In an Open Thread comment beriukay mentioned that he's reading C.S. Lewis' Mere Christianity. I've been reading it too, for interesting reasons.
In my case it so happened that I started discussing faith with a long-time online friend whose spiritual views I didn't yet know, and he turned out to be a Christian with a high regard for the Bible, who also has an interest in science. As our discussion turned to our readings on spirituality, I acknowledged (I think it was me) that I probably spent more time on books that reinforce my point of view than on books that challenge it, perhaps a case of confirmation bias. (I've been exposed to many poor arguments for Christianity, and dismissed them; but possibly that was largely a function of having started out with that bottom line already written and picking arguments I wouldn't have much trouble refuting.)
In the spirit of experiment we agreed to a "trade" - he would read (thoughtfully and with an open mind) a book of my choosing on reasons to doubt faith, and I'd do the same with a book he chose on Christianity.
So the idea here is to pick a book that's the "best argument from the other side" (as in quote 3 here).
I recommended The God Delusion - I'm not sure if that's the best choice given the above intent, but it's what came to mind on the spot.
Would you make a different choice? If so, what?
The thing about books like The God Delusion is that they activate his mental defense mechanisms to prepare himself for any well-thought out, logical arguments. You need to start with something which isn't as blatantly screaming "this book wants to destroy everything you care about because it merely happens to be right!" So I'm somewhat surprised people haven't realized this and gone with the following option:
Gödel, Escher, Bach (by Douglas Hofstadter)
The brilliant thing about this book is that it subtly changes people's worldview without them even realizing it to begin with. It doesn't assert anything which sounds explicitly controversial, and they start digging down the rabbit hole. Because it's honestly fun.
From there, you can feed him a steady diet of materials which implicitly assert a materialistic view of reality. In some time, he'll wake up and realize that he has been compromised, and he hasn't been smote by Zeus or lost all sense of moral direction and purpose either.
It's so bloody unfair that you'd think Hofstadter was some sort of advanced disciple of the Dark Arts, but it is really just that good.
In retrospect, that was really what did it for me. I held on to various forms of wishful thinking for a long time, because it seemed to me that minds and matter were fundamentally separate things, I couldn't see how it could be any other way--though I knew at that point that religious claims tended to be laughable, so I had some kind of vaguely half-assed do-it-yourself wishing-makes-it-so I believed in--and that implied the whole universe of dualism. Somehow I came away from it having relinquished that idea, and it, more than any other one book I'd read b... (read more)