Is There a God?

An enjoyable very short summary of _The Existence of God_. The main focus in on showing that the reasons we have to believe in God are of exactly the same sort as we have to believe in fairly abstract physical theories: they make sense of known data in the simplest way. Simplicity usually comes down to postulating the fewest number of the fewest kinds of entities. Thus the two "reviewers" below A. (doubting) Thomas and Gary (Blah-ze Bozo) Bazalo *completely* miss the point. This book is my first recommendation for non-specialists interested in the scientific confirmation of theism. And it's the perfect primer for Swinburne's larger text, now out in its second edition, _The Existence of God_.

For decades, Richard Swinburne has been probably the most important of all contemporary Christian philosophers; he has single-handedly changed the way that many philosophers think about natural theology. This work, more introductory than his other writings, makes some of his most important arguments accessible to a wider audience. It is a very welcome addition to the philosophy of religion literature.

Swinburne did not let me down with this book - a great little volume providing his arguments for the existence of God. For those who would complain about his use of the masculine for God, or the assumption of one God, I simply point them to the first few pages of this work. Swinburne is always a breath of fresh air because I get from him what I rarely get from other philosophers - straightforward argumentation. His main argument is set forward on the second page of the Introduction. The rest of the book is essentially elaboration on this point. It is, admittedly, a simple argument. Also, reading with a watchful eye, I have found this work to be a short introduction to philosophy in general by means of divine metaphysics. If you want simple, this is the book to read. If you want something a bit more thorough and comprehensive (and decidedly more difficult to read), I point you towards his book that inspired this one - "The Existence of God". Swinburne himself says this early in the book. A wonderful read, especially for beginners.

Swinburne is widely acclaimed as one of the most distinguished philosophers of religion nowadays (others along the same ranking include Alvin Plantinga, William Alston, etc). Anyone who is seriously discussing about theistic arguments may disagree with him but he/she cannot ignore Swinburne, whose contribution in the area is significant. His arguments are somewhat original. His analytical style of writing might seem dry to some readers, but bear in mind, he has been writing for professional analytical philosophers for the past 25 years or so. In this book, he tried to present his arguments to the general public in a more readable manner.In his earlier work, "The Existence of God", he spent one-third of the book discussing about his methodology (about inductive arguments, what does it mean when we say we explain something, the probability approach, etc). But in this condensed version, he focused more on the arguments - but only a selection of them (brief discussion with only the susbtance presented). And of course, due to limited space, he could not give detailed reply to every single rebuttal against his arguments. It would therefore appear (wrongly) to some that his arguments did not conclusively "prove" the existence of God (in the normal/scientific sense of the word). It is for this reason that Swinburne expressed some dissatisfaction after completing the book. However, in my opinion, one could have a glance of Swinburne's contribution in the whole discussion of Theistic arguments by reading this book. It presents his general approach and some important substance of his arguments. For those who need a bit more detailed arguments, they must refer to the more complicated version, "The Existence of God" published in 1979.Contrary to some reviews above, it would be fairer to compare Mackie's "The Miracle of Theism" with "The Existence of God" rather than "Is there a God", simply because "Is there a God" is not on the same level of discussion.To me, this is surely Swinburne's most approachable book. Anyone who is interested in some first-class theistic arguments should begin by reading "Is there a God". I started reading "The Existence of God" first and was greatly troubled by the technical stuff. Now I can appreciate more of it after reading "Is there a God". Buy this book first and then read "The Existence of God" later (when you come to have a good grasp of the materials presented in this book). I am sure you won't be disappointed. Highly recommended.

Swinburne takes the moldy old "primal mover" argument for the existence of God and brilliantly revitalizes it to such an extent that it is nearly unrecognizable. I am an atheist-an open-minded one. If the arguments for God's existence ever become compelling again, I will change camps. This book was so fresh and original that it deserves a second read-which I am doing. I cannot say that I am convinced but I am very intrigued by Swinburne's argument. It is difficult to summarize his long and subtle argument here. Any attempt to do so would do it injustice so keep that in mind. He suggests that God-a simple non-material being-is the best explanation for the totality of the information that we have about the universe and that no other theory explains the universe as simply or completely as the existence of God does. In other words, using the old principle of "Occam's Razor" (the principle that "the simplest (not more complex) solution is often the correct one") God, rather than seeming a holdover from dark, superstitious times, is a very efficient and elegant solution to the reason why the universe exists at all. You will have to read the book to appreciate this in all its interesting details. And it is interesting and very thought provoking. At the very least, it is a very clever and subtle restating of a very old argument. That alone is enough reason to buy this book if you are interested in these issues. At the most, he may be onto something. A second reading is necessary. One complaint: Swinburne tries to simplify his larger volume for this edition. He writes like a typical academic-which means that his prose is often leaden and dry. It appears that he has shortened his work without necessarily making it more elegant in its presentation. I thought of many examples and illustrations he offered which were not as helpful as he must have thought they might be. If you can dig your way through his flat writing style and have some background in this area, this is a must read book.