'Let me start by laying my cards on the table. I’m the son of a missionary. My father’s parents were atheists and scientists. He, in adolescent rebellion, became a Christian; I, ditto, became an atheist.'
I would like to be able to determine the merits to me of this book (or otherwise) through other reviews than this obviously very biased one, but there don't seem to be many that don't take an clear 'position' themselves. Maybe wait until it appears on Amazon ...
On the topic, I enjoyed reading Koestler's "The Sleepwalkers" - I found that his treatment of Classical and Renaissance thought was particularly good, even though the volume itself is now rather elderly.
A short article on Koestler's motivations:
@v4169sgr Thank you.
@cyrilpedia
Well worth a re-read, in my opinion.
I used to teach some of this stuff: while Arthur certainly did have some idiosyncrasies, not only is his grasp of the detail impressively solid (for the time and the references he had) but his view on how religion and science intertwined such that the separation between them was gossamer-thin in the time of Pythagoras, and again in the during the life of Kepler, is very thought-provoking.