So I escaped my home for a few hours on Saturday by chloroforming my wife and stapling the children to the carpet and I made my way to Barnes and Noble bookstore nearby for a few hours.
I love going to the bookstore and sitting down in those big chairs with a hot chocolate. I remember the first time I ordered a hot chocolate there and the girl behind the counter said “Vente?” I said “No. Just a plain hot chocolate.” She laughed at me. I’m not talking a polite titter. I’m talking this girl laughed at me. And then she explained condescendingly that Vente means large.
Oh, said the large uncouth cretin. “Extra vente if you have it.”
Anyway, I did my typical bookstore thing Saturday by picking up any book that seems even remotely interesting to me but in my travels I noticed something. The famed scientist Francis Collins’ book, “The Language of God: A Scientist Presents Evidence for Belief” was in the “Christianity” section.
Yet I also noticed that Richard Dawkins’ book “The God Delusion” was placed prominently in the Science section.
I wonder why the discrepancy? So let me get this straight. If you’re a scientist who finds that science leads to God you’re voted off the Science island and relegated to the Christianity section. But if science leads you to believe in nothingness, then you’re cool enough to stay in the Science section.
And to add insult to injury, Collins, who decoded the Genome, is a far more accomplished scientist than Dawkins.
Now I can take a few consolations from this. One, there were more people in the Christianity section. And two, the science section is right near the bathrooms.
And before you go crazy calling 911 on me for stapling my children to the carpet, I didn’t really do that. I used Krazy Glue.
January 12, 2009 at 4:39 pm
That's strange. In every bookstore I've been to here, including Barnes & Nobles, Dawkins and company are filed in the Atheism section, which comprises about one or two shelves in the religion section, right above the Judaism section and to the immediate left of Hinduism and Buddhism.
Perhaps your local bookstore is misfiling their merchandise by mistake? I once found Bibles filed under Christian fiction, brought it to the store's attention, and they were very polite in rectifying the mistake. Some of the employees honestly don't know any better.
January 12, 2009 at 4:51 pm
I’ve found that duct tape works better. No need to hold them down until the glue dries.
January 12, 2009 at 5:02 pm
Collins' book is incredible. The placement is the same at my B&N- that is, Dawkins in science, Collins in religion. The symbolism is not lost on me.
January 12, 2009 at 6:45 pm
Why should Dawkins be in the religion section? Atheism isn't a religion. It's in the science section because most of the people who are looking for it will look for it there. The same with Collins's book – most people would probably look for it in the Christianity section before looking for it in the science section.
It's not a conspiracy, it's just marketing. B&N doesn't care which books you buy as long as you're buying from them. They are simply catering to their clientele.
The fact that Collins is a more accomplished scientist than Dawkins does not mean that his book should be placed in the science section. If the book is religious or philosophical then it belongs in the relevant section of the bookstore no matter who wrote it.
I hasten to add that I'm not familiar with the content of either book, though I understand Dawkins does strain to make "scientific" arguments for atheism. Does Collins do the same for Christianity?
January 12, 2009 at 9:55 pm
I haven’t read Collins’ book, though it sounds interesting. But if anyone here is looking for an excellent book on faith and modern science from a Christian perspective, I give the highest recommendation to “Modern Physics and Ancient Faith” by Stephen Barr.
January 12, 2009 at 10:12 pm
I left my brood home with dh for a good 5 hours while I took a sewing class and had a lovely lunch out. A grownup French lunch, which I ate while reading an adult book (no pictures!) and sitting in front of a non-child-friendly fireplace.
It was marvelous.
January 12, 2009 at 10:33 pm
It seems like these decisions are rather arbitrary. Atheism having a shelf in the religion section is both ironic and appropriate, as it is often as much of a religion as any other sort (and more of one than several). But it defnitely unbalanced that Dawkins’ scientific case against God would be in science, and Collins’ scientific case for God would be in religion. Oh well.
A family friend, Roy Shoeman, complained to me once that his book, Salvation is from the Jews was never put in the Judaism section, because he is a Jewish Catholic, and yet The Gift of the Jews, which was not so much religious as historical, was. These things will rarely be entirely fair, unfortunately.
~Zee
January 12, 2009 at 11:20 pm
I have read and own Collin’s book. It is NOT a scientific case for God. It is an argument against Intelligent Design Theory, and concludes that science is powerless to prove or disprove God’s existence. It then presents C.S. Lewis’ moral argument for God’s existence.
Richard Dawkin’s book, likewise, is NOT a scientific case against God. It is a philosophical and moral case against him. For instance, the book’s only disproof of God’s existence is the “Ultimate 747 Gambit,” which argues that if the universe is complex and unlikely, and if God created the universe, then God would have to be even more complex and unlikely than the universe. The rest of the book uses historical examples to support the claim that religion makes folks do bad things.
Why it would be filed under science is lost upon me. It’s not about science at all.
January 12, 2009 at 11:37 pm
Ah, thank you. I had the wrong impression of the work then. So, basically, neither is scientific, and neither should be in science, but using CS Lewis’ argument for God hardly seems like a sufficient reason to put it in Christianity specifically, and not a complete one for religion in general.
Of course, you forget, Eo, that if an atheist makes a case it is by nature scientific…
just kidding…
~Zee
January 13, 2009 at 3:20 am
I think the religion island is the cooler island to be on anyway. 😉
And I will second Mike’s vote on the duct tape.
January 13, 2009 at 9:18 am
In one of the largest bookshops in Vienna the choice of non fiction books in english is quite small and mostly comprises of two sections: the Obama section and the Dawkins section.
I ended up using the gift coupon for a small xylophone, it sounds much more intelligent than reading.
January 13, 2009 at 6:34 pm
Just as an FYI to you and your readers, Matthew, and as one who shares in the joys of both browsing in large bookstores and reading in general:
Barnes & Noble partners with Starbucks for its cafés now (didn't used to until about two years ago.) Starbucks has given significant corporate donations each year to Planned Parenthood, and I believe to a couple of other groups that support or perform abortions and contraception.
Of course there is the argument that so many large corporations currently donate each year to abortion providers (e.g., Microsoft and the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation are HUGE donors) that it' impossible to make a principled boycott, I at least feel I can avoid Starbucks like the plague and keep my $4 from going to abortion mills. Besides, Starbuck's is way overpriced and the coffee isn't any good–they burn those beans to a crisp before they grind and use them! Yuck!