to Mackie the recent works of Sam Harris and Richard Dawkins seem to be the work of crackpots. "The village atheists screaming at the village idiots" to parphrase Chesterton. I can actually envision having a rational debate with Mackie on the topic. I only hope that I would be able to hold my own. He quite cogently for his point of view and even though its not mine
any person of faith and any non believer who is interested in the concept of God from a philosophical point of view will be enriched by reading this work.
Flawless arguments against some theist positions, but limited scope October 20, 2006
25 out of 32 found this review helpful
Mackie's book discusses the main arguments for and against the existence of God. The book covers many different kinds of proofs for the existence of God, for example, ontological, cosmological, teleological proofs, moral arguments for God, as well arguments from consciousness, and religious experience. He goes back to Anselm, Aquinas, Descartes, Hume and Berkeley, but a lot of his focus is on modern proofs (Plantinga, Hans Kung, Swinburne). Using what I consider nearly flawless logic he argues convincingly against all of those proofs, including the more complex modern versions. However, I do not consider his handling of the cosmological proof fully satisfying. Even though it is correct that the cosmological proof is flawed because it is possible that the Universe has always existed, modern cosmology implies an actual beginning of the universe (including time).
He is also discussing the "problem of evil" (how can evil exist if there is a good and omnipotent God). In particular he argues against Alvin Plantingas' defense of the theistic position (Plantingas defense is based on free will). However, it should be noted that many modern theological belief systems do not require an omnipotent, or all good God, and some also consider evil a "good" in the long run (soul development). So the famous problem of evil does not apply to those systems.
The book is well written, coherent, concise, and uses well constructed and correct logical arguments throughout. It is an excellent book in philosophy. However, I question its relevancy to the average theist and atheist alike. For example, I have never met anyone who is basing his faith on the ontological proof for God's existence. Clearly religious faith is often an adaptation to the faith of your family and society. However, faith is also sometimes based on very personal and profound religious experiences, which may not be relevant to other people, but are compelling to the experiencer himself. In addition, the scope of the book does not cover many modern forms of spirituality, some that does not even require a "classical definition of God".
So in conclusion, the book is a great book on philosophy, but it is far from the last word on spirituality and faith.
Still the Strongest Argument for Atheism in Print November 1, 2005
56 out of 74 found this review helpful
In "The Miracle of Theism" J.L. Mackie examines the arguments for and against the existence of God from an atheistic perspective. John Mackie is a highly respected twentieth century philosopher and along with Anthony Flew has been one of the most capable contemporary proponents of atheism.
Written almost a quarter of a century ago, "The Miracle of Theism" remains a classic in the field of religious philosophy and is widely considered to be one of the best-stated arguments for atheism in print. Unfortunately, many popular works supporting the atheistic perspective come across as unduly angry and self-righteous. In contrast, Mackie's work is a much-needed breath of fresh air. One may disagree with Mackie while at the same time respecting his views. The book touches on a wide range of important issues, I offer the following thoughts for potential readers:
The approach is largely evidentiary in nature - Mackie examines different arguments for and against the existence of God and assesses the overall likelihood of theism in light of his analysis of these arguments. This is not an uncommon approach, however, theists often argue that it is the wrong way around and that a more direct awareness of God is available (see Plantinga's Warranted Christian Belief for an opposing view).
Mackie does a good job in handling the ontological argument. On examination this classic "proof" does seem to possess more force than is initially evident. Despite its subtle attractiveness, however, I tend to agree with Mackie that something does quite feel right about it. At the end of the day the attempt to define God into existence seems more like a logical -linguistic exercise than a compelling argument.
The handling of the cosmological argument is not as strong. Current scientific and philosophical thought favours an actual beginning for universe (including space and time). Traditionally, atheists had taken the tact that the universe had always existed and hence did not require an explanation. Although this supposed beginning does not let the theist entirely of the hook (an uncaused God can be a conceptual challenge), it is doubly problematic for the atheist who is faced with the universe not only being created out of nothing but also for no reason. To be fair to the author, however, much of the scientific and philosophical thought, which added to the cosmological argument's theistic appeal is subsequent to Mackie's work. A good starting point in this area for interested readers is Craig and Smith's "Atheism, Theism and Big Bang Cosmology".
Mackie's handling of the teleological (or argument from design) is interesting if a bit dated. From my perspective Mackie reliance on Hume is a bit excessive (he is an accomplished Hume scholar and his comments if not always salient to the current argument are of value in themselves). Similar to the cosmological argument, recent developments in science have also weakened the atheist position in this area. The complexity of life and the apparent fine-tuning of the universe has made its "accidental appearance" extremely improbable.
The argument from evil - i.e. that the existence of evil and a wholly good God are logically incompatible is widely viewed as the best argument for atheism. While it retains some of its emotional appeal it has lost much of its intellectual bite. It is now widely accepted that there is no logical incompatibility between God and the existence of evil and consequently the argument has shifted to a less forceful approach - i.e. how much evil is compatible with a theistic model.
Although atheism remains a popular worldview, many commentators recognise that the intellectual ground has shifted toward the theistic position. The argument from evil, while still possessing some force, has been weakened whereas the teleological and cosmological arguments in support of theism have been strengthen by developments in philosophy and science. Flew himself has recently acknowledge that theism is the more likely explanation (he appears to be advocating a deistic perspective) - it is interesting to speculate where Mackie would be given current thought?
Overall, though the argument for atheism has weakened in recent years Mackie's work remains its best and most compelling statement. It is an excellent book and I highly recommended it to all readers - atheist or theist.
|
