The Four Horsemen: The Conversation That Sparked an Atheist Revolution

I will start by saying that I am an evangelical Christian and I still liked this book. Of course there were some cheap shots, but I know these come from both sides of the debate. What I liked about the book is that four of the foremost Atheist academics are at least intellectually honest enough to say they don't have all the answers to some very tough and relevant questions to life, and more to the point YOUR life. They would argue that a future evolved mankind will discover these answers though science, and I would argue that this very belief, conviction or "faith" is no different than the Christian faith they attack. Promise that we will have answers later is very intellectually unfulfilling so lay off on how intellectually unfulfilling Christian belief and faith is. You can't have your cake and eat it too. It's also worth noting that not all four were in agreement on some of the tougher life questions.There were a couple of notable characterizations of true Christianity where they completely missed the mark. The first in the notation that the "superstitious" religious zealots discourage critical debate because we supposedly have no intellectual ground to stand on. There are several intellectuals on the Christian evangelical side of the debate who more than hold their own with these four Horsemen in public debates, to include John Lennox who I personally heard debate Richard Dawkins one-on-one in what could only be called an Atheist routing. Maybe Richard was having an off day, but to characterize all evangelical Christians as foolish simpletons has been proved many times over as being ingenuous at best and perhaps even dishonest depending on their intent.It's fair to also share that they made some great points that I happen to agree with even as an evangelical Christian. Both sides have plenty of evidence for the atrocities performed in the name of the godless and those who also claim theism. I would argue the supposed "Christians" killing in the name of God during the Inquisition are as godless as the atheist Pol Pots, Stalins as well as the fundamentalists religious murderers throughout history.In summary, whether you claim to be Atheist or a Theist you should question everything. Don't take man's word for anything at face value, as we all come with biases and preconceived notions (even the intellectuals on both sides). I believe true Christianity will hold up to your scrutiny and everything else will fall underwhelmingly short. I also believe the four Horsemen would agree were they to ever understand what true Christianity is, and not the straw man that they continue to pick away at.

If you've already heard the convo on Hitchen's Youtube channel, all the book has that's new is a few articles written by the participants prior to the conversation and a foreward by Steven Fry. Overall, I think it is definitely worth the buy. Especially incase the Youtube overlords ever decide to take that conversation down.R.I.P Christopher Hitchens

"You don't have to boast a PhD or have read Thomas à Kempis, the Qur'an, the Book of Mormon and the teachings of Siddhartha (or indeed On the Origin of Species and Principia Mathematica) to be able to take part in such wrangling and disputation. But boy, isn't it wonderful when you can eavesdrop on four who have." ~Stephen FryOh, to have the sagacious chops to merit a seat at that table! A secular Mt Rushmore. An evolutionary biologist, a neuroscientist, a philosopher, and Hitch (sorry, I couldn't describe Christopher Hitchens with just one word. Historian? Journalist? Contrarian? Sage? Even collectively they fall far short.)One of my utopian fantasies would be to live in a world where all of us could practice and embrace rational discourse at this level. It's a pipe dream that has absolutely no chance, but I like to ponder the implausible. I have another where I'm spooning with Uma Thurman and she whispers, "that was the BEST I've ever had!"

It’s too bad Steve Martin wrote his book (“Pure Drivel”) first. Had he not, his title would have been a perfect fit for this unfortunate screed. Our gallant “horsemen” are quick to declare their abject humility then—almost as quickly—go on to showcase their customary hubris, because after all, they’re right—aren’t they? Nothing new here. Old arguments that fit poorly with new evidence. In fact, they fit poorly with just about ALL the evidence. Harris, to his credit has figured out Islam. Hitchens was an entertaining writer but not an original thinker. Dennett does a nice job of explaining the function of marine zincs to protect rudder shafts and bronze propellers, but not much else. And Dawkins really should know better by now. Consider that on p.8, to demonstrate his intellectual humility, he writes “How did life begin? I don’t know, nobody knows, we wish we did...”. Fair enough—and true. But on p.21 he returns to the question “how complex life came to exist and diversify” then assures us that “those questions have now been definitively answered by Darwin and his successors.” Really? And definitively no less? Didn’t you just say on p.8....? Slick.Like a spent comedian Dawkins trots out some of his tired favorites from his book “The God Delusion”. E.g., if God created everything, who created God? News flash: Even high school kids are knocking that one out of the park. Short answer: God is eternal. For some reason, atheists have a hard time grasping that concept. (But recall that from the time of Socrates to Einstein/Hubble they had no difficulty believing in an eternal and static universe.) And another Dawkins’ favorite: the universe is highly improbable, a universe Creator is even more improbable. One might be forgiven for thinking that since the universe is indeed highly improbable, a universe Creator is essential. An IPhone is highly improbable—so is a plasma TV. I wonder if Dawkins has a theory about them?Another overarching theme of our noble horsemen in their courageous (their word, not mine) search for the truth, is the absolute and inviolable requirement that all scientific knowledge (as opposed to that mushy stuff theists believe) must be based solidly—and exclusively—on facts. Nothing else will do. One wonders if any one of them has ever detected the scandalous reliance of Darwinian Evolution on (dare I say it?) assumption? As in see p.8 on how life got started. Or how birds evolved from reptiles. Or how DNA managed to get it right—right from the start. The list is long. But lest you doubt me, here is a challenge. Read the book and see if you can find any scientific facts in it. Good hunting!My assessment of this book is that it has precious little to do with science and a lot to do with atheist propaganda. This is fact-free arguing at its best. Read this book if you want some insight on the limitations of the atheist mentality. It does have one virtue—it is brief.

I bought this hoping for to learn something new from these four 'new atheists'. Instead, following rather bland opening chapters from three of them (Hitchens died a few years ago), most of the pages are a transcript of a meal/discussion that the four men had a decade ago. If this is the best that these allegedly incisive minds could come up with, their philosophical opponents have nothing to fear. The fawning forward by Stephen Fry is better written but still very thin on intellectual meat.

Tedious really. Like them all but this is four blokes up their own arses and indulging in dick waving. Tiresome.

Whether you agree with their views or not, this is a thought provoking and challenging read.The foreword by Stephen Fry is laced with both wit and admiration for the 'Four' and is worth the 99p I paid for this kindle book in itself.It is hard in the face of such intellect and rational thinking not to just accept all that they say without question, but that would of course be abhorrent to the 'Four' as questioning, challenging and proof is at the heart of who they are.Whether you are religious, agnostic or a 'devout' athiest the dicussions here are fascinating.

Nothing new to inspire or even change already held opinions.

The Four Horsemen give a great debate on their atheism and disbelief, in organised religion and deities.The four exhibit very powerful intellects and superb erudition throughout the book. My only complaint is it was short. I could have read on for hours.