Jon's Reviews > Seven types of atheism

So this one was a bit of a hot mess. The first chapter, The New Atheism: A Nineteenth-Century Orthodoxy, just felt like a vehicle for the author to attack the so called New Atheists. I don't think new atheism is a thing, let alone one of the titular seven types of atheism. To my mind this chapter, including it's sub-section entitled Why science cannot dispel religion, probably should have been a part of chapter 3, A Strange Faith in Science.
Chapter 2, supposedly discussing secular humanism, includes five pages on Ayn Rand. That surprised me more than a bit. The terms secular humanist, humanist and liberals all seemed to be used interchangeably throughout this chapter. They're not interchangeable.
Chapter 3 appears to make the argument that since some Enlightenment philosophers and 19th century scientists were racists, modern day atheists that push science must be racist too?
In the end I just could never connect the dots between the different philosophers, scientists, thinkers and ideas that are brought up throughout the book. There are no clear threads defining the Seven Types of Atheism. It all seemed like a jumbled mess.
My biggest problem with this book was the definition that the author chose for religion. I'm all for defining terms to prevent confusion. The author can certainly choose any definition he wants. But to choose a definition that, in my opinion, none of the atheists mentioned argued against, seems disingenuous at best. Because at heart the message of this book is that all of the types of atheism, except for his type of course, are stupid and poorly thought out. Which reminds me, if you enjoy old men yelling at kids to get off their lawn, you might enjoy this book.
I did like all of the different philosophers, scientists and thinkers that were mentioned. I wrote down several for further exploration and reading.