Who ought to hold claim to the more dangerous idea--Charles Darwin or C. S. Lewis? Daniel Dennett argued for Darwin in Darwin's Dangerous Idea (Touchstone Books, 1996). In this book Victor Reppert champions C. S. Lewis.Darwinists attempt to use science to show that our world and its inhabitants can be fully explained as the product of a mindless, purposeless system of physics and chemistry. But Lewis claimed in his argument from reason that if such materialism or naturalism were true then scientific reasoning itself could not be trusted. Victor Reppert believes that Lewis's arguments have been too often dismissed. In C. S. Lewis's Dangerous Idea Reppert offers careful, able development of Lewis's thought and demonstrates that the basic thrust of Lewis's argument from reason can bear up under the weight of the most serious philosophical attacks. Charging dismissive critics, Christian and not, with ad hominem arguments, Reppert also revisits the debate and subsequent interaction between Lewis and the philosopher Elizabeth Anscombe. And addressing those who might be afflicted with philosophical snobbery, Reppert demonstrates that Lewis's powerful philosophical instincts perhaps ought to place him among those other thinkers who, by contemporary standards, were also amateurs: Socrates, Plato, Aristotle, Aquinas, Descartes, Spinoza, Locke and Hume. But even more than this, Reppert's work exemplifies the truth that the greatness of Lewis's mind is best measured, not by his ability to do our thinking for us, but by his capacity to provide sound direction for taking our own thought further up and further in. An alternative title for this book might be Gunfight at the I'm-OK Corral, a Shoot-out: Darwin and the Materialists versus C. S. Lewis and the Theists . And for philosopher Reppert, it might be a toss-up over whether Darwin or Lewis had the more dangerous idea. Although Lewis hasn't been much respected as a professional philosopher, Reppert defends so calling him by noting that many of the greatest moral teachers, including Christ and Socrates, wouldn't of late have been considered professional philosophers, either. Reppert discusses Darwin, with his notion about how the natural world is the source and be-all of the universe, but he gives the decision to Lewis and his argument that the naturalist-materialist point of view of Darwin and others negates itself: "If we explain reason naturalistically, we shall end up explaining it away." Reppert stops short of defending the claim that arguments from reason close the case against naturalism, but he does make a well-grounded apology on behalf of Lewis' dangerous idea. Donna Chavez Copyright © American Library Association. All rights reserved Reppert provides his readers a fresh, clear, and able exposition and defense of what he calls C. S. Lewis's dangerous idea: that a purely naturalistic account of the world cannot explain the reality of human rationality. A fine work. Well-written, the book glows with Reppert's engaging style and ability as an incisive thinker. This book represents a real advance in apologetics generally and Lewis scholarship specifically, and I highly recommend it to anyone interested in either. -- R. Keith Loftin, Christian Scholar's Review, Winter 2009 "Victor Reppert's book is a delight on two counts. First, it is asophisticated and well-informed discussion of C. S. Lewis and hisapologetic arguments, demolishing some well-known myths and demonstrating that Lewis had important and serious things to say as a philosopher. Second, and perhaps even more important, Reppert honors Lewis by developing and defending one of Lewis's central arguments against naturalism in a way that is both rigorous and readable, paying attention both to the objections raised against Lewis by Elisabeth Anscombe and to contemporary philosophical debates. This makes the book an important andoriginal contribution to Christian apologetics in its own right." -- C. Stephen Evans, University Professor of Philosophy and Humanities, Baylor University "According to the standard account, chapter three of C. S. Lewis's Miracles, his argument against naturalism, is a philosophical embarrassment, a beguiling house of cards that collapses at the merest breath of rigorous critique. Victor Reppert, in C. S. Lewis's Dangerous Idea, certainly proves thestandard account wrong. But he does more than that: he deepens and extends Lewis's argument against naturalism and makes an intellectually exciting and persuasive case of his own. Reppert's book is philosophical revisionism at its finest." -- Peter J. Kreeft and Ronald K. Tacelli, authors of Handbook of Christian Apologetics "One mark of a great apologist is that the apologist's central arguments are reappropriated and refined profitably by later thinkers. One mark of an outstanding Christian philosopher is the ability to do such work in a manner that meets the contemporary demands of philosophical argument. Victor Repp