Why I Am Not a Christian and Other Essays on Religion and Related Subjects - Bertrand Russell Audiobook
Language: EnglishKeywords:
atheism
Christianity
Classics
Essays
Nonfiction
Philosophy
Religion
Science
Spirituality
Theology
Shared by:Guest
Written by
Read by Qarie Marshall
Format: MP3
Bitrate: 160 Kbps
Unabridged
Dedicated as few men have been to the life of reason, Bertrand Russell has always been concerned with the basic questions to which religion also addresses itself - questions about man’s place in the universe and the nature of the good life, questions that involve life after death, morality, freedom, education, and sexual ethics. He brings to his treatment of these questions the same courage, scrupulous logic, and lofty wisdom for which his other work as philosopher, writer, and teacher has been famous. These qualities make the essays included in this collection perhaps the most graceful and moving presentation of the freethinker’s position since the days of Hume and Voltaire.
Whether listeners share or reject Bertrand Russell’s views, they will find this book an invigorating challenge to set notions, a masterly statement of a philosophical position, and a pure joy to listen to. This collection was edited, with Lord Russell’s full approval and cooperation, by Professor Paul Edwards of the Philosophy Department of New York University.
Length: 8 hrs and 1 min
Release date: 03-22-19
| Announce URL: | http://tracker.files.fm:6969/announce |
| This Torrent also has several backup trackers | |
| Tracker: | http://tracker.files.fm:6969/announce |
| Tracker: | http://open.acgnxtracker.com:80/announce |
| Tracker: | http://tracker2.dler.org:80/announce |
| Tracker: | udp://exodus.desync.com:6969/announce |
| Tracker: | udp://open.stealth.si:80/announce |
| Tracker: | udp://opentor.org:2710/announce |
| Tracker: | udp://tracker.dler.org:6969/announce |
| Tracker: | udp://tracker.opentrackr.org:1337/announce |
| Tracker: | udp://tracker.tiny-vps.com:6969/announce |
| Tracker: | udp://tracker.torrent.eu.org:451/announce |
| Creation Date: | Tue, 03 Oct 2023 01:34:57 +0200 |
| This is a Multifile Torrent | |
| Why I Am Not a Christian and Other Essays on Religion and Related Subjects.mp3 624.89 MBs | |
| 51ZCnnIR4tL._SL500_.jpg 50.56 KBs | |
| Combined File Size: | 624.94 MBs |
| Piece Size: | 256 KBs |
| Comment: | Updated by Science Audiobook |
| Info Hash: | f637ee4d22776375f4746c8c08a595f5d424a270 |
| Torrent Download: | Torrent Free Downloads |
| Tips: | Sometimes the torrent health info isn’t accurate, so you can download the file and check it out or try the following downloads. |
| Direct Download: | Start Direct Download |
| Tips: | You could try out alternative bittorrent clients. |
| Secured Download: | Download Files Now |
| AD: |
|
This post has 29 comments with rating of 5/5
October 2nd, 2023
A life of reason cannot lead a free thinker to atheism, and Russell lived recently enough to know the requisite science.
October 3rd, 2023
…said the unqualified buffoon to the long dead, reasoned atheist.
October 3rd, 2023
If you want tolerance you need to give some in return. We can fight when belief intersects public policy, until that point everyone’s beliefs ought to be their own. If you don’t want to hear Bertrand Russell’s opinions, may I suggest that you not read his book?
October 3rd, 2023
Ha ha ha. Chesterton used to kick his ass
October 3rd, 2023
AMEN brother! You know it is a SCAM when they make you pay $$$ to get to HEAVEN! Suckers!
October 3rd, 2023
There are BILLIONS of other people on this planet that will tell you that THEIR religion is the CORRECT one. So how do YOU know you picked the RIGHT ONE? You don’t ;)
October 3rd, 2023
Russell was quite honest in admitting his strong bias. (Incidentally, he was actually agnostic, not atheist. He regarded atheism as contradictory & unsustainable.)
His 1948 BBC debate w Frederick Copleston is certainly worth a listen/read. (Copleston, a Jesuit, philosopher, & historian of philos, wrote the greatest (thus far) multi-volume history of philos. It’d be great if it were in audio form.)
As to the many Earthlings in disagreement, looking for the correct 1, there are also many diverse & opposed political systems & ways of life; how do you know you’ve picked the right one, worth defending?
On reason as our guide, as Hobbes said, reason is a calculator. We can each exercise our rational faculties, & arrive at discrete, opposing conclusions. Many atheists, for inst, disagreed with Hitchens’ strong support for the Iraq War.
Anyway, Wittgenstein disagreed w Russell. He was a great admirer, friend & colleague of Russell, but used to say that Russell’s books should be bound in 2 covers, those dealing with mathematical philosophy in blue, & every student of philosophy should read them, while those dealing with popular subjects should be bound in red & no one should read them. A tad harsh.
October 3rd, 2023
Sorry, caesar, but this is the subject that makes me think less of you. It’s quite silly to think there is such an entity.
October 3rd, 2023
Well, prejudice can come in many forms (or bigotry moves in mysterious ways).
Quite apart from lowly me, on the issue of religion, you must think less of the greatest minds in human history; most of the human beings who have ever lived; and approx 93-96% of the world’s population. That’s one hell of a superiority complex.
It always comes down to necessary causation. How silly is base materialism?
October 3rd, 2023
I had that Bertrand Russell in the back of my cab.
October 3rd, 2023
Did he pay the fare, or merely question its existence?
October 3rd, 2023
@caesar963 as always, thank you for the education.
I’m sorry my fellow atheists often aren’t more compassionate people. It is sad that they feel any view that conflicts with their own is a threat.
October 3rd, 2023
thanks
October 3rd, 2023
My good caesar, those I deem the greatest minds are sceptics, agnostics and atheists, without failure.
If it makes you feel better, I still think you’re quite often the most intelligent in the room. Even when there are others.
October 3rd, 2023
Must add: Minds of modern times. In the some not so distant past you were quite suicidal if you denounced God(s), whether you believed or not.
October 3rd, 2023
And I don’t want to think from which orifice you got those statistics.
October 3rd, 2023
@caesar963 - Saying someone is actually agnostic, not atheist is incorrect. If someone believes in 0 gods, they are atheist. That’s it. If they claim to be agnostic, fine, but that is about knowledge, not belief. An agnostic still believes in 0 gods, hence the term agnostic atheist.
Also your argument from popularity doesn’t prove any god exists. In terms of the category of evidence, there is nothing to distinguish any one religion from the rest. This makes it inconceivable that one could be true and all the others false. There isn’t a consistent or coherent definition of God that everyone can agree on.
Comparing religion to political systems is dishonest. Political don’t claim to know what is unknown, such as a pathway to salvation in the afterlife. That is what religion does, using the foundational framework of faith, which can lead to contradictory positions. With politics we can see what works, try things out, look at other systems, etc. Can’t do that with religion. There is no way to know which religion is true, since they are all very similar in the arguments, explanations, and apologetics they use.
October 3rd, 2023
@ISeeded - Thx for the response. A few misunderstandings: “Saying someone is agnostic, not atheist is incorrect” - the point referred to here was on Russell’s agnosticism specifically. Amongst fellow philosophers, he said he would identify himself as agnostic (an epistemic issue, as atheism he & many others defined as positing a certain stance re-theism). But to “the ordinary man in the street” (& his “servants,” whom he sometimes deployed in his examples) he said he would identify himself as an atheist, because presumably he deemed it conceptually easier for “ordinary” people to get their heads around. We should probably cut him some slack here, he was an English aristocrat, and snobbery was a design flaw. Still is apparently, amongst that demographic.
“argum from pop doesn’t prove any god exists” - Not intended to. The point there was in response to the noble illodiini’s implication that a state of superiority pertains over people with a religious framework of values. My point was that that’s a hell of a lot of humanity (virtually all of it) against whom to feel superior. Not my bag.
“there is nothing to distinguish any one religion from the rest” - No. Some religions base their metaphysics & origins entirely within the context of the universe - bounded by space, time, matter & energy. Judeo-Christian (& Islamic) cosmology is transcendent. Transcendence, in terms of causation, is entirely more rational & defensible.
“This makes it inconceivable that one could be true & all the others false” - No, this doesn’t work. It’s always logical that one thing can be true, & others false.
“There isn’t a consistent or coherent definition of God that everyone can agree on” - There is a grounding definition that most religious people can agree on. It’s based in Classical theology or natural theology. That there is necessary causation which accounts for all contingent being (you cannot be the cause of your own existence, for inst). In Classical metaphysics, God is just the name we give to pure being (pure act - no potentiality) itself. The fundamental act of “to be” itself. This transcendent definition, most theists - & deists - can agree upon. Thereafter, there are theological & philosophical differences.
“Comparing religion to political systems is dishonest” - It’s entirely valid to compare all of these discrete value systems & ways of life.
“Political don’t claim know what is unknown, such as a pathway to salvation in afterlife” - Oh, indeed, it’s all unknown. As theology & philosophy affirm, God is unknowable: “The eye has not seen, the ear has not heard.” Regarding objective morality & the religious framework of values (the “pathway”), there’s a reason that the concept & doctrine of human rights originated in the Church. That the human person is intrinsically valuable - is sacred; that people are more than just material objects - which anti-theist regimes & ideologies could discard in their tens of millions. That is the road to hell, rather than the promised Utopia.
“faith, which can lead to contradictory positions” - Which was my point: virtually all of our reasoning around values can lead to contradictory conclusions & positions.
“With politics we can see what works, try things out, look at other systems, etc.” - Precisely. And where exactly do we see reasoned consensus or certainty? As I said above, we each exercise our faculties of reason, & arrive at discrete, opposing conclusions - all the time. I used the example of many atheists opposing Christopher Hitchens’ militant support for the Iraq War.
If there was one clear, rationally best way, wouldn’t we all have the same system & path/way? Instead, we have such wildly different approaches, such as: Anarchism; Liberal Democracy; Directorial; Federacy; Hybrid regime; Monarchy; City-state; Parliamentary; Presidential Republic; Semi-parliamentary; Semi-presidential; Mutualism; Libertarianism; Anarcho-syndicalism; Single party Communism or Socialism; etc. etc.
Don’t forget that people support, fight & die for these different systems & ways of life. And you have innumerable (reasoned) differences of political philosophy within the same country - or city.
It all leads to “contradictory positions,” - so, we don’t have a “consistent or coherent” reasoned approach.
“Can’t do that with religion” - It seems, in this context, we can’t do this with any value system or way of life - we can only compare - as you yourself maintain, rather than fix truth.
“religion…all v similar in arguments, explanations, & apologetics they use” - As in the example I adduced above, there can be foundational differences.
Apologies for my excessive length, & I appreciate that you seeded for days.
October 4th, 2023
@illodiini - Which “orifice?! My stats?!” You confounded scoundrel! You inveterate scallywag! You swindling sleeveen & spalpeen! (etc. etc.)
To the numbers, batman - & these are indeed (tony) stark: according to the researches of sociologists Keysar & Navarro-Rivera, & their review of numerous global studies on atheism, there are 450-500 m positive atheists & agnostics worldwide (7% of world pop). That’s the upper estimate. Alterna-findings put the figure at half that total, which is essentially margin of error territory.
And future projections? The numbers of positive atheist materialists is expected to decline further, both proportionately & numerically. It all comes down to reproduction. However, I’d caution that these are projections. Albeit with the best data.
The median age of the global population is 28. Two religions have a median age below that: Muslims (23) & Hindus (26). Other main religions have an older median age: Christians, 30; Buddhists, 34 & Jews, 36. The religiously unaffiliated come in at 34. (Don’t want to make you feel old, or anything.)
Hindus are set to grow by 27%, & Jews by 15% mainly because of the high birth rate among ultra-Orthodox. The religiously unaffiliated will see a 3% increase. But proportionately, these groupings will be smaller, because their growth is lower than the increase in the overall global population.
Quite apart from the whole Abrahamic crowd, there are well in excess of twice as many Hindus on the planet as there are atheist materialists. And possibly as many as 4 times.
So don’t allow what’s happening in parts of the West to disproportionately skew your perspective. With our massive population decline (& IQ decline) the future is likely to have far less use for us in the West than we p’haps imagine/hope. However, we do have meta facebook. And twatter X.
Again, ISeeded was concerned that I was deploying an argument from population, or popularity - not the case. That’d be too highfalutin’ for the likes of me. It’s not about being triumphalist, or anything like that. I think we’re all ultimately in a minority of 1.
Demographics determine it, & they indicate that religion - which was never inconsiderable - is decreasing in parts of W Eur & N Amer, & it’s growing everywhere else in the world.
Birth rates are key. Globally, according to Pew research, the religious demographic are generally younger & produce more children than those who have no religious affiliation.
Consequently, any decline in specifically formal, organised religion in Western countries is of negligible significance, in terms of the world picture. Bluntly, your world view is only important if you reproduce. Anything else is moot. And folks who are optimistic for the future tend to have kids.
While the religiously unaffiliated currently make up 16% of global pop, only 10% of the world’s newborns were born to religiously unaffiliated mothers betw 2010 & 2015. (Of course, the term “religiously unaffiliated” does not mean positive atheist; this group might not be a part of official, organised religion, but they variously describe themselves as “spiritual,” or “seekers” - there can also be New Age beliefs, Wicca, Buddhist-Catholic practitioners, etc. etc. - people who mix, match & meld beliefs creatively/dizzyingly).
Global studies indicate that atheism may be in decline due to irreligious countries having the lowest birth rates in the world & religious countries having higher birth rates in general. (Zuckerman, Phil - Atheism: Contemporary Numbers & Patterns”. In Martin, Michael (ed.). The Cambridge Companion to Atheism. pp. 47–66.)
This would seem to be intuitively correct. Optimistic people, those with a religious, moral frame of values, will tend to have children. And even more children. Whereas, when you think that life is without purpose or meaning (this is intended generally, not meant to be a description of all atheists) - if you think you’re a purposeless meatball, sans free will, hurtling meaninglessly into the empty void - you’re just not going to have kids.
But still, be of good cheer, illodiini (& call us when u hit that last lock).
China (which was a militantly anti-theist state where, as under many such oppressive ideologies globally, it could be suicide to have a religious frame of values) has seen a huge religious revival in recent yrs & is forecasted to have the world’s largest Christian population by 2030. The number of Chinese Protestants has grown by an average of 10% annually since 1979, to betw 93 million & 115 million. There are reckoned to be another 10-12 million Catholics.
Contrastingly, the number of Jedi Knights in the UK has declined sharply. Jedi was the most popular alternative religion with more than 390,000 people (0.7% of pop) registered in the 2001 UK census; however, by 2011, this had reduced to 176,632. I think this is attributable to the declining quality of the movies, & the fact that it actually takes many yrs to become a Jedi Knight, with some notoriously arduous training - combined with the ever-present risk of going over to the Dark Side (which is probably where many of those in excess of 200,000 Jedis ended up. Peace be upon them).
Interestingly, amongst the religiously unaffiliated, 70% live in countries where they are in the majority, including China, the Czech Republic & North Korea.
October 4th, 2023
Your last paragraph kind of proves my point. One conforms with the society, whatever the system.
Still, while I’m really ready to be proven wrong, nothing in your text, as pretty as it is, makes tiniest bit of difference. People are bad and flawed animals. And there certainly is no supernatural, all powerful, entity. Call him/her/it what you will.
October 4th, 2023
The exercise was merely to respond to your charge that the stats may have been somehow contrived - or more colourfully, extracted them from an “aperture.” You know I’m only a simple, honest country boy. But you’re still a An spailpín fánach, of course.
“One conforms w society, whatever the system” - But that’s being proven wrong - in China, of all places. Even though it can cost them socially, religion is now growing (as seen a couple of paras up). They’re going against their social “programming” & freely choosing not to conform in this aspect of their lives. It’s a dimension of our free will in operation. Where there’s life, there’s hope.
However, in even more controlling, extreme anti-theist ideological systems, such as North Korea, atheism is indeed ruthlessly imposed, & people have no access to information. Their free will is inhibited & impeded. (Similar to the Soviet empire & elsewhere.)
It always comes down to necessary causation. Base materialism is logically contradictory, but I’m not trying to impose a position on you, it’s just an interesting dimension of life, which is why people discuss it. We often go in with our minds made up, merely looking for confirmation of our biases.
October 4th, 2023
Wow @Caesar enjoyed the exchange of ideas but somehow I think you are a closet sophist.
October 4th, 2023
I must be the measure of all fings*, in that case. In a nice closet for myself.
*Authentic cockney pronunciation.
“Cockney” probably originates from the Norman word for a sugar cake - cocaigne. Normans called London the ‘Land of Sugar Cake,’ & the name has stuck. In the 1360s, the writer Wm Langland also used the term ‘cockeney’ to mean cock’s egg.
October 4th, 2023
Hope you do not mean a cockney carsey. I do enjoy your thoughts, comments and ruminations.
October 4th, 2023
Very smooth.
October 6th, 2023
You really need to meet a girl
October 6th, 2023
Married (Calpurnia) - with kids. So there might still be some1 out there for ya, ol’ froot.
October 17th, 2023
commenting only to be able to re-track caesar963 comments later. I love them. :)
October 18th, 2023
Superb Upload…. please share more of Bertrand Russell if possible.
Add a comment