![\"\"](\"https:\/\/wp-media.patheos.com\/blogs\/sites\/84\/2013\/11\/books-many.jpg\" "\\"books,")
<\/a><\/p>\n\u00a0<\/p>\n
Chana (A) choosing for Gilbert (C) and Christian (C)<\/h3>\n
Chana was both the atheist most likely to be mistaken for Christian by Christians, when she tried her hand at imitating Christian thought (entry C4<\/a>) and was the atheist that, when writing as herself, was most likely to spur Christians to wish to have pugnacious coffee with her (entry A5<\/a>). \u00a0She writes at The Merely Real<\/a> and contributes to Strange Notions<\/a>.<\/em><\/p>\n Chana chose to buy the same book for her two counterparts, David Deutsch\u2019s\u00a0The Beginning of Infinity: Explanations That Transform the World<\/em><\/a>. \u00a0Since she didn\u2019t include a write-up, I\u2019ll crib from Amazon:<\/p>\n In this groundbreaking book, award-winning physicist David Deutsch argues that explanations have a fundamental place in the universe\u2014and that improving them is the basic regulating principle of all successful human endeavor. Taking us on a journey through every fundamental field of science, as well as the history of civilization, art, moral values, and the theory of political institutions, Deutsch tracks how we form new explanations and drop bad ones, explaining the conditions under which progress\u2014which he argues is potentially boundless\u2014can and cannot happen. Hugely ambitious and highly original,\u00a0The Beginning of Infinity<\/em>\u00a0explores and establishes deep connections between the laws of nature, the human condition, knowledge, and the possibility for progress.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n Gilbert blogs at\u00a0The Last Conformer<\/a>, and his atheist round entry (A10<\/a>) was the most plausible Christian entry according to true atheists.<\/em><\/p>\n Leah has asked me to pick a book prize for Chana and my choice is\u00a0The Genesis of Science: How the Christian Middle Ages Launched the Scientific Revolution<\/a>\u00a0by James Hannam.<\/p>\n While I\u2019ll admit to choosing this book with a somewhat apologetic purpose, it isn\u2019t directly about the truth of Christianity. In fact, I expect Chana to agree with basically everything it says and still remain a staunch atheist, at least for now. That\u2019s fine by me, because my evil plan is more underhanded: I\u2019m trying to shift the question rather than the answer.<\/p>\n A lot of smart atheists trying to understand theists \u2013\u00a0and<\/a>\u00a0Chana in\u00a0particular<\/a>\u00a0\u2013 wonder how we reconcile faith and reason. The official and correct Catholic answer is pretty much that this is not a problem because our faith is reasonable. And the proper direct way to deal with this concern is to disaggregate the vague concepts of \u201cfaith\u201d and \u201creason\u201d and then look at the easier individual questions. They tend to separate into counter-factual what-thens with\u00a0obvious authoritative answers<\/a>, political rather than epistemological conflicts, and questions that can be dissolved by recursively applying the same strategy. Chana herself has\u00a0successfully used<\/a>\u00a0that strategy in other contexts.<\/p>\n But in a way this ignores the more general expectation behind the concern. There actually is a guiding principle or narrative behind all these questions. For example, this type of question tends to come up for religion much more than e.g. for feminism or libertarianism, because that\u2019s where the cultural expectation of conflict lies. I think that narrative is simply false, but it is much to big and vague to engage directly. However, there used to be a very tangible side to this narrative:\u00a0the conflict thesis<\/a>. This book is an excellent take-down of that thesis. So, even if for all I know Chana might not actually believe the actual conflict thesis, I would hope that a detailed look at\u00a0how<\/em>bogus the tangible part of the narrative of her concern was might push her towards wondering if the rest of it doesn\u2019t look a lot like an\u00a0invisible dragon<\/a>.<\/p>\n As for the credibility of the book, I\u2019ll note that its British edition was shortlisted for the 2010 Royal Society Prize for Science Books. So while it does have a bit of an agenda, it also is a valid popularization of history as academic historians now understand it.<\/p>\n \u00a0<\/p>\n Christian H writes at The Thinking Ground<\/a>, and his honest Christian entry (C3<\/a>) was the one whose author atheists most wanted to take out for coffee and a chat.<\/em><\/p>\n \u00a0<\/p>\n The Long List, alphabetical by author<\/p>\n 1. Borges, Jorge Luis. Collected Fictions<\/em><\/a>\u00a0\u2013 Gorgeous, thought-provoking, humane; mystical, maybe a little undisciplined \u2014<\/p>\n The Short List, alphabetical by author<\/p>\n 1. Borges, Jorge Luis. Collected Fictions<\/a>\u00a0\u00a0<\/em>What would he look like to a mathematician? Maybe really interesting, maybe not. Borges is evocative, but not rigorous. Hmm hmm hmm. \u2014<\/p>\n Verdict<\/p>\n In order, assuming that she doesn\u2019t have the book already (to Leah\u2019s knowledge):<\/p>\n 1. Borges, Jorge Luis. Collected Fictions<\/em><\/a> [this is the one I sent \u2013 Leah] \u00a0<\/p>\n Jeez oh man, if you didn\u2019t already vote for Christian as someone you wanted to have coffee with in the Turing Test, surely you want to head Canada-wards now.<\/em><\/p>\n<\/body><\/html>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" This year, I decided to have prizes for the Ideological Turing Test, and to have the winners pick them out for each other. \u00a0The two contestants who were most successful at aping the other side swapped books, and so did the two people who, when writing their true beliefs, were the contestant that the opposing […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":127,"featured_media":8288,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[1],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-8202","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-uncategorized"],"yoast_head":"\nGilbert (C) choosing for Chana (A)<\/h3>\n
Christian H of (C) choosing for Chana (A)<\/h3>\n
\n
\n2. Carr, Caleb. The Alienist<\/em><\/a> \u2013 Fascinating, interesting historically and intellectually; it\u2019s been a long time since I read it, so my recommendation would have to be uncertain
\n3. Chesteron, G K. The Man Who Knew Too Much<\/em><\/a> \u2013 Clever, I like what it says about justice; a bit sexist, racist, colonialist, a bit preachy
\n4. Cogburn, Jon and Mark Silcox. \/Dungeons & Dragons and Philosophy: Raiding the Temple of Widsom\/ \u2013 It looks really interesting; I haven\u2019t read it yet
\n5. Davis, Wade. One River<\/em><\/a> \u2013 Intellectual history stuff, quite interesting; long, drags a bit
\n6. Davis, Wade. The Wayfinders<\/em><\/a> \u2013 Humane, I like the idea about creative\/intellectual resources; maybe not for everybody?
\n7. Dreger, Alice Dorumat. One of Us: Conjoined Twins and the Future of Normal<\/em><\/a> \u2013 I really like the ideas, I think maybe Dreger\u2019s approach will be of interest to Chana; maybe excessively academic, non-fun?
\n8. Dunn, Katherine. Geek Love<\/a><\/em>\u00a0\u2013\u00a0Gorgeous, brilliant, well-written; depressing, bizarre
\n9. Goto, Hiromi. Half World<\/em><\/a> \u2013 Lovely, pacist, fun; hard to handle for some people, maybe not as intellectually tight as some of the other options?
\n10. Green, John. Paper Towns<\/em><\/a>\u00a0\u2013 Humane, literary, gripping; YA may not appeal to everyone
\n11. King, Thomas. Green Grass, Running Water<\/em><\/a> \u2013 Oh my goodness, what an excellent book, the best kind of experimental writing, hilarious; maybe a high chance she\u2019ll have read it (maybe? what\u2019s its visibility in the States?)
\n12. Mendely, Linda. Castle Waiting<\/em><\/a> \u2013 Humane, hilarious, creative, graceful; maybe not as philosophically-inclined as Chana might like?
\n13. Poortvliet, Rien. Journey to the Ice Age<\/em><\/a> \u2013 Utterly gorgeous, I\u2019d recommend it to anyone who is sighted and has any taste at all; incredibly expensive
\n14. Shapiro, James. A Year in the Life of William Shakespeare: 1599<\/em><\/a>\u00a0\u2013 Fun history and literary criticism stuff, decently written; very narrow interest
\n15. Wecker, Helene. The Golem and the Jinni<\/em><\/a> \u2013 It deals with some lovely stuff w\/r\/t freedom v service, other pet projects of mine, character-driven; these are pet projects of mine<\/em>, writing a tiny bit uneven<\/p>\n
\n2. Davis, Wade. One River<\/em><\/a> Very interesting. Also very long. Not generalist knowledge, highly specific. A little weird in places.
\n3. Davis, Wade. The Wayfinders<\/em><\/a> If Chana is interested in new ideas and arguments, and in religion, this might be of some interest to her. But I found this book to be as much of a downer as it was informative.
\n4. Dreger, Alice Dorumat. One of Us: Conjoined Twins and the Future of Normal<\/a>\u00a0<\/em>Fascinating, clever, both science-y and interpretive, but definitely not as fun<\/em> as the alternatives.
\n5. Goto, Hiromi. Half World<\/em><\/a> Fun but certainly depressing and in many places hard to read. It cares about people, reconciliation.
\n6. Green, John. Paper Towns<\/em><\/a> Same as Goto, I guess, but less so, and far more fun\/less depressing.
\n7. King, Thomas. Green Grass, Running Water<\/em><\/a> Pretty brilliant. I\u2019m always a little hesitant to suggest it to an atheist, but I oughtn\u2019t be, b\/c it\u2019s not like it\u2019s going to make them change their mind about Christianity or anything.<\/p>\n
\n2. King, Thomas. Green Grass, Running Water<\/a><\/em>
\n3. Dreger, Alice Dorumat. One of Us: Conjoined Twins and the Future of Normal<\/em><\/a>\u00a0[I was so tempted to send this one, but recognized that means that\u00a0I<\/em> should read it \u2013 Leah]
\n4. Davis, Wade. The Wayfinders<\/em><\/a><\/p>\n