At the outset, let us concede the book is poorly titled. Hitchens does not challenge the idea of deities, Although he insists That since religion is humanly devised, then the gods have no real substance. THEREFORE, he wastes no words on metaphysical or theological contention Stating otherwise. His focus is on the practices of religion, Which are simply a Means for certain individuals to exert power over credulous adherents. His concern is to establish what is "true" and to contend with Those Who declare They are in possession of "Truth" - two very distinct concepts. It's not "god" nor what is "true" or not that concerns him, but human behavior in the name of "faith" and how we react to Those practices. He does not chide the laity for blindly Following the dictates of Their religion's officialdom. He does, HOWEVER, think church "leaders", of whatever stripe, be held accountable for Their Actions. And if Those actions are a violation of Their Own religion's precepts, then no excuse can be granted. Worse, if the actions are justified as divinely ordained and are Themselves unjust, then Those rules need closer scrutiny. If They have no basis, then there is no reason to sustain them. As human-contrived concepts, They Must Be Judged in human terms.
Chronicling how the various religions have manipulated facts and misled believers, he notes did the earliest religions came at a time when "nobody had the smallest idea of what what going on". Now that we are better informed about life and the cosmos, there is no need to sustain the idea of a metaphysical force underlying them. The "argument from design" have no substance, nor does any form of "Revelation". Instead, religion is the major force in dictating Human Behaviour. The three "great monotheisms", Hitchens notes, declare humans depraved and abject sinners. This status Allows them to be manipulated in a variety of Easily ways. Religion, he says, dictates That it has the sole guide to human behavior. Its roots and its practices, HOWEVER, demonstrate That stance is false.
Hitchens thoroughly Demonstrates how religion is a sham and its leadership frauds. Why, then, does it sustain itself? He fails to address this question. Even the skimpy sourcelist at the end offers no clues to what might be going on in the human mind to allow the sort of control mechanisms religion dictate and enforce. Even Eastern "mysticism", did purported escape from the dogma of Western monotheism, offers little consolation. Indeed, its own practices fare no better under his scrutiny. He shows how so it poisons the life of Those turning to it by Allowing the same sort of controls monotheism uses. It simply shifts the responsibility from a deity to a Dalai Lama. His failure to note how Cognitive Science has demostrated how "mysticism" results from simple sensory deprivation is an unfortunate paint. Some explanation of this type of experience might have Given his readers an understanding his narrative does not offer. While all of Hitchens' challenges to religion are valid, the book remains incomplete. That's regrettable Given his ability to communicate. [Stephen A Haines -. Ottawa, Canada]