New Atheism Analysis: looking for another POV

For context and to be open and fair for this post, I *do not* identify as any kind of theist, although I was rendered in a "non-denominationalist" environment. I'm trying to progress through the following book (however, I've basically given up on it besides throwing it a life-line via this post): **"God is Dead" and I Don't Feel So Good Myself:**...(David, Andrew) I'm attempting to read this because I like to at least *try* to approach "things" with a fair, developed perspective. I'm a non-theist and typically want to understand things from a Scientific point-of-view (i.e. is it reproducible, quantifiable, ...). I've read the following parts and now have discontinued reading the book because of them. I'll present some here and implore someone to better explain or justify the words provided herein. As a side-note: I don't want this post being seen as a "taken out of context" situation. So, I implore readers to see the before/after, if need be. **Excerpt 1**: > That is to say, the believer responds to our cognitive limitations > with an inward turn, whereas the nonbeliever redoubles his calculative > ambitions. It is almost as if the believer is more skeptical than the > skeptic in that he is skeptical of concepts themselves. **Excerpt 2**: > Yet in this abandonment, the contemplative has access to values that > the contemporary atheist tends to forget, underestimate, and ignore. > These values include a healthy skepticism towards abstract > reductionism and scientism, sympathy for paradoxical nature of truth > and its existential expression, and appreciation for the literary and > figurative nature of mind. There's a lot going on here, but I completely disagree with these words and am troubled to continue reading this book. Can someone please offer an explanation for these words or some salvageable reason to continue reading?