The Utility of Religion: Mill, Nietzsche, and James
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
The Utility of Religion: Mill, Nietzsche, and James By Copyright 2014 Brad Musil Submitted to the graduate degree program in Philosophy and the Graduate Faculty of the University of Kansas in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy. ________________________________ Chairperson James Woelfel ________________________________ Ben Eggleston ________________________________ Thomas Tuozzo ________________________________ Dale Dorsey ________________________________ Sandra Zimdars-Swartz Date Defended: May 16, 2014 The Dissertation Committee for Brad Musil certifies that this is the approved version of the following dissertation: The Utility of Religion: Mill, Nietzsche, and James ________________________________ Chairperson James Woelfel Date approved: May 16, 2014 ii ABSTRACT In contrast to the truth of religion, the utility of religion has been a historically-underappreciated subject of philosophical scholarship and everyday discourse, and this dissertation aims to draw more attention to the fruits of religion in everyday life. The utility of religion is an expansive topic and, in the interest of offering a reasonable treatment of it, the dissertation focuses on outlining the insights offered by three nineteenth-century philosophers in particular, for whom the utility of religion was an important issue: John Stuart Mill (1806-1873), Friedrich Nietzsche (1844-1900), and William James (1842-1910); this is accomplished by devoting a chapter to a text authored by each of these thinkers: 1) Utility of Religion (Mill), 2) The Anti-Christ (Nietzsche), and 3) The Varieties of Religious Experience (James). In these works, Mill, Nietzsche, and James defend a variety of positions regarding the utility of religion, and they offer an illuminating survey of the many relevant issues (e.g. the relationship between religion and morality and the relationship between religion and happiness). The dissertation advances conclusions regarding the utility of religion in view of the textual analyses offered, and it highlights the significance of—and a vision for—future scholarship devoted to the topic in light of these conclusions. Specifically, it proposes that we have good reasons to question the moral advantages frequently ascribed to religion, but that religion is nonetheless vitally useful for some—and perhaps many—individuals who would otherwise never be able to find happiness. Although it is possible for some to experience lasting happiness without the aid of religion (contrary to what James suggests), others require religious salvation in order to find peace of mind (contrary to what Mill, to a lesser extent, and Nietzsche, to a greater extent, suggest). iii ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS Writing this dissertation was one of the hardest things I have ever done, and it was a humbling learning experience, to say the least. However, I feel a great sense of satisfaction and accomplishment in having completed it. I owe many people thanks for seeing me through the process. First, I would like to thank the members of my dissertation committee: Ben Eggleston, Thomas Tuozzo, Dale Dorsey, Sandra Zimdars-Swartz, and, especially, my advisor, James Woelfel. Perhaps more than anyone else, Professor Woelfel’s wisdom, guidance, and scholarly example have helped me mature as a scholar. Moreover, his patience with me and his feedback on the various drafts of this dissertation were invaluable. I would also like to thank Professor Gene Fendt and Professor Yōzan Mosig, who were particularly formidable in my early intellectual development as an undergraduate student at the University of Nebraska at Kearney; both helped kindle my interest in philosophy, and their authentic and passionate personalities inspired me to stay true to myself. I cannot neglect to mention a kind of historical debt of gratitude to John Stuart Mill, Friedrich Nietzsche, and William James, whose many insights regarding the utility of religion form the foundation of the dissertation that follows. Finally, I would like to thank my family (my wife, Paula; my children, Abigail, Jack, and Sophia; my parents, Steve and Jane; my sister, Brittany; my father-in-law, Paul; and my mother-in-law, Susan) and my closest friends (Josh Herian, Jamie Kramer, Daniel Davis, and Joseph Braun), who kept me grounded throughout the many years it took to complete this dissertation, and who have always encouraged me with an optimistic outlook when I needed it most. iv TABLE OF CONTENTS TITLE PAGE i ACCEPTANCE PAGE ii ABSTRACT iii ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS iv TABLE OF CONTENTS v INTRODUCTION 1 CHAPTER 1: J.S. Mill and Utility of Religion 7 CHAPTER 2: Friedrich Nietzsche and The Anti-Christ 68 CHAPTER 3: William James and The Varieties of Religious Experience 134 CONCLUSION 199 APPENDIX: Comprehensive Outline of Dissertation 210 v INTRODUCTION I can easily recall the first philosophy book I read—it was a book I stumbled upon early on in my high school years and that instantly ignited a passion for the philosophy of religion. That book was Bertrand Russell’s Why I am Not a Christian. The book was provocative for me at the time for a number of reasons. Chief among them was the fact that I had been growing up in an ultra-conservative and heavily Christian south-central portion of Nebraska; almost all of my peers were religious (in fact, not one comes to mind who was not), and by this I mean that they professed allegiance to some (very predominantly Christian) religion and attended regular religious events and ceremonies. To my knowledge, few if any of these acquaintances had ever thought of questioning their religion. Russell, on the other hand, did precisely this, questioning the value of something that has been, for the most part, universally embraced throughout the history of humankind. As time has passed, I have become very curious about a number of aspects regarding religion. What, for instance, explains the endurance and nearly-universal nature of religious belief? Why, when so much seems to change over time, does religion continue to exert as much influence as it did thousands of years ago? Does religion help to ensure the survival of our species (in which case its influence might be attributed to something like natural selection), or is it gradually tearing us apart through doctrinal differences and holy conflicts, as some scholars suggest?1 More generally, is it useful—does it make us happy? What 1 Consider, for example, the arguments advanced by Sam Harris, a contemporary American scholar, in his book, The End of Faith. One of Harris’s chief claims therein is that religion, if strictly adhered to, is inherently divisive, and he argues that there is a significant positive correlation between religiosity and violence. I will say much more about the relationship between religion and violence throughout the dissertation. 1 follows is the culmination of years of personal reflection on religion, ruminations that began with that fateful first book. Specifically, I will examine key philosophical texts that address issues regarding the utility of religion. In doing so, I reflect on whether religion is useful for the individuals who subscribe to it and for society at large, not on whether there is any truth to the claims advanced in various religious doctrines. Admittedly, the subject matter at hand is highly complex, and I feel it is imperative that I be as clear as possible about what exactly it is that I intend to assess. As I have indicated, the concept of “utility” is essential here: there is a significant difference between an analysis of religion in terms of truth and an analysis of it in terms of utility. It is one thing to ask about the truth of various claims within the doctrines of a religion (e.g. “Jesus died for our sins”), and it is quite another to ask about the usefulness of the religions espousing such claims. In the following analysis, I distinguish the truth of religion from the utility of religion and examine the latter. Ultimately, what I desire to know is this: does religion make us happy? Naturally, one might wonder why we ought to focus on the utility of religion to begin with—that is, why should we concern ourselves with this issue? The short answer lies in the fact that religion is so prevalent. According to recent estimates, roughly 84% percent of the world’s population is religious (in fact, over 50% of all people alive right now subscribe to either Christianity or Islam).2 At the time of this writing, the world’s population is estimated to be 7,170,216,431,3 which means that, conservatively, six billion people across the globe consider themselves religious. The general point is that, while there are certainly a multitude of phenomena affecting the wellbeing of humanity, few are as widespread as religion. As a result, 2 adherents.com, Major Religions of the World Ranked by Number of Adherents, http://www.adherents.com/Religions_By_Adherents.html (accessed 5 Nov. 2010). 3 U.S. Census Bureau, www.census.gov, http://www.census.gov/ipc/www/popclockworld.html (accessed 3 June 2014). 2 this makes consideration of the usefulness of religion all the more worthwhile, since it is much more likely to affect humanity in significant and palpable ways. In my experience, discussions within the philosophy of religion, both in common parlance and in academic settings, tend to revolve around the truth of religion, rather than around its usefulness. John Stuart Mill echoes this sentiment, as the first sentence of his essay Utility of Religion (which is the subject of Chapter 1) reads: “it has