sign in sign up
<<
Home , Ludwig Feuerbach

Through ... 7/1/2015 2:30:37 PM

a phrase , but is nevertheless Levinas - Emmanuel 4 One is often told that a veryit is that wrong told One is often because , attack to thing men virtuous. So I am makes religion it. not noticed I have told; 1 . 1 Religiosity College San Beda Atty. Alden Reuben B. Luna, Ph.L B. Luna, Alden Reuben Atty. . It can also be described “as a natural outgrowth outgrowth natural a “as described be also can It . 3 . 2 which, although very limited, can be used as a simple way way simple a as used be can limited, very although which, he rendezvous of the supernatural and man – supernatural of the he rendezvous Edward Tylor, for example, saw as a natural early product of the same product early animism as a natural saw example, for Tylor, Edward Ibid., 15. Linda Trinkaus Zagzebski, : An Historical Introduction, (Oxford, (Oxford, Introduction, An Historical of Religion: Zagzebski, Philosophy Linda Trinkaus 2009), and Company, Little, Brown of , (New York: The Evolution Wright, Robert 3 4 1 2 T Religion Religion is not simply an institutionalization of man’s assent Religion Religion is not a novel masterpiece of the civilized world as Bertrand Russell Through The Alleys Of Filipino Filipino Of Alleys The Through Russell Bertrand speculative curiosity that had led to modern thought. According to him, it had been the “infant him, it had been the “infant to modern thought. According curiosity that had led to speculative good theories It did what .” “ancient savage assembled by of mankind”, philosophy (Ibid., 13) economically. facts otherwise mysterious explain do: to supposed are to to make sense of the world with a hodgepodge collective of tools output whose isn’t wholly nothing short of being human. rational” Publishing, 2007), 1. UK: Blackwell 12. to a spontaneous divine revelation; it is also an apparent off-shoot apparent an also is it revelation; divine spontaneous a to of his constant adaption to both his and his surrounding’s needs changing ever selection natural by built brain a of product natural a humanity; of we we know it; nor is it an innovation ushered in or by the the pious. educated On the it contrary, has always been at antiquity. of the grounds the from heart rose empires of before even humanity Some scholars even say that religion is a by-product of “cultural evolutionism” of illustrating what religion is. Religion, along with art and science, and art with along Religion, is. religion what illustrating of counts as one of the most fundamental and pervasive aspects of been have there as long as for existed has “(It) civilization. human human beings on the earth” Introduction

Scentia Inside.indd 1 Scentia Inside.indd 2 Luna... Why Pray? body, thatistheobjectofthiselevation and exaltation. Everything thathappensinthisworld is man, thesoul,which inthecourseoftimehassoslowly andunwillingly detacheditselffrom the purpose is,butitcertainly signifiesaperfecting ofman’s nature. Itisprobably thespiritualpartof Other Works (1927), , Volume XXI:TheFuture ofanIllusion, Civilization anditsDiscontents, and & Co.,Ludgate Hill,1881,10. miseries endless seemingly his in man pacify to order in mind the of creation a only is “god” of idea the that and patterns of thought in response to feelings of helplessness and guilt, wish-fulfilment. He believed that religion is a reversion to childish him from thehumansocietyitself. the against – directions threatenthat injuries the Fate,against and natureand of dangers two in him protects ideas these of (religious) possession the that seen be clearly can It race. human his make the of childhood the and childhood ownhis of helplessness the of to need “man’s of upshot helplessness tolerable and built up an from the material of memories than more nothing is religion of idea the embracing into humanity pulls that impetus Accordingthe illusion. tohim, an merely mind, is the productof a that religion was a great hindrance to societal progress, and that it believedFreud religion. to opposition his by fuelled actually was psychoanalysis of field the towards path his that religion. shows of History existence very the into attack direct a launching by religion, anditsstrong gripuponthehumanmind. vis the notion of eternal life that accounts for the attractiveness of vis-à- death, particularly fears, human from escape expedient an of idea the is It us. fromaway fear this take to offers life, eternal promising in Christianity, most. the spines our into chills sends him, a sundry of fears embrace humanity, but that of death is what Christianity merely lies in its promise of . According to deepest tragedies andconundrums. humanity’s addressing of wayconvenient a than more nothing is it that assertion bold a into foundation, very its beneath digging from went religion underlying concept fundamental the explain However, the attempt of certain scholars and philosophers to philosophers and scholars certain However,of attempt the o Fed a fr eebc, eiin s ohn mr than more nothing is religion Feuerbach, for as Freud, For Sigmund Freud, the father of psychoanalysis, went a step further For one, Ludwig Feuerbach that much of the appeal of 7 6 5 Life inthisworld serves ahigher purpose; nodoubtitisnoteasy to guesswhat that Sigmund Freud, Ludwig Feuerbach, The Essence of Christianity, trans. MarianEvans, (London: Trubner 17. TheStandard Edition oftheComplete Psychological Works of 2 6 ” 7 5 Furthermore, .

7/1/2015 2:30:37 PM Bertrand Russell Through ... 7/1/2015 2:30:37 PM . Religion, to him is a 8 3 9 , Critique of Hegel’s Philosophy of Right, 6. Marx, Critique of Hegel’s Philosophy Karl We ought to believe because our forefathers believed. But these ancestors of ours of But these ancestors believed. because our forefathers believe to ought We 9 8 Religious distress is at the same time the expression of real of real expression same time the is at the distress Religious The abolition of religion as the illusory is people as the of the happiness The abolition of religion illusion the up give to demand The happiness. real their for required needs which up a condition, give demand to is the about its condition illusions. distress and the protest against real distress. Religion is the sigh is the Religion distress. real against protest and the distress just as it world, heart of a heartless the creature, oppressed of the people. opium of the situation. It the is of a spiritless is the For him, religion’s purpose is to create illusory fantasies for the for fantasies illusory create to is purpose religion’s him, For Moreover Moreover religion, for Karl Marx, is no different from other themselves bear every mark of untrustworthiness. They are full of contradictions, revisions and revisions full of contradictions, are They of untrustworthiness. mark bear every themselves unconfirmed. It themselves are confirmations they speak of factual they and where falsifications, originates only their content or even that their wording, it asserted have does not help much to authenticity is under this assertion is itself one of the doctrines whose for revelation; divine from of itself. (Ibid., 25-26). can be a proof and no proposition examination, wisdom which directs this course of things, the infinite goodness that expresses itself in it, the goodness that expresses this course of things, the infinite directs wisdom which us also created beings who of the divine the attributes its aim in it—these are justice that achieves all the in our civilization, which, being into of the one divine or rather, as a whole, and the world first succeeded in thus concentrating been condensed. The people which of antiquity have who view the father It had laid open to of the advance. not a little proud was attributes the divine a this was as its nucleus. Fundamentally figure divine had all along been hidden behind every beginnings of the idea of God. (Ibid., 17-18). the historical to return in writings which set down left us are have they proofs are…The than we ignorant more far were which will not suffer us to become a plaything of the over-mighty and pitiless forces of nature. of nature. and pitiless forces of the over-mighty a plaything become us to will not suffer which but the beginning of a new lifelessness, inorganic to is not a return Death itself is not extinction, And, looking in the something higher. to lies on the path of development which kind of existence set up have our civilizations which laws this view announces that the same moral other direction, court of justice a supreme maintained by are that they except as well, universe the whole govern and all evil is rewarded In the end all good and consistency. power more with incomparably death. In that begin after existences then in the later of life in this form punished, if not actually Life be obliterated. destined to are of life and the hardships the sufferings all the terrors, this way the joins on to part of the spectrum as the invisible on earth just continues life death, which after the superior And missed here. have perhaps may visible part, that we brings us all the perfection poor. Economic realities prevent them from finding true happiness true finding from them prevent realities Economic poor. situation acceptable an is this that them tells religion so life, this in its ways in the end, though us, which superior to of an intelligence of the intentions an expression for it enjoyable make the best—that is, to for everything orders follow, difficult to are and byways and stern seemingly is only which Providence benevolent a watches each one of us there us. Over on to express his critique on religion. express on to social institutions in terms of its dependency upon the material and economic realities in religious a The given forces. society. It productive has of no creature independent the is it instead history; went he notion, this From world. real the of reflex the but is world for for him, most people who cling to religious doctrines only do so because they have been accustomed to it childish delusion while on the other hand is a grown-up problem. as a psychological this He considered realism. Scentia Inside.indd 3 Scentia Inside.indd 4 Luna... He went furtherby saying, anaesthesize them from the sufferings of their alienated and condition. minds people’s cloud to merely is religion of function social because they will find true happiness in the next life. 2007), 12. there isnoreason to even considerthem. probableknowledge,then of thoroughlybeyondniche lie the and explained be cannot which matters are and God since him, Toorientation. this challenges roots Russellbeliever. Bertrand each personal to its rejuvenate and reestablish to tool a as serve can it maybe unbelief; towards bound necessarily not is faith of faith.ownMaybe our shake betterweunderstand little can that a doubts innermost our unveilingexactly in is it maybe But hell. of of the fear that this attitude is a thoroughfare towards the furnace nation like ours. Many are afraid to confront their doubts because predominantlya Christian in commonlyfrownedupon is which – of one’s faith is like crossing the boundary of unfaithfulness to God abyss the into deeper dig to Christians, society.Filipino most For differentcry a fromtune how religiosity portrayed isbeing our in might milieu religious our at look closer a Filipinos, many of ire to thepeople’sdespair. consolation momentary the for is purpose sole whose institution an society;] the of scepter the wields [that injustice great the of underclass. exploited and ruled Religion, actually, is not the problem per a se, but the manifestation and rulers/owners of class ongoing result of a constant tension between two classes, an upper the theory,is history this to according nutshell, a In . the people is but part and parcel of his general theory of dialectical While some of the above-mentioned concepts might cause the of opium the is religion that Marx of Accordingly,remark the the criticismofthe vale oftears, the haloofwhich isreligion. that needsillusions. The criticismofreligion istherefore inembryo theexisting state affairsof isthedemand to giveup astate affairsof demand theirreal happiness.demand toThe giveillusions about up 12 11 10 To abolishreligion happiness ofthe asthe people illusory is to Karl Marx,Contributionto theCritiqueofHegel’sPhilosophy ofLaw, 10. HimelShagor, MarxandReligion: ABriefStudy. Douglas J.Soccio, Archetypes ofWisdom,(California, USA: ThomsonWadsworth, 12

4 10 To him, the 11

7/1/2015 2:30:37 PM Bertrand Russell Through ... 7/1/2015 2:30:37 PM , which attacks philosophical 13 5 For Russell, “religion is based…primarily and mainly 14 Rev. Ralph Allan Smith, Why Bertrand Russell Was Not a Christian. Was Russell Bertrand Allan Smith, Why Ralph Rev. Analytic philosophy, also called linguistic philosophy, a loosely related set of related a loosely also called linguistic philosophy, philosophy, Analytic 14 Another tradition, sometimes referred to as informalism, similarly turned to the turned to similarly as informalism, to referred sometimes Another tradition, 13 Furthermore, Furthermore, from a practical vantage point, in Russell’s Bertrand Russell was part of the parade of scholars who think of scholars who part of the parade was Russell Bertrand case the sentences can be true or false, or are merely expressions of the subject’s feelings— expressions merely or are can be true or false, case the sentences at all. Thus, in no truth-value have case they which or “Boo!”—in shouts of “Bravo!” to comparable as a problem treated was and wrong of right of the nature problem the philosophical this debate http://www. Philosophy, - Analytic statements. status of moral about the logical or grammatical 23, 2014) on October (Accessed britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/22568/analytic-philosophy logical boundaries of the concept under study. uses in emphasized their diverse but instead expressed the concept was in which sentences noting the concept by elucidate situations, the idea being to language and everyday ordinary among analytic talk and act. people actually Even in how reflected are features its various how or informalist, philosophical either formalist not essentially were approaches philosophers whose of language. An influential debate about the nature of as problems conceived often were problems moral that express sentences concerned the question of whether example, ethics, for in analytic in which of the world, of some feature descriptions a lie”) are tell to judgments (e.g., “It is wrong approaches to philosophical problems, dominant in Anglo-American philosophy from the early the early from philosophy dominant in Anglo-American problems, philosophical to approaches of concepts. Analytic of language and the logical analysis that emphasizes the study 20th century, not invariably, though that characteristically, philosophers conduct conceptual investigations or can be, expressed. in question are, the concepts studies of the language in which involve for as formalism), to (sometimes referred philosophy in analytic one tradition to According logical the underlying uncovering by of a concept can be determined the definition example, of it. representation A perspicuous express used to of the sentences or “logical forms,” structures, make thought, would logic, so the formalists in the language of modern symbolic these structures establish the and thereby such sentences and from to permissible inferences clear the logically upon fear. upon It fear. is partly the terror of by stand will the who unknown brother elder and of kind partly…the a have you that feel to wish whole the of basis the is Fear disputes. and troubles your all in you thing – fear of fear of the defeat, mysterious, fear of is death. Fear opinion the teaching of religion to children inhibits their ability to think clearly and to cooperate with others whose beliefs differ from theirs. Far from being the source of great contributions to than more nothing done has religion world, the of civilizations the help fix the calendar and provoke Egyptian priests to chronicle eclipses. To To him, the traditional arguments as God regards run the through existence the alleys of of conundrum in expressed. For the him, way these arguments they are are full of absurdities and demands of logic and language. cannot satisfy the the school of thought from which he emerged. He was well known known well was He emerged. he which from thought of school the for his works on mathematical Because logic of and these he analytic became philosophy. a leading known thnker of as the discipline Analytic philosophy problems by analyzing the language in which they are expressed. Russell’s Critique Of Religion Critique Russell’s from forth gushing is religion of critique His religion. about coldly Scentia Inside.indd 5 Scentia Inside.indd 6 Luna... of thosetwo things.” religionhave fearis because gonehand-in-hand).It basis the isat parentcruelty,the of thereforeand and wondercruelty no if is (it Christianity, (London:George AllenandUnwin Ltd., 1927),1. by saying: started certainty.He absolute of parameter the of short fall they of proving God’s existence. The reason being that according to him, high degree ofmoral goodness.” Christ was the best and wisest of men, although I grant him a very that think not secondly,do and, I whyimmortality; in and God in believe not do I why first, things: different two you tell to have I Christian a not am I why you tell I when that it take I “Therefore said, He one. not is he why propositions general two gave he is, a Christian is: who defining by starts he Christian, a not Am I Why work his pcfcly te etrod f i ciiu i Crsint. In Christianity. is critique his of centerfold the Specifically, Christian a be to is it what of definition self-crafted his From adequate mannerIshould have to keep you here untilKingdom serious question,I were andif to attempt to dealwith itinany thatpurelyis a geographicalwhich sense, suppose weI can ignore. sense we are all Christians. Thegeography bookscounts usallbut in, fetishMohammedans, Buddhists, worshipers, in that andsoon;but books, geography where thepopulation ofthe world issaidto bedividedinto Christians, in and Almanack Whitaker’s in find you which toright call yourselfcourse,Of a Christian. there is another sense to believe Idonotthink that muchthat you aboutChrist, have any not divine,atleast the best andwisestyou ofmen.If are notgoing I thinkyou musthave lowest atthe very the that Christwas, if and immortality, andyet they would not call themselves Christians. TheMohammedans, for instance,about Christ. also believe inGod asthethanname implies, that, you musthave somekindofbelief think that you can properly call yourself aChristian.Then,further and immortality.you If donotbelieve things, inthoseI donot two is first The Christian. one ofadogmaticnature --namely, that you mustbelieve a inGod himself calling anyone to essential quite 17 16 15 To come to this question ofthe existence ofGod,itisalarge and As mentioned above he criticized the traditional arguments I think, however, that there are different two items which are Ibid. Ibid., 2. Bertrand Russell, Why IamNotaChristian:anExamination oftheGod-Ideaand 15

17 6

16

7/1/2015 2:30:37 PM Bertrand Russell Through ... 7/1/2015 2:30:37 PM everything 7

19 “If there can be anything without a cause, a cause, without anything be can “If there 18 Ibid., 3. Ibid. 18 19 reason, and they had to set up what they considered were arguments arguments were considered they set up what had to and they reason, but I take shall a number of them, it. of course, are, There prove to only a few. of their dogmas. They had to introduce it because at one time the at one time the it because introduce had to dogmas. They of their and such were there habit of saying that the adopted Freethinkers existence the against might urge reason mere which arguments such God did that of faith as a matter knew they of God, but of course length, great set out at were reasons exist. the and The arguments they it. must stop they Therefore that felt Church Catholic and the unaided the by be proved can of God existence the that it down laid Come, so that you will have to excuse me if I deal with it in a somewhat it in a somewhat me if I with deal excuse to have will you so that Come, has Church Catholic the that course, of know, summary You fashion. by be proved can of God existence the as a dogma that it down laid it is one dogma, but curious This is a somewhat unaided reason. the According According to Russell, there is no real reason we can give for And his objection to it is very simple: if we ask about the cause the about ask we if simple: very is it to objection his And The first argument that Russell Contested is the First Cause contemporary world. In other words, the present era have already already have era present the words, other In world. contemporary because no matter what is said, the statement would just circles. go in For him, the argument fallacious of that the he cannot First but Cause reject follow is that it; since logically it everything does has a not cause necessarily God. then there Furthermore, must be he a considers that is this old-fashioned and thus it cannot serve any purpose in argument the as something Russell Russell himself wrote: be any cannot there that so as god, world be the it may just as well validity argument.” in this incongruous too just It’s cause. a have must world the that insisting Cause whose existence is not caused by another and through whom whom and through another by is not caused existence whose Cause God. call we and this from; comes existence all other of the there seems Universe, to be no reason not to ask about the cause of God. And if we insist that God needs no cause, then we might as well say that the Universe needs no cause. As Bertrand argument. The argument of First Cause runs like this: (or its itself cause a being cannot and since has a cause, exists that And another. by must be caused one’s existence then existence) own so to avoid infinite progression, there must necessarily be a First The First Cause Argument The First Cause Scentia Inside.indd 7 Scentia Inside.indd 8 Luna... find no place in it. AsRussellfind noplaceinit. claimed would existence God’s for arguments the even that and past the of dilemmas and riddles the to answers necessary the fashioned Either Godhadareason orhedidn’t. Ifhedidn’t, says Russell, dilemma. a us offers he here And others?” than ratherlaws these chance. According to him: and conventions and law human Law, Natural of understanding the by about brought confusion the of result the just is this that The Natural Law Argument Russell’swethat “whyis ask point can second made God does is first The points. clear two made he argument, this Against not serve your purpose,becausenot serve heis notthe ultimate law-giver.“ have alawoutsideandanteriorto theand Goddoesdivine edicts, get any advantage by introducing God as an intermediary. You really gave, thenGod himself was subjectto law, andtherefore you donot thinktoit there-- if lookatit was areason for thelaws whichGod course,to being create the best universe, althoughyou would never a reason forthose giving laws rather than others -- the reason, of orthodox theologians do,that inall the laws which God issues hehad and so your train ofnatural law is interrupted.you If say, as more further for any explanation ofthe lawofgravitation.” and simpleexplanation thatsaved them the trouble looking any of and that was why they didso.Thatwas, ofcourse, aconvenient given abehest to these planetsto move inthat particularfashion, accordingto thegravitation,law of and they thought that God had and Newton Isaac Sir his cosmogony.People of theplanets going observed around thesun influence the under especially century, waste any more timeuponthe argument aboutthe FirstCause.” due to theTherefore, ofourimagination. poverty perhaps, Ineednot at all. The ideathatbeginning thingsmust have is really abeginning inquiries…There isnoreason to suppose that the world hada where they justcompose presuppositions to escape the further 22 21 20 law, to subject not is that something is there that find then “you “(this) was afavorite argumentall throughthe eighteenth world the of view Indian’s the than better no is argument “the Ibid., 5. Ibid., 4. Ibid.

8 21

20 22

7/1/2015 2:30:37 PM Bertrand Russell Through ... 7/1/2015 2:30:37 PM 9 . It was for him absurd because it defies logic defies it because absurd him for was It . 23 Bruce Waller, Coffee and Philosophy, (New York: Pearson Education, Inc., 2006), 27. Education, Pearson (New York: and Philosophy, Coffee Bruce Waller, According to Russell, between religion and science there has been a prolonged has been a prolonged and science there religion between Russell, to According 24 23

24 Russell Russell offers two objections. The first is that much of what Based on this argument, it is said that everything in the world is world the in everything that said is it argument, this on Based In a nutshell, if this is the case then God is not God since he moreover, they were thought to be undermining morality, since moral duties were deduced by deduced by were duties since moral be undermining morality, to thought were they moreover, had a good that they felt as Churchmen, as well Secular rulers, therefore, creeds. from Churchmen and Religion Russell, (Bertrand of the men of science.” teaching the revolutionary fear to reason Science , 1935,) 7-8 from from design finds itself knowledge just being a pulled out mere of shadow the him, earth. something of that has It just the gained was, popularity during according growing medieval to are victorious…Creeds proved science has invariably years, conflict, until the last few in which, of the and science, but the bitterness religion of the conflict between source the intellectual codes. Those and with moral with Churches the connection of creeds opposition has been due to diminish the incomes, of Churchmen; and might the authority, weakened questioned creeds who the design argument was intended to deal with is if because dealt roughly, with environment, our to adapted by are We evolution. survived. have not would they thus, adapted not had ancestors our And the mechanisms of adaptation random involve genetic a mixing and healthy mutation. dose Therefore, the of argument produce produce motion, and that motion so regulated as to point out the hour of the mechanism day…This being observed…the inference we think is inevitable, that the watch must have had who completely a comprehended its construction and maker… designed its use.” so that we can manage to live in the world. One updated version of this argument is Crafted by William Paley: “Suppose watch I upon had the a ground…When we come to we inspect perceive…that its the several parts watch, are framed and put together for a purpose, e.g. that they are so formed and adjusted as to and is thus invalid. Design from The Argument just made is everything and entity intellectual higher a of design a that science had started laying down an ample of proofs and facts and facts an ample down of proofs laying that science had started of the as divinity within the realm been believed have about what a Russell hard time gave accepting the said argument.him, in For the conflict between religion and science/reason, the latter has hand upper the had had no control on everything. The fact, not everything seemed to according follow the so-called “Natural to Law” and him, that Scentia Inside.indd 9 Scentia Inside.indd 10 Luna... the existence ofevil which isanobvious Hesaid: fact. examplewasthe it And that gavedesigned. he plausible to be it is Russell’s further objection is that the world is too bleak a place for so-and-so. support to necessary the of lack the of because period a result of God’s arbitrary fiat, then it is meaningless to say that say to meaningless is it then fiat, arbitrary God’s of result a by saying that if the difference between right and wrong is merely the basis of all moral principles. Here, Russell gave his counterclaim to be a difference between right and wrong. In other words, God is there are any moral principles at all -- to explain how there comes Moral Argument forDeity humanity ofitsmiseriesandtragedies. consoling at attempt flimsy a but nothing as design of argument the of rejection utter the to led was he principle, aforementioned This argument run along this lines: we need God to explain why the with corollary are felt he that ironies the all of Because Charles Darwinshares thesameperspective. Hesaid: caterpillars, orthat acat shouldplaywith mice.” with the express intention oftheir feedingwithin the livingbodies of omnipotent Godwould have designedly created the Ichneumonidae and beneficent a myselfthat persuade cannot I world. the in misery design and beneficence on all sides of us. There seems to me too much see asplainlyothersshould wishtodo andasI do,evidenceof to which the earth istending –something dead,cold andlifeless. life ofthe whole solar system. You seein the moonthe sortofthing are suitable to protoplasm, and there islife fortime inthe ashort you get the sortofconditions andtemperature andso forth which is astagethe in decay the of solarsystem; atacertain stagedecay of this planet will die out in due course: it is merely a flash in the pan; it science,you have to supposethatlifehuman lifeand generalin on in million(s) of years…Moreover,you if accept the laws of ordinary best thatomnipotence andomniscience haveable to been produce with all the things withthat all its defects, areshould bethe init, most astonishingthing that people can believe thatthis world, 26 25 “I hadnointentionto write atheistically.ownI But thatI cannot weWhen come to lookinto this argumentfrom design,it isa ,TheAutobiography ofCharles Darwin,(London:Collins,1958). Russell, Why IamNotaChristian,6. 10 26

25

7/1/2015 2:30:37 PM Bertrand Russell Through ... 7/1/2015 2:30:38 PM 11

27 Ibid., 8. 27 …so they say that there must be a God, and that there must be there be a God, and that must there say that …so they supposing that justice does not rule in the world; and therefore so and therefore world; rule in the not does justice supposing that deity against and not in argument a moral it affords as it goes far of one.” favor oranges that you opened, and you found all the top layer of oranges of oranges layer top the all found and you opened, you that oranges so as must be good, ones “The underneath not argue: would bad, you a is lot whole the “Probably say: would You balance.” the redress to bad consignment;” and that is really what a scientific person would argue about the universe. He would say: “Here we find in this world for is a reason that goes as that and so far of injustice, deal a great That is a very curious argument. If you looked at the matter from from matter verya at the That is curious argument. looked If you a scientific point of view, you would all, say, “After I only know this one as far but so universe, of the rest about the not know I do world. this probably say that one would on probabilities at all argue can odds are the then here is injustice sample, and if there is a fair world of a crate got you Supposing also.” elsewhere is injustice there that Heaven and Hell in order that in the long run there may be justice. may be justice. long run there in the that in order and Hell Heaven rent tune treads through the path of inconsistencies. through tune treads rent

Thus, this argument is for him illogical and invalid because Pursuant to this argument, without God, there is no justice; diffe saying saying that God is needed for justice and yet the world utters a the world the is world not just after all. And to that say must there be a God injustice is escape the to and from facts laid. remedy to evidences He said: we we need to posit God in order to vouch cosmic justice. be always And would there around, Looking dismissed. this readily Russell a cry againts injustice. And because of this phenomenon, it was difficult for Russell to affirm this argument. According to him, if the universe seems unjust, then the evidence seems to say that of God’s will. And so it does not follow that there is a God simply principles. of moral of the existence because of Injustice for the Remedying Argument God is good. Furthermore, he said that if it makes sense to say that say to sense makes it if that said he Furthermore, good. is God God is good, there must be a different basis for the rightness and wrongness of things than God’s will. Thus, it is wrong to say that independent are they since principles moral all of basis the is God Scentia Inside.indd 11 Scentia Inside.indd 12 Luna... …in anutshell… pp. 543-48quoted from STJoshi,Atheism: AReader Philosophical Testament, 1943-68, ed.JohnGSlater andPeter Köllner (London:Routledge, 1997), Illustrated Magazine (1952:repr. TheCollected Papers ofBertrand Russell, Volume 11:Last their own.” the fresh air brings vigor, and thegreat spaces have asplendor all end the in myths, humanizing traditional of warmth indoor cozy the after shiver us make first at science of windows open the if “Evenhumanity. all of language the be should faith, not Reason, dogmas of religion, should be the foundation of human civilization. the not Science, people. overlycertain an of imaginativeof minds wovenpoorlyinvention but nothing as dismissed be should both dragged down within the realm of precise scientific embrace, then be can neither it that thoroughlyand reason,explainedby be can have made of itinall these ages.” good aswe wish, after all it will still be better than what these others and world, the of can we best the make to Weought free of unworthy men.... quite We ought to conception stand up and look the world a frankly ancient in the face. is the It from despotisms. derived oriental conception a is God a whole “The of guidelines. conception our as science and reason adopt we as fadeawaysoon will and intelligence,over our left infancyof fromthe a somewhat is Religion truth. the of pursuit intellectual for inhibit natural kindnessinfavor ofsystematic hatred.” and hostility to unbelievers; it asks of its disciples that they should thought, as the source of opinion; it requires persecution of heretics he added that: “Dogma demands authority, rather than intelligent opportunity.”the is so and his, is responsibility destiny.own his The out work to free is forces,natural to subject is no reason to wish that they were true. Man, in so far as he is not further,there and, that traditional of dogmas the of any Russell said: “My conclusion is that there is no reason to believe For him, religion merely suppresses man’s natural inclination naturalman’smerely suppressesreligion Forhim, 31 30 29 28 Bertrand Russell, IsThere aGod?,commissionedby, butnever publishedin, Bertrand Russell, WhatIBelieve?, 5. Russell, Why IAmNotaChristian?, 6. Bertrand Russell, TheDegeneration ofBelief. 31

30 12

Since neither religionneither Since faith nor 28 Furthermore, ifitisnotso 29

7/1/2015 2:30:38 PM Bertrand Russell Through ... 7/1/2015 2:30:38 PM 13

32 Claire Carlisle, Bertrand Russell on the Science v Religion Debate, http://www. Debate, on the Science v Religion Russell Bertrand Carlisle, Claire 32 “I wish to propose for the reader’s favourable consideration Moreover, this animosity towards religion can also be attributed attributed be also can religion towards animosity this Moreover, To start To with, it must first be made clear that Russell himself My response to the criticisms argued by Russell as regards theguardian.com/commentisfree/belief/2013/nov/25/bertrand-russell-science-religion, theguardian.com/commentisfree/belief/2013/nov/25/bertrand-russell-science-religion, 7, 2014. accessed on November life life deeply, they were not allowed to position. change his philosophical a doctrine which may, The I doctrine subversive. in question is this: that it is undesirable fear, appear wildly paradoxical to believe and a proposition when there is no ground whatever for body of doctrine to be intellectually analyzed, or as a phenomenon a as or analyzed, intellectually be to doctrine of body to be observed objectively institutions flawed from second, the in arguments; the flawed found Russell outside. In the first case, perpetrating violence and oppression. His own spiritual insights belonged to a different order – and although they changed his empirical demands of science should pushed aside, or otherwise suspend judgment. to his deep methodological commitment to both rationalism and scientific empiricism: Russell tends to treat “religion” as either a to pure reason that although at the outset he wanted to believe, he believe, to wanted he outset the at although that reason pure to chose to succumb to the dictates of his on reason the that ground religion and faith cannot be grasped in its entirety by the human mind. He was so engrossed with reason and science that he was also led to assert that one should only believe what is warranted sufficient scientific all by short evidence; others falls of which the admits that one source of his original interest in philosophy was defense intellectual sound a not or whether discover to desire the could be provided for any sort of religious beliefs. But, as can be gleaned from the discussions made above, he was so committed religion religion will be two-fold: the first one apparent is a insufficiencies presentation in of his the critique of are religion; points the second from Russell’s help works strengthen the which, withering authenticity in of religiosity my Philippines. in the belief, would A CONSTRUCTIVE RESPONSE TO RUSSELL’S CRITIQUE OF OF CRITIQUE RUSSELL’S TO RESPONSE A CONSTRUCTIVE RELIGION Scentia Inside.indd 13 Scentia Inside.indd 14 Luna... with Bertrand Russell’s arguments and criticisms is the fact that fact the is criticisms and arguments Russell’s Bertrand with least believe, flaw, the I general The convictions. despite such support Christianity to grounds or God on belief the to referring supposing it true.” Phenomenology ofPerception, 82). their face, itistrue for thesamereason thatmy body isthepivot oftheworld” (Merleau-Ponty, the world, thatitis theunperceived term inthecenter oftheworld towards which allobjectsturn me, displaying themselves while concealing others.“IfitistruethatIamconsciousofmy body via enables meto survey theobjectswithinmy vicinity. Theobjects,inturn,form asystem around momentarily becomesthefigure while thispaperrecedes to thebackground. Mybodily space enables meto shiftmy gaze towards thecellphonenext to thecupofcoffee sothatthecellphone against thebackground ofatablefilledwithcircus ofbooks andotherjamsor, alternatively, every that show to goes everyperspective onlyand incomplete. ambiguous is situation human it finite, is existence embodied our of since manner And object. the of part a only seeing time, particular situation; we only perceive from a single nook at a given we never experience a thing in its totality. We are only occupying a aforementioned, for,as – experience of ambiguity the for reason world, thevisibleform ofourintentions. the in expression our is it means; a or instrument an than more much is body the us them…For on hold our of things, and body our between relation the of notion implicit and practical, global, schema” postural or “corporeal A situation. bodily our throughWe being-in-the-world.space grasp perception” world” the into projected are beings, embodied as we, which in manner “a as understood Our perception of reality is never in its entirety. Perception is thus after all. “philosophical” so not is parade) circus a in freaks non-sense of limited minds project (and all others being considered as a bunch their which that only is reality of caboodle and kit whole the that is it that saying wrongreasontoolstoour the that utilize offers tobut assume us; not am I noggins. narrow their of confines the beyond lies nothing if as – established had comrades his and he endeavorwhich philosophical the of frames limited the to bound he got stuck within the quagmires of “reason”. His skepticism is so This perspectivity and situatedness is at the same time the very piecemeal. in reality experience only we beings, physical As 37 36 35 34 33 It ismy body which makes thispieceofpaperIamwritingonstandoutfor me Merleau-Ponty, VisibleandInvisible, 8. Dermot Moran, Introduction to Phenomenology, 424. Bertand Russell, OntheValue ofScepticism. Merleau-Ponty, AnUnpublishedText, 5. 35 and the very necessity for our situatedness – for my 33 This was Bertrand Russell’s own words while 34 The body is the “stage director of my of director “stage the is body The 14 36 gives us at every moment a moment every at us gives 37

7/1/2015 2:30:38 PM Bertrand Russell Through ... 7/1/2015 2:30:38 PM ; this is precisely 39 15

38 Merleau-Ponty, Phenomenology of Perception, 233. Phenomenology of Perception, Merleau-Ponty, 236. The Visible and the Invisble, Merleau-Ponty, 38 39 The ipseity is, of course, never reached: each aspect of the things things aspect of the each The ipseityreached: never is, of course, at the very moment when we thought to possess it. What makes the it. the possess to thought What makes very we at the when moment ‘reality’ of the thing is precisely what therefore it snatches from our grasp. which falls to our perception is still only an invitation to perceive perceive to an invitation only is still our perception to falls which If it, process. beyond a momentarystill only perceptual halt in the moment arrayed that be from it would reached, were itself thing the as a thing exist to cease would It mystery. us and stripped of its before Therefore, Therefore, Russell’s overwhelming devotion to the realm of The transcendent and the invisible should not be seen as and hence cannot submerge beneath their grasps the vast entirety entirety vast the grasps their beneath submerge cannot hence and of any single reality of being. Therefore, faith, religion and God, reason and science without accounting for the slightest possibility slightest the for accounting without science and reason process the in and everything, explain thoroughly their cannot such with that conform not do which those under feet six burying hastily obviously limited parameters, is misplaced, if not stubborn. Not everything can be quantified. Quantity and language are limited, to to realize that there is more to what is given – a transcendence – or the possibilities of the way the other and not because unseen side and conversely, see is real; we Not everything unfold. may real. it isn’t mean see, doesn’t don’t we because phenomenon is a constitution of both and the transcendence, immanence of both the visible and the invisible. Reality escapes attempts to man’s imprison it always within the confines of reason - for never do we (or can we) its comes totality; perceive one our the – perception reality immanence is its always in perspectival. As in one – moves perception through thing a towards negativity, negativity, but rather “other dimensionality” of our juxtaposed worlds. There is explore, always something something that more escapes to our grasps, our perception. So much so that there is indeed in things the intermingling dialog of and visible immanence, and transcendence presence, and absence invisible. This This ambiguity is a testimony of our relationship with the world, of reminder a is It embodiment. our of mark the is It real. the with our finitude; but it is, at the same time, an invitation to discover peripheries the within imprisoned be never and perspectives new Scentia Inside.indd 15 Scentia Inside.indd 16 Luna... end-result ofthefrailty andmiseryofman’s flight. an or mind, the of merefiction as dismissed be words,not should of objectification the alwaysescape would which and quantified, entirely be cannot which niche that of parcel and part are which Evangelical TheologicalSociety, (Ontorio, Canada:Thornhill)157. Sons, 1959),443. was thought he that person Christianity. close-minded very the being up as human composition. who, non-conformists are Williston Walker Unitarians the For orientation. But herein probably lies the formative source of Russell’s religious account it for his adherence does to humanistic and nor scientific rationalism. position anti-Christian course, present-day Russell’s of justify not, does This asceticism. moralistic his grandmother’s against rebel to came manner, reflective quiet, a in Russell, Unitarian period this of grandmother.During Victorian his mainly by indoctrination consisted which — experiences religious understand the real Russell, we should not overlook his childhood to order In (Because) experience. personal own his upon based Finally, Russell’s critique is hardly philosophical for he ends he for philosophical hardly is critique Russell’sFinally, Whatever contradicts Hiswill is sinfuland evil,inany generation, in absolutes which transcend timeandplace. Godisarighteous God. appeal to ethical teachesfor norms, Christianity thatthere areethical worldview onto hisirrational view. view,at the but attempts sametime,he to graftthe thisof fruits Biblical the rejects Russell be. to it defines Bible the what is world interpretationknowledge theof creation. short, In the is possible if couldhe learn from not thecreation theman in and guide correct special revelation, especially in Holy Scripture, to teach manwhat way that the world reveals truth to man,andGodhasgiven man understandingtrue because Godhascreated the world insuch a perfectly understand himself,the world, man canBut God. or have never can Man exhaustive. be ever can understanding man’s that to understand bothGod andthe world. believe Christiansdonot as arational system andthat Healso created manwith acapacity teachesforlogic, Christianity thata rational Godcreated theworld 41 40 Again,then istrue, it isreasonable Christianity forif Russell to then istrue, itis reasonableIf Christianity for Russell to appeal to be to seems religion towards ire his anything, than More Arnold Weigel, ACritiqueofBertrand Russell’s Religious Position, Bulletinofthe Williston Walker, AHistory oftheChristianChurch, (NewYork: Charles Scribner’s 40 points set out, themselves against all creeds of 41

16 7/1/2015 2:30:38 PM Bertrand Russell Through ... 7/1/2015 2:30:38 PM

42 17 Smith, Why Bertrand Russell Was Not a Christian, 24. Was Russell Bertrand Smith, Why 42 any place in heaven or on earth. Russell rejects this view of ethics, of view ethics, this rejects Russell earth. or on in heaven place any serve as a standard can that offer to he has nothing its place but in else. Christ or anyone criticize to “Do you believe in God?” – a question that I always throw to However, although However, I believe that Russell’s critique falls short

politicians and undisciplined and unruly citizenry. A nation where where nation A citizenry. unruly and undisciplined and politicians claws the within suffer many yet and give, to taught being are most seemingly perpetual seemingly scream of uncertainty – a withering mask of prestige and is gravity: religion still Juxtapose relevant? this with the overwhelming contradiction being presented by the fact that the Philippines, while being a predominantly Catholic/Christian nation, has also been a breeding ground for freaks and corrupt back to me. And in order to tickle their imaginations, and hopefully hopefully and imaginations, their tickle to order in And me. to back trigger their scarce I a interests, would little ask bit them further, And Bible?”. the read still you “Do mass?”, to go still you “Do anew: unsurprisingly the confident affirmation slowly fades, the clatter doubt of silence deafening the and down, dies noises unwanted of wields the scepter. And alongside the momentary hush is the place to start, if I am to cite a few examples. examples. few a start,place to cite if I am to my students to kick things off in my Theology classes; setting the pace, as others would call it. A hodge-podge of confident, if arrogant, not yeses and indifferent nods is what usually boomerangs a habit. And having spent nine years in the seminary, and what seems to be an epoch of teaching Theology subjects, I have been a witness to the many Catholic faith clichés that have anchored hard on our society – clichés that Russell had himself seen experienced. The four and corners of the classroom is actually a good reminder reminder of the worsening paradoxes of Filipino religiosity. As discussed above, two of his criticisms summarized in against two-fold: first religion it is can ultimately based be upon man’s fear for death and the unknown; second, its anchors dogmas upon its have members cast which they blindly and involuntarily ascribed to because such doctrines have metamorphosed into …a wake-up call …a wake-up of its main goal resounding as of serves vilification his that dismantling fact the in confide the equally fundamentals of religion, I Scentia Inside.indd 17 Scentia Inside.indd 18 Luna... rae a i fs – setce I ih sy a Bak Nazarene Black as say; might I spectacle, undeniably a – it fuss year, big a Each creates religiosity. Filipino of sight welcome of poverty. perceptions which are more thanlikely delusory. (Ibid., 84-85). and mentalstates withinhimself.Suchstates, heargues, leadto abnormal,unreliable perceptions, 2007). mankind advances, themore certain itseemsto methatthe path it isanamalgam ofthesetwo contradicting realities. havehysteria?I saymass tothis, to Again,of sight sorry a or God, to faith profound of expressionsreally gatherings religious these or oneness) absolute with delusory encounter genuine (a veridical be Rowe William to hoping to have their cups also filled with such blessing. According for alleged recipients of Quiapo, some either sort of miraculousare gifts from NazareneGod or In are Black the sensitive.of devotees the and of most instance, emotional being who for Filipinos, known with true are especially is This person. human a of as side emotive and affective precedence the to appeals it takes not, than often seeminglymore experiences these religion, of mysticalexperience.Overabove and appreciationintellectual the is alittlebitofboth. it that is this to answer My system? their of part been simply has and worship, or are praise they of all but chants part of their an old-aged in tradition depth which there Is in? themselves find they problems and sufferings of quagmire the from escape and resort desperatemere a devotion, or genuine a of showing reallyclear a of this so-call “faith”. Which now boils down to the question: is this genuineness and sincerity the to as doubts scepter the into pulls – faith Filipino of depth the portray seemingly they surface, its On mission is meek, the execution is almost beyond the realm of sanity. Nazarene.the whileglimpsecatchof a the But least to – at simple is goal whose devotees of swarm the of out and in diving people shrieks; and cheers of melodies harmonious in resonating voices Towelsflying; Manila. of alleys and streets the congest devotees but looking the event vis-à-vis other attending circumstances attending other vis-à-vis event the looking but vr Jnay te es o te lc Nzrn sre a a as serves Nazarene Black the of Feast the January, Every let isen ad “ said: Einstein Albert of realm the is religion of characteristics key the of One 44 43 According to Bertrand Russell, amystic, like thedrunkard, produces abnormalbodily Philosophy ofReligion: AnIntroduction, (California, USA: ThomsonWadsworth, 44 Hne wt Flpn rlgoiy s h cnet are context, the as religiosity Filipino with Hence, . 43 , mystical experiences of the divine can either can divine the of experiences mystical , The further the spiritualevolution of 18 7/1/2015 2:30:38 PM Bertrand Russell Through ... 7/1/2015 2:30:38 PM 19 Many utter the words, “I believe which in God…”, 45 Albert Einstein, Science and Religion, 5. Science and Religion, Albert Einstein, 45 But ultimately, all such attempt of understanding one’s faith Faith Faith ought to be a personal assent to God – an assent which entirety of reality. entirety I of see reality. something you do not see and vice versa. Or even when two persons are gazing at the same mountain, the you you can get from your religion or from God, ask what you can do for your religion – and for eventually, others. Each one of the the physical, brings us to meaning, which us constant pursuit for in metaphysical, sometimes to the delusional, and back. And since the world we live in is never a realm private but is rather shared by all, we ought to be open that one’s perspective is never the better, rather than reinforcing the dividing line created by history history by line created the dividing than reinforcing rather better, them. between must be geared towards putting books into the a more meaningful practice. Rather letters than asking what of all those holy tenets tenets and contents of faith, without falling arrogance like into that of the Russell’s trench critique of of religion. To doubt or push the query button does not necessarily lead to disbelief; on Reason faith. one’s of foundation very the deepens it contrary, the and faith must go hand-in-hand; religion and science must walk through the same alley of enabling the people to understand life offered by culture and tradition; rather, it must be juxtaposed with juxtaposed be must it rather, tradition; and culture by offered one’s attempt to understand bedrock its for should Neither himself affirmation. each the of purpose the reason – behind belief the be made of emotions alone; instead it must be with amalgamated reason and intelligence – a humble attempt to understand the trekking – because it is what we got used to. got used to. we it is what – because trekking divine, the with encounter individual own one’s from forth gushes not necessarily through the importantly in the routineness grandeur of living. day-to-day It being should not panoramas the of upon or say others , what upon based be but solely more of meaning as they do not genuinely manifest Some in hold their firmly to actions. the doctrines and teachings without of really the understanding Church the reason behind the letters and inscriptions. Still others follow the same path of religiosity only because it is the road where the greater majority of the populace to genuine religiosity does not lie through the fear of life, and the the and life, of fear the through lie not does religiosity genuine to rational after striving but through faith, and blind of death, fear knowledge.” devoid gong banging a from echoes than more nothing as resonate Scentia Inside.indd 19 Scentia Inside.indd 20 Luna... ennfl eain d nt et ih ni cmoaiis of commonalities, ontic with rest not do relations meaningful more meaningful – for there is always something to share. Indeed, is it But different. makerelationsthat human preciselyview stay of points distinct these will mountain the sees other each way ______. I ______. Russell, Bertrand. Moran, Dermot. ______. Merleau-Ponty, Maurice. Karl. Marx, Sigmund. Freud, Ludwig. Feuerbach, Einstein, Albert. Darwin, Charles. something thatislived. done, something is it sorts; various of novels in and sermons in intersubjectivity is not something which we reduce to mere words transcends thelanguageofeitherreligion andscience. which history single one of weaving the towards horizon single an other; each a and freedom culture, language, by with mediated are communion active relationship We religion. a to exclusive towards called not all is but embodied religion, is all which almost doctrine in a – meaning for quest respective that definitelysharedtheir byshould twoindividuals,be be that must something is there if simulations; myopic of traces, empty eiiu cnitos uh s mah, hrt and charity empathy, as such convictions Religious and Peter Köllner. London:Routledge, 1997. VolumeLast Philosophical 11: Testament, repr.(1952: T Magazine trated Christianity. Beacon Press, 1963. don: Routledge andKegan Paul, 1962. Collins, 1985. its Discontents, andOther Works. SigmundFreud, Volume XXI:TheFuturean Illusion,Civilization of and Trubner &Co.,Ludgate Hill,1881. Contribution to the Critique of Hegel’s Philosophy of Law. of Philosophy Hegel’s of Critique the to Contribution s There a God?, a There s Introduction to Phenomenology. The Standard Edition ofthe Complete Psychological Works of Science andReligion. London: The Autobiography ofCharles Darwin The VisibleandtheInvisible. Trans. Why I am Not aChristian:anExamination ofthe God-Idea and London:George AllenandUnwin Ltd. 1927. The EssenceChristianity, of trans. Phenomenology ofPerception. Trans. BIBLIOGRAPHY commissioned by, but never published in, Illus in, published neverby, but commissioned 20 he Collected Papers ofBertrand Russell, 1927. Collins,1980. New York: Routledge, 2004. 936, d Jh G Slater G John ed. 1943-68, . (London: Collins, 1958). Alden L. Fisher. Boston: Fisher. L. Alden Marian Evans. London: Evans. Marian Colin Smith. Lon London: 7/1/2015 2:30:38 PM - - Bertrand Russell Through ... - 7/1/2015 2:30:38 PM New York: Charles Scrib California, USA: Thomson Wadsworth. Wadsworth. Thomson USA: California, Ontorio, Canada: Thornhill. Ontorio, . California, USA: Thomson Wadsworth. London: Routledge, 1997. Routledge, London: New York: Little, Brown and Company, 21 New York: Pearson New Education, York: Inc., 2006. Philosophy of Religion: An Historical Introduction. Introduction. Historical An of Religion: Philosophy A History Christian Church. the of Archetypes of Wisdom. Archetypes The Evolution of God. The Evolution A Critique of Bertrand Russell’s Religious Position, Bulletin of the the of Bulletin Position, Religious Russell’s Bertrand of Critique A Coffee and Philosophy. Philosophy. and Coffee On the Value of Scepticism. Value On the 2009. 2007. Publishing. UK: Blackwell Oxford, 2007. ner’s Sons, 1959. ner’s Sons, 27. Society. Theological Evangelical 2007. Zagzebski, Linda Trinkaus. Introduction An of Religion: Philosophy Walker, Williston. Walker, Bruce. Waller, Arnold. Weigel, Wright, Robert. ______. ______. Christian. Not a Was Russell Bertrand Why Allan. Ralph Smith, J. Douglas Soccio, Scentia Inside.indd 21