Skip to main content

Really Really Big Questions


My skeptical kid's book Really Really Big Questions was one of the top fifty winter reads in yesterday's Independent (it was number five, in fact):

Go here.

'This is one book I wish I'd written,' admits Joe Craig of Dr Stephen Law's philosophical compendium, which any child over the age of eight should find some treasure in. 'It is definitely worth spending time on every page of this life-enhancing book. Every home should have a copy,' he adds.

The book aims to develop independent, critical thinking about weird and wacky stuff, from fairies to spoon-bending to God. A sort of skeptical primer that aims to be a lot of fun at the same time...

Publisher Kingfisher

How much? Normally £12.99. But currently just £6.49 from amazon uk:



and also from amazon US.

Labels

Labels:

Comments

Martin said…
I was introduced to philosophy at age sixteen. I wish it had been earlier, and firmly believe that children can get a lot out of the subject. I shall seek out a child of the right age that needs a Christmas present so I can add it to their list, and get a sneaky read of the book myself before it gets wrapped.
November 15, 2009 at 2:05 PM
Stephen Law said…
Thanks Martin - that's one sold at least.
November 15, 2009 at 4:57 PM
Flea said…
I'm ordering my own copy today. But, is it going to be translated into spanish? When?

"¿Tú, en qué piensas?" ("The ph. files") was a great book that amazed my nieces and nephews (and me) and I only hope to repeat the deed!
November 16, 2009 at 10:40 AM
The Atheist Missionary said…
Stephen, this stuff is veritable gold. I just finished read a superb book called Curious Minds (edited by John Brockman) which is fascinating collection of essays by some of the world's leading scientists about their childhood experiences. If there was one overriding theme that ran through many of the stories it was that their parents provided an atmosphere conducive to learning. Leaving books like this "lying around" is one way to foster such an atmosphere (electric guitars also seem to be a hit at my place).

Really Really Big Questions will be under our secular Christmas tree this year.

Congratulations for your recognition and keep up the great work.
November 17, 2009 at 2:27 PM
Stephen Law said…
Thanks AM - I appreciate that.
November 17, 2009 at 2:28 PM
Sonja said…
Will be purchasing two books, one for each of my granddaughters. Really appreciate books like this for young people - there is not much to choose from for their age. Thank you so much for recognizing that parents need help introducing philosphy to their children - and it is pretty much non-existent in public school curriculums in the USA.
November 23, 2009 at 7:04 AM
Stephen Law said…
Thanks Sonja - that's good to hear. Hope they like it.
November 23, 2009 at 10:04 AM
PrepareforAutomation said…
Why is the hardcover version almost $100?
August 3, 2015 at 5:23 AM
PrepareforAutomation said…
Why is the hardcover version almost $100?
August 3, 2015 at 5:23 AM
Stephen Law said…
h/b out of print I guess, hence 'rare' and thus expensive
August 3, 2015 at 8:23 AM
Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

EVIDENCE, MIRACLES AND THE EXISTENCE OF JESUS

(Published in Faith and Philosophy 2011. Volume 28, Issue 2, April 2011. Stephen Law. Pages 129-151) EVIDENCE, MIRACLES AND THE EXISTENCE OF JESUS Stephen Law Abstract The vast majority of Biblical historians believe there is evidence sufficient to place Jesus’ existence beyond reasonable doubt. Many believe the New Testament documents alone suffice firmly to establish Jesus as an actual, historical figure. I question these views. In particular, I argue (i) that the three most popular criteria by which various non-miraculous New Testament claims made about Jesus are supposedly corroborated are not sufficient, either singly or jointly, to place his existence beyond reasonable doubt, and (ii) that a prima facie plausible principle concerning how evidence should be assessed – a principle I call the contamination principle – entails that, given the large proportion of uncorroborated miracle claims made about Jesus in the New Testament documents, we should, in the absence of indepen...
159 comments
Read more

Sye - nowhere to run to, baby.

SYE RESPONDS TO MY PRECEEDING POST: @ Stephen, Alright, how about we go this way. Since you, and perhaps many of your cohorts are philosphically trained, why don't you show me how it's done. It would appear that your biggest problem with my proof is that you feel that the argument I offer "The impossibility of the contrary," for the truth of my premise that "God is the necessary precondition for intelligibiliy," is not, in fact, an argument. Alright in the format you are requesting of me: premise 1 premise 2 premise 3 (...) premise n Therefore: conclusion please prove to me, that "The impossibility of the contrary" is not an argument. Cheers, Sye MY RESPONSE TO SYE: Sye You misunderstand. I am not saying you don't have an argument. Maybe you do (though of course I don't think you have a good argument - for there are not the resources on the page behind the continue button to support your conclusion). I am saying I cannot figure out what th...
153 comments
Read more

The Evil God Challenge and the "classical" theist's response

On another blog, FideCogitActio, some theists of a "classical" stripe (that's to say, like Brian Davies, Edward Feser) are criticisng the Evil God Challenge (or I suppose, trying to show how it can be met, or sidestepped). The main post includes this: In book I, chapter 39 , Aquinas argues that “there cannot be evil in God” (in Deo non potest esse malum). Atheists like Law must face the fact that, if the words are to retain any sense, “God” simply cannot be “evil”. As my comments in the thread at Feser’s blog aimed to show, despite how much he mocks “the privation theory of evil,” Law himself cannot escape its logic: his entire argument requires that the world ought to appear less evil if it is to be taken as evidence of a good God. Even though he spurns the idea that evil is a privation of good, his account of an evil world is parasitic on a good ideal; this is no surprise, though, since all evil is parasitic on good ( SCG I, 11 ). Based on the conclusions of se...
446 comments
Read more