"I am more than ever convinced that the question of what it is to be a human person is the biggest intellectual question of our day."I am inclined to agree, and also when the same writer says,
"... there is a major intellectual battle going on, especially in the West, between those who adopt a purely materialist view of human persons and those who believe that there is a distinctive reality and value about human minds, and that such minds far transcend their physical embodiments both in their nature and in their moral worth. [...] It is about what it means to be human and about the distinctive importance of human personhood in our physical universe. It is a metaphysical battle, a battle about what sorts of things exist and about whether persons are distinctive sorts of things that are different from purely material things. This metaphysical battle is real."
Anonymous users wishing to paste in the comments box need first to select 'preview', then close the preview box. When posting your comments please give a full name and location. Comments without this information may be deleted.
So, who is it by?
ReplyDeleteI agree that the spritual nature of human beings is an essential issue in the cultural war. "Naturalism" (but born - natus - of what? and how?) leads to despair and moral arbitrariness.
Mark B.
With apologies to the Ugley Vicar, I will first address Mark B.'s comments here, then make another post to answer you, John.
ReplyDeleteMark B., "moral arbitrariness" ? Seriously? Can you name me one system of ethics, one religion, one anything at all that is not an arbitrary choice?
Seriously. Even if you want to claim revealed truths, revelation, it is an arbitrary choice on the acceptee's part as to whether the (alleged) revelation is accepted as such, or dismissed as a mere fancy or temptation from the devil or so on.
Please. There is no non-arbitrary system; all systems must rely on arbitrary premises taken at onset.
"despair"? Puh-leeeze. Quite a few of us atheists are very life-affirming.
Now, sorry for the delay, John, I will answer your remarks here. I really think you are very wrong on this. I think you vastly over-simplifly what a "materialist" viewpoint is here; just for example, there are lightyears of difference and distance between my own atheist materialist metaphysics and the overly simplistic metaphysics of some sort of cod logical positivism pushed by atheist Sam Harris.
ReplyDeleteSecond, seriously? Materialism versus religion as the great battle? Do you really - really - see yourself on the same side as Fred Phelps, Pastor Terry Jones (of wannabe Qur'an-burning fame) or Ayatollah Khomeni? Very serious question here.
I realise you probably find my own rermarks on theologies silly or unknowledgeable, but I find you greatly over-simplify things here, with no sense of history; history shows us that religion can be every bit as dangerous to the individual as any sordid authoritarian form of secularism; witness the birth of the Church of England for example, and all those people killing each other in the name of religion for being Protestant or Catholic.
And that example is hardly the most lurid example of religion grinding down people as people into the dust and treating them like robots to whom orders are issued.
I also wonder how your own personal theology handles Jews. Saved, unsaved, needing salvation, damned for their non-acceptance, or what?
No; the real battles lie elsewhere, and are more complex than you allow of here.
Gurdur, the quote doesn't even mention religion.
ReplyDelete"Gurdur, the quote doesn't even mention religion"
ReplyDeleteJohn Richardson, this is akin to dragging an elephant into the room and then refusing to acknowledge it. As it is, I see I am not the only commentator here to take it that way; Mark B. also took it that way.
Would you mind citing who said the original, and where?
I also point out the false dichotomy in in the quotation between
a) a purely materialist view of human persons
and
b)those who believe that there is a distinctive reality and value about human minds
There is no incompatibility necessitated between the two stances / choices mentioned; there is, however, reliance obviously going on on unspoken premises.
Given your own oft-given veiwpoint, given your introductory remarks about "... this Christmas Eve, when Christians ...", and given the false dichotomy there, I can hardly be blamed for assuming it's yet another religious blast about atheist materialism; I would be surprised if it wasn't, though I am quite willing to accept it on its face value if it isn't.
So I wait agog to find out who said it and in what context.
Gurdur, you need to be a little less inclined to assume!
ReplyDeleteI'll take your response at face value: "There is no incompatibility necessitated between the two stances / choices mentioned ..."
Fine, that's your view. The author would disagree.
As a PS to Gurdur, the quote above was in antithesis to this:
ReplyDelete"You, your joys and sorrows, your memories and your ambitions, your sense of personal identity and free will, are in fact no more than the behaviour of a vast assembly of nerve-cells and their associated molecules."
That's the initial context.
John Richardson, I think it might well be nice if you might to respond to my previous request and cite the original author and context?
ReplyDeleteAs it is, I am being asked to judge in a context of a whole lot of missing information, and I don't think you have given the entire context.
My comments stand as written, and it simply makes no sense for me to say anything more till you cite author and context fully. As for criticising me for "assuming too much", I find it peculiar you then want me to assume even more by going on on incomplete information, and I won't.
As for your implicit negation of it being yet another religion versus atheist materialism battle, what it might be is some cluey sort of atheist criticising overly simplistic logical positivism, but since I have already acknowledged such a possibility, then I am simply not willing to play games here, and I leave my remarks as said still standing, given the greater possibility of it being only another religion versus atheist materialism battle, till the actual information is given.
I again stress I am not the only commentator to take your remarks in that way, so I find your response odd.
Gurdur, there are times when I think people are so inclined to ad hominem reactions that it is best to let something stand without attribution - indeed, that can sometimes make things more interesting as people can wind up in surprising agreement or disagreement.
ReplyDeleteHowever, you are not being "asked to judge" anything. You are welcome to react, or not react. As you'll have noticed, I have put up the 'antithesis' to the original quote, which I posted because I found it interesting.
All this, as you say, "might be ... some cluey sort of atheist criticising overly simplistic logical positivism", or it might not. It doesn't really matter. What matters, as far as I'm concerned, is that it was an interesting observation. It was a 'thought for the day' (though you have to be a Radio 4 listener to spot the reference), not a fully developed thesis.
Enjoy it!
"Mark B., "moral arbitrariness" ? Seriously? Can you name me one system of ethics, one religion, one anything at all that is not an arbitrary choice?"
ReplyDeleteChristianity grounds ethics in God's perfect will (divine command theory), and answers the'Euthyphro dilemma' by basing God's commands on his perfect nature of love.
"Seriously. Even if you want to claim revealed truths, revelation, it is an arbitrary choice on the acceptee's part as to whether the (alleged) revelation is accepted as such, or dismissed as a mere fancy or temptation from the devil or so on."
Really? Suspend your disbelief, if you can, and ask: what do we know about God's sovereign grace? Or ask yourself, as a doubting atheist, 'how far are my choices my own?'
"Please. There is no non-arbitrary system; all systems must rely on arbitrary premises taken at onset."
Then you have joined company with miserable Hobbes. But Jesus Christ has overcome the Leviathan.
'"despair"? Puh-leeeze. Quite a few of us atheists are very life-affirming.'
So far. I was talking about the heat-death of the cosmos, not your current psychological state. Happy Christmas to you.
Mark B.