This forthcoming posthumous book by Ronald Dworkin looks pretty cool. Amazon's description:
Dworkin joins Einstein's sense of cosmic mystery and beauty to the claim that value is objective, independent of mind, and immanent in the world. He rejects the metaphysics of naturalism--that nothing is real except what can be studied by the natural sciences. Belief in God is one manifestation of this deeper worldview, but not the only one. The conviction that God underwrites value presupposes a prior commitment to the independent reality of that value--a commitment that is available to nonbelievers as well. So theists share a commitment with some atheists that is more fundamental than what divides them.
I think this way of looking at things might explain why religious people tend to like Christopher Hitchens (on religion) and Philip Pullman (to be fair, also an awesome fantasy writer in his own right) so much more than the other new atheists. Hitchens and Pullman are both at root deeply morally offended by religion. It's like reading someone on your own team telling you to get your act together.
Dworkin's carving of logic space leaves open the possibility of theistic naturalism. Do any philosophers of note fit there?
Paul Churchland sometimes writes perceptively that the lay-person's philosophy of mind is not strictly speaking Cartesian Dualism but rather usually better described as a kind of naturalism that includes ghostly entities (which, though very attenuated, still take up space and are causally connected to the non-spiritual world). However, I think extending this kind of naturalism to include God would probably carry with it a pretty obnoxious version of Divine Command Theory (where might is right). Unfortunately, it's not just laypeople that subscribe to such a thing, but I don't know if any decent philosophers have argued themselves into believing it.
Recent Comments