Customer Reviews
Another Christian apologist apropos Dawkins - By: Richard Bowden, 10 Nov 2008 
In this post-Dawkian world of militant, bulldog Atheism, we've seen a whole host of Christian apologists spring up with varying degrees of success, trying to claw back some of the authoratitive ground they once so fondly held. Ward's book attempts to find answer to just the philosophical arguments contained within THE GOD DELUSION (chapters 2 - 4) & therein lays both its strength & weakness.
WHY THERE ALMOST CERTAINLY IS A GOD shows less of the certainty of faith, at leastin its title, than was possible before the arrival of the intellectually pugnacious Dawkins - although by the end, Ward, who remembered initially "how important it is to be critical of all our beliefs" has the graciousness to admit that, finally, what he's just toured the patient reader through "must seem like a wish-fulfilling fantasy ... (which is) not just a question of evidence ... (but of) basic forms of perception & action". The trouble is, for this reader at least, is that a good deal of Ward's "perception", being necessarily of the philosophical variety, comes across unduly complex & wishy-washy at the same time. It consists neither of Dawkins' wide appeal for the common reader, gained through a wide marshalling of arguments which give the impression of overwhelming probabilityin his favour, nor the arch atheist's clear & hard-hitting prose style. For Dawkins, evolution provides an excellent escalator of natural events which necessarily precludes the 'sky hook' offered by one's Invisible Magic Friend. It's an independent process which leads to increasing complexity. Whether or not he accepts the imperatives of evolutionary biology, Ward falls into the believer's habit of offering up that old stand by, faith, by way of alternative, suggesting that because something can't be proved not to be, so it really *has* to be, as he thinks so. The result is a lot of wishful thinking, dressed up splendidlyin verbiage.
For instance his insistance that mind can exist entirely outside of mechanical process: "This may seem rather odd, but it seems to be a possibility. There could be minds without matter.." so consciousness *might* be achieved by, er, well nothing tangible really as it happens... If I am simplfying Ward then that's because, stripped down to essentials, it's the same old special pleading for something which, ultimately, IS just because he think it ("almost certainly") IS, see? And of course he being a professional philosopher, he must know what he is talking about even though there's no independent verification of anything he hopes is the case.
Incidentally Ward does not discuss exactly just how it is pure mind can create matter from nothing - indeed the exact connection between the two is one of his book's more fuzzy moments. Just because we have obviously thought & feelings, it seems, this is an argument for God who can also exist 'separately' from physicality - a dubious idea, given the necessarily mechanistic origin of those thoughts & feelingsin the first place. But anything else, it seems, is consciousness "explained away".
In short, this fairly short book is full of academic special pleading within a very short range. The denseness of argument here certainly proves that a. Dawkins is no professional philosopherin TGD ... but also shows b. that that wide-ranging book, though not without faults, has enough impact to remain impressive. Dawkin's broad assault on belief, built on the foundation strictures of evolutionary biology, creates an overwhelming sense of probability of world reality, one which makes Ward's necessarily narrow attack seem little more than more wishful thinking from an academic, & with none of the same impact.
Elegantly dismantles Dawkins - By: Mr. W. S. Knowland, 31 Oct 2008 
Ward does a good job picking apart Dawkins's attempts at philosophy. This is neither surprising nor particularly impressive considering Dawkins's book on God is a bit of jumble & should really be called 'Meditations on theology, history, American society & Constitutional Law, the Gnostic Gospels, & the thought processes of Pat Robertson by an OXFORD UNIVERSITY expertin the behavior of chicks at feeding time'. Even the ardent evolutionist Michael Ruse said it made him embarrassed to be an atheist. What's really good about Ward's book - & the reason I've given it 4 stars - is that it is a lucid, concise & penetrating introduction to theistic argument. I've withheld the fifth star because the passages on evolutionary biology could have been fuller. For a fuller critique of scientismin general with particular focus given to Dawkins, consult Peter S Williams's book 'I Wish I Could Believe In Meaning'.
Doubting Ward - By: David Hitchcock, 18 Oct 2008 With such a preponderance of books attacking Dawkins tending to uncritically recommend each other, it is hard to choose which makes the best case for theism to read as a foil to Dawkins. While the evangelism of John Lennox (or even the heartfelt sermonizing of David Robertson) might appeal more to committed Christians (and atheists playing "spot the special pleading"), this book comes closer to addressing Dawkins directly. More challenging than McGrath's rushed polemic, Ward describes his underlying position with clarity.
Having written books attacking fundamentalism, Ward shows himself a more reasonable apologist than most with statements such as "The judgment as to whether or not the resurrection happened as recordedin the Bible is likely to depend on whether or not you already believein God." Unfortunately the same is likely true for the claims of this book. Key claims such as the fundamental validity of personal explanation are justified briefly by (tenuous) analogy, a "most philosophers agree that..." assertion, & the implicit "trust me, I'm a much nicer guy than Dawkins". More space is devoted to Ward's musings on consciousness & quantum mechanics.
The book starts inevitably with praise for Dawkins' previous works followed by castigation of his temerity to comment on faith & a list of historical theist philosophers, with more barbed insults popping up throughout. For a book directly addressing Dawkins, Ward needs understand what he criticizes more carefully. For example he seeks to characterize "the ultimate nature of reality", & assumes Dawkins is attempting to do the same. Ward is brave to tackle Dawkins on evolution, & does make some interesting points on probability & complexity which challenge rather than undermine Dawkins' more accessible writing.
Ultimately, Ward's view of God will be too abstract for many: "Could there be an unembodied mind, a pure Spirit, that has knowledge & awareness? I can see no reason why not." So where's the evidence? Ward has an answer: "So it seems that God does make a difference, but it is not a neutrally testable difference that could be settled by experiment." More work is needed to show that he is describing something more substantial than metaphor - if indeed he is.
A Ward to the wise! - By: Paul James Cocksedge, 17 Sep 2008 
This deceptively slim volume of 159 pages is a book of three parts & eight chapters. It has been primarily written as a refutation of the arguments to be foundin chapters 2 & 4 of Richard Dawkins 'The God Delusion'(chapter 4 from which the book takes its slightly ammended title), as Ward explains (p10):"...because those are the chaptersin which he enters into the territory of philosophy, of arguments about God & the ultimate nature of reality. That is my territory...". The book however goes well beyond the bounds of its remit & quickly builds into a comprehensive, sophisticated & nuanced defence of theism as a rational worldview whilst simultaineously critiqueing & exposing the philosophical weakness & naivity of the reductionist materialist position of the Neo-athiests. This is not a defence of christian doctrine or beliefs (we are notin C.S.Lewis territory here!) but of the rationality & cogency of theism, as Ward states(P137): "In this book I am not discussing the topic of revealed religion or defending the Christian faith specifically.I am concerned with general reasons for believingin God, or for accepting the God hypothesis. Those reasons hold good for any theist, Jewish, Christian ,Muslim, Hindu or Sikh...".
Keith Wards arguments do not lend themselves to simple synopsis but they cover areas such as: the New Design Argument, Causality, Certainty(practical & theoretical), Chance(two meanings of), Common Sense, Complexity & the improbability of God, Conciousness, The Cosmological argument, Eternal things & causality, Eternity of God, Evidence for God, Faith, Final explaination, First cause argument, Five Ways of demonstrating God, the God hypothesis, Goods(objective & intrinsic), Idealists & idealism, Immortality, Intelligence, Materialism, Matter, The difference between the scientific & metaphisical hypothesis, Mind, Morality & reigion, the Multiverse, Necessity & contingency, Occams razor, the alleged paradox of Omniscience & Omnipotence, Ontological argument, Personal explanation, Probability, Proofs of God, Purposein the Universe, Reductionismin science, Relationship as an intrinsic good or perfection, Revelation, Self-transcendance, Simplicity of the laws of nature, Simplicity (three senses of), Simplicity,complexity & probability, "Skyhookery", Theory of everything, Timelessness of God & Transcendance.
Philosophers & scientists engaged with include: Anselm, Aquinas, Aristotle, Peter Atkins, A.J.Ayer, Martin Buber, Paul Davis, Daniel Dennet, Descartes, Einstein, Bernard d'Espagnate, Hugh Everett, Stephen j.Gould, John Gribbin, Steven Hawking, Hegel, Fred Hoyle, David Hume, Kant, Gottfried Liebniz, Lock, Simon Conway Morris, Isaac Newton, Rudolf Otto, Roger Penrose, Alvin Plantinga, Martin Rees, Thomas Reid, Matt Ridley, Jean Paul Satre, Spinoza, Swinburne, Richard Taylor, Max Tegmark, Steven Weinberg & E.O.Wilson.
As I said, a deceptively thin volume! But one which covers an immense area of philosophical & scientific ground. And although a refutation of the arguments of a notoriously splenetic & ill mannered adversary 'Why there almost certainly is a God' is a measured, dispassionate & gracefully written riposte (-and then some!). Recommended to the more philosophically inclined Christian reader.
Possible further reading:
Gods Undertaker by John Lennox.
Dawkins God by Alister McGrath.
Creation & the world of science by Arthur Peacock.
Science & Creation by John Polkinghorne.
Reason & Reality By John Polkinghorne.
The Existence of God by Richard Swinburne.
The Coherence of Theism. ""
The Existence of God. ""
God, Freedom & evil by Alvin Plantinga.
God, Chance & Neccesity By Keith Ward.
The Big Questionsin science & Religion By Keith Ward.
Very closely and convincingly argued - By: Mr. Richard J. Pask, 19 Aug 2008 In this book Keith Ward takes each of Richard Dawkins' pointsin turn, and, for me at least, convincingly refutes them. A very closely argued, highly respectful & erudite work.
