DOCSLIB.ORG

The Struggles and Wishes of New Atheism

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

Illinois State University ISU ReD: Research and eData Theses and Dissertations 2-3-2018 Faith Too Big To Fail? The Struggles and Wishes of New Atheism Joe Rice Illinois State University, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://ir.library.illinoisstate.edu/etd Part of the Religion Commons Recommended Citation Rice, Joe, "Faith Too Big To Fail? The Struggles and Wishes of New Atheism" (2018). Theses and Dissertations. 880. https://ir.library.illinoisstate.edu/etd/880 This Thesis is brought to you for free and open access by ISU ReD: Research and eData. It has been accepted for inclusion in Theses and Dissertations by an authorized administrator of ISU ReD: Research and eData. For more information, please contact [email protected]. FAITH TOO BIG TO FAIL? THE STRUGGLES AND WISHES OF NEW ATHEISM Joe Rice 195 Pages After September 11th, 2001, public criticism of religion took front and center stage in the United States like never before, epitomized by the works of Ayaan Hirsi Ali, Richard Dawkins, Daniel Dennett, Sam Harris, and Christopher Hitchens – the so-called “New Atheists”. In this thesis, I reunderstand the New Atheism as an oppositional social movement that promises important contributions to the recent trend in academic scholarship geared toward the study of religion and secularism. Reunderstanding is essential because the mainstream scholarly treatment of the New Atheism has not fully, much less charitably, drawn out the purpose and upshot of New Atheist viewpoints in areas such as international relations and American political culture. Accordingly I correct prominent misconceptions (the ‘struggles’) of the New Atheism that stem from this uncharitable and, at times, summarily dismissive engagement. These misconceptions include the charges that New Atheists are: mere polemicists and fundamentalists of a secular kind; ‘Islamophobic’ neoconservatives who pedal a strident white male identity politics; and bad philosophers ill-equipped to the task of growing public knowledge through sophisticated discourse. I then make explicit the contributions (the ‘wishes’) of the New Atheists through three distinct, but related approaches, namely critical theory, affinity politics, and public philosophy. These contributions include the vigorous support for taking religion more seriously by: redeploying the power of ideas in analyses of religious violence; reestablishing liberal principles in the face of multicultural relativism; and reasserting secular citizenship in the face of civil and uncivil religion. In sum, New Atheists challenge the legitimacy, integrity, and pedigree of faith- based belief in a modern world where faith may very well be ‘too big to fail.’ KEYWORDS: New Atheism, Religion, Secularism, Critical Theory, Affinity Politics, Public Philosophy FAITH TOO BIG TO FAIL? THE STRUGGLES AND WISHES OF NEW ATHEISM JOE RICE A Thesis Submitted in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of MASTER OF ARTS Department of Politics and Government ILLINOIS STATE UNIVERSITY 2018 © 2018 Joe Rice FAITH TOO BIG TO FAIL? THE STRUGGLES AND WISHES OF NEW ATHEISM JOE RICE COMMITTEE MEMBERS: Lane Crothers, Chair Daniel Breyer Ali Riaz Kam Shapiro ACKNOWLEDGMENTS First and foremost, I would like to thank my committee members, for their collective support and interest in helping me along with this very lengthy and mentally grueling process, as well as the department as a whole (namely Mary and Cherie), for their trust and kindness (and giving me a key to the building.) I remain baffled as to my good fortune, being able to share this time with my graduate colleagues who are both wonderful friends and promising scholars. I must mention Ky Ajayi, Michaelene Cox, Jakeet Singh, and T.Y. Wang for not only their presence in the department, but for being kind and considerate mentors that have shaped my graduate experience. Going forward with my academic and professional career, I feel well placed to use political science in multiple and overlapping contexts, in and out of the classrooms and publications. On to more nice words. Lane Crothers, to whom I am indebted an unknown sum, has been absolutely vital to this entire process, a force of helpful feedback, encouragement, and constructive criticism that impelled this project in a manageable direction. It was in his class on political culture that I developed an initial research prospectus, which has now metastasized into a full-fledged thesis. There were many times were I felt unsure about how to carry on with this project, and Professor Crothers offered nothing but patient and well-trained advice, in particular the truism that no research project is ever fully satisfying. In fact, every research project is marked by at least a subtle form of dissatisfaction at what could not be included or expanded upon in greater detail. i Daniel Breyer is a masterful and intensely entertaining teacher of philosophy, and as every student of his can attest, a model of how philosophy should be done: light-heartedly, ironically, and yet balanced by constant application and thoughtful reconsideration. I took multiple classes with Professor Breyer as an undergraduate and he even oversaw my minor in religious studies. In many ways this thesis codifies philosophy and religious studies as part of my political science degree, and for that I have Professor Breyer to thank. His devotion to student well-being, as well as his work with youth in an attempt to introduce philosophy at an earlier age, has inspired me to follow a similar path. Ali Riaz, already a distinguished professor, continues to be recognized for his work. Most recently, the Redbird Scholar celebrated his academic research that ‘unravels the tapestry of religion and politics’. From my perspective this was bound to be an understatement. I have found his views on this unraveling most instructive and challenging in a way that exceeds academic confines. The independent study on secularization theory I took with him cemented his take on the roles of religion in modern politics as authoritative and integral to positive, lasting change in states and societies everywhere. Professor Riaz has been a guiding and encouraging influence on me throughout my graduate career, and I remain in awe of his immaculate body of work and impact on others. Kam Shapiro taught a class on American race relations in the spring of 2016, one of my first in the politics department and one of the most insightful I have ever taken. As an undergraduate philosophy major, taking a class in political theory on such a pressing topic seemed like an important opportunity, and Professor Shapiro did not disappoint. To this day, I reconsider my thinking along the rather daring lines that were drew in that class. I noticed early on in our relationship that his expansive knowledge can very easily intimidate the average ii student, yet he only ever offers his insight and expertise through easygoing dialogue. A love for words and well-articulated questions enlivens his lectures and trains his students to pay attention to these almost intangible displays of genius. Professor Shapiro has been especially gracious with his time and affordances of energy (and his office), having spent the last year on a research- intensive sabbatical. Rest assured, while I have yet to make a significant dent in his collection of great books, I now can say that I have sat in the company (and chair) of greatness. Lastly, and mostly, I would like to acknowledge the love of my life, Cecelia. In our five years of blissful cohabitation, we have always grown together and our respective graduate programs have been no exception. Her ambitious and bright-eyed research on communication and community development has inspired me to explore more practical avenues for helping people in need. Because we have no gods and no masters, this thesis of mine has challenged our thinking about the utility of religion as a social device. No one can deny ‘religion’ is a great word and probably admits of no impeccable substitute. Oh well, we have agreed, our atheism is little more than a signal that ‘religion’ needs to change in accordance with our best knowledge and reach some understanding of spirituality that conforms to our most reasonable and most sustainable values. If anything, that is what the last two years have been about: combining our best knowledge to deepen the impact we make on others and the many wonderful friends we have made who are simply too numerous to tally. Many thanks and much love. J. R iii CONTENTS Page ACKNOWLEDGMENTS i CHAPTER I: INTRODUCTION 1 Statement of the Problem 1 Faith Too Big To Fail? 5 Research Questions 16 Relevance and Significance 18 Method and Roadmap 21 CHAPTER II: LITERATURE REVIEW 27 What is the New Atheism? 27 Understanding Religion and Secularism 33 Understanding the New Atheism 43 Reunderstanding the New Atheism 55 Summary 68 CHAPTER III: NEW ATHEISM, NEW WARS 71 Struggles 77 Uncritical Theory 79 Identity Politics 90 Bad Philosophy 99 Summary 113 CHAPTER IV: NEW ATHEISM, NEW LEFT 116 Wishes 120 Critical Theory 120 Affinity Politics 130 Public Philosophy 143 Summary 154 CHAPTER V: CONCLUSION 157 Restatement of the Problem 157 Future Research 158 REFERENCES 162 iv CHAPTER I: INTRODUCTION Man is manifestly not the measure of all things. This universe is shot through with mystery. The very fact of its being, and of our own, is a mystery absolute, and the only miracle worthy of the name. The consciousness that animates us is itself central to this mystery and the ground for any experience we might wish to call "spiritual." No myths need be embraced for us to commune with the profundity of our circumstance. No personal God need be worshiped for us to live in awe at the beauty and immensity of creation. No tribal fictions need be rehearsed for us to realize, one fine day, that we do, in fact, love our neighbors, that our happiness is inextricable from their own, and that our interdependence demands that people everywhere be given the opportunity to flourish.
Recommended publications
  • Sociology of Religion, Lundscow, Chapter 7, Cults

    Sociology of Religion, Lundscow, Chapter 7, Cults

    Sociology of Religion , Sociology 3440-090 Summer 2014, University of Utah Dr. Frank J. Page Office Room 429 Beh. Sci., Office Hours: Thursday - Friday, Noon – 4:00-pm Office Phone: (801) 531-3075 Home Phone: (801) 278-6413 Email: [email protected] I. Goals: The primary goal of this class is to give students a sociological understanding of religion as a powerful, important, and influential social institution that is associated with many social processes and phenomena that motivate and influence how people act and see the world around them. The class will rely on a variety of methods that include comparative analysis, theoretical explanations, ethnographic studies, and empirical studies designed to help students better understand religion and its impact upon societies, global-international events, and personal well-being. This overview of the nature, functioning, and diversity of religious institutions should help students make more discerning decisions regarding cultural, political, and moral issues that are often influenced by religion. II. Topics To Be Covered: The course is laid out in two parts. The first section begins with a review of conventional and theoretical conceptions of religion and an overview of the importance and centrality of religion to human societies. It emphasizes the diversity and nature of "religious experience" in terms of different denominations, cultures, classes, and individuals. This is followed by overview of sociological assumptions and theories and their application to religion. A variety of theoretical schools including, functionalism, conflict theory, exchange theory, sociology of knowledge, sociobiology, feminist theory, symbolic interactionism, postmodern and critical theory will be addressed and applied to religion.
  • Atheism AO2 Handout Part 1

    Atheism AO2 Handout Part 1

    Philosophy Of Religion / Atheism AO2 Atheism AO2 Handout Part 1 New Atheism successfully shows the incompatibility of science and religion. Evaluate this view. 1. New Atheists seem to argue that scientific theories are based only on evidence, whilst religion runs away from evidence. The claim is that atheism is rational and scientific while religion is irrational and superstitious. Faith is not an element of science since evidence for a correct conviction compels us to accept its truth. As Dawkins says “Faith is a state of mind that leads people to believe something – it doesn’t matter what – in the total absence of supporting evidence. If there were good supporting evidence, then faith would be superfluous…” However, Alister McGrath points out that such a view “fails to make the critical distinction between the ‘total absence of supporting evidence’ and the ‘absence of totally supporting evidence’.” It is true that some facts about the world have been proved (e.g. the chemical formula for water) but the bigger scientific questions such as is there a Grand Unified Theory that explains everything rely on answers based on the best evidence available but they are not certainties. In future years they may well change as new evidence is considered. As Gauch concluded “Science rests on faith”. Dawkins in his book “The God Delusion” does argue that the existence of God is a testable hypothesis and concludes that the hypothesis is falsifiable. Therefore the hypothesis is open to the scientific method. So here is a New Atheist proponent arguing that that the existence of God is a meaningful hypothesis.
  • (Dis)Believing and Belonging: Investigating the Narratives of Young British Atheists1

    (Dis)Believing and Belonging: Investigating the Narratives of Young British Atheists1

    (Dis)Believing and Belonging: Investigating the Narratives of Young British Atheists1 REBECCA CATTO Coventry University JANET ECCLES Independent Researcher Abstract The development and public prominence of the ‘New Atheism’ in the West, particularly the UK and USA, since the millennium has occasioned considerable growth in the study of ‘non-religion and secularity’. Such work is uncovering the variety and complexity of associated categories, different public figures, arguments and organi- zations involved. There has been a concomitant increase in research on youth and religion. As yet, however, little is known about young people who self-identify as atheist, though the statistics indicate that in Britain they are the cohort most likely to select ‘No religion’ in surveys. This article addresses this gap with presentation of data gathered with young British people who describe themselves as atheists. Atheism is a multifaceted identity for these young people developed over time and through experience. Disbelief in God and other non-empirical propositions such as in an afterlife and the efficacy of homeopathy and belief in progress through science, equality and freedom are central to their narratives. Hence belief is taken as central to the sociological study of atheism, but understood as formed and performed in relationships in which emotions play a key role. In the late modern context of contemporary Britain, these young people are far from amoral individualists. We employ current theorizing about the sacred to help understand respondents’ belief and value-oriented non-religious identities in context. Keywords: Atheism, Youth, UK, Belief, Sacred Phil Zuckerman (2010b, vii) notes that for decades British sociologist Colin Campbell’s call for a widespread analysis of irreligion went largely un- heeded (Campbell 1971).
  • Translation Ellehumanist Ur S

    Translation Ellehumanist Ur S

    . ! se rv ic e e a m n p d a t p hy a r t i c i a p l a tr t i u o is n m ility um h – e t h ic a l d e v e l o p m e n t peace and ice l just cia so critical thinking responsibility s gl s ob e al awaren e n vironmental ism ، American Humanist Association: www.americanhumanist.org Humanist Manifesto: www.americanhumanist.org/what-is-humanism/manifesto3/ The Ten Commitments: www.humanistcommitments.org Effective Altruism: https://www.effectivealtruism.org Camp Quest: www.campquest.org Foundation Beyond Belief: https://foundationbeyondbelief.org Oasis: www.networkoasis.org Sunday Assembly: www.sundayassembly.com Unitarian Universalist Association: www.UUA.org Center For Inquiry: www.centerforinquiry.org Freedom From Religion Foundation: www.ffrf.org American Ethical Union: www.aeu.org Secular Student Alliance: www.secularstudents.org Skeptic Society: https://www.skeptic.com Black Non-Believers www.blacknonbelievers.com Hispanic American Freethinkers: http://hafree.org Freethought Society: www.ftsociety.org Friendly Atheist: www.friendlyatheist.patheos.com Thinking Atheist: www.thethinkingatheist.com American Atheists: www.atheists.org Annabelle & Aiden Book Series: www.annabelleandaiden.com Stardust Book Series: www.stardustscience.com Society for Humanistic Judaism: www.shj.org Openly Secular: www.openlysecular.org Secular Coalition: www.secular.org Teacher Institute for Evolutionary Science: www.tieseducation.org Richard Dawkins Foundation: www.richarddawkins.net Humanists International: www.humanists.international Humanist Community
  • Humanism in America Today

    Humanism in America Today

    Humanism Humanism in America Today Humanism in America Today Summary: Writers and public figures with large audiences have contributed to the increasing popularity of atheism and Humanism in the United States. Thousands of people attended the 2012 Reason Rally, demonstrating the rise of atheism as a political movement, yet many atheists and Humanists experience marginalization within American culture and the challenge of translating a mostly intellectual doctrine into a social movement. On a rainy day in March of 2012, roughly 20,000 people from all parts of the Humanist, atheist, and freethinking movements converged on the National Mall in Washington, D.C. They gathered to celebrate secular values, dispel stereotypes about secular people, and support secular equality. Sponsored by twenty of the country’s major secular organizations, the Reason Rally featured live music and remarks from academics, bloggers, student activists, media personalities, comedians, and two members of Congress, including Representative Pete Stark (D-CA), the first openly atheistic member of Congress. The Reason Rally is evidence of a growing energy and excitement among atheists in America. This new visibility of secularism was inspired in part by the “New Atheists”—including authors such as Richard Dawkins, Sam Harris and Christopher Hitchens—who have pushed the discussion of the potentially dangerous aspects of religion to the forefront of the public discussion. More people than ever are turning away from traditional religious faith, with the Pew Forum on Religion and Public Life reporting that, as of 2014, some 20% of the US population identify as “unaffiliated.” This is particularly true of the rising millennial generation, which has increasingly come to view institutional and traditional religion as associated with conservative social views such as opposition to gay marriage, and is therefore much more skeptical of the role of religion in public life than their parents and grandparents.
  • Religion and Public Reasons Works of John Finnis Available from Oxford University Press

    Religion and Public Reasons Works of John Finnis Available from Oxford University Press

    Religion and Public Reasons Works of John Finnis available from Oxford University Press Reason in Action Collected Essays: Volume I Intention and Identity Collected Essays: Volume II Human Rights and Common Good Collected Essays: Volume III Philosophy of Law Collected Essays: Volume IV Religion and Public Reasons Collected Essays: Volume V Natural Law and Natural Rights Second Edition Aquinas Moral, Political, and Legal Theory Nuclear Deterrence, Morality and Realism with Joseph Boyle and Germain Grisez RELIGION AND PUBLIC REASONS Collected Essays: Volume V John Finnis 1 3 Great Clarendon Street, Oxford OX2 6DP Oxford University Press is a department of the University of Oxford. It furthers the University’s objective of excellence in research, scholarship, and education by publishing worldwide in Oxford New York Auckland Cape Town Dar es Salaam Hong Kong Karachi Kuala Lumpur Madrid Melbourne Mexico City Nairobi New Delhi Shanghai Taipei Toronto With offi ces in Argentina Austria Brazil Chile Czech Republic France Greece Guatemala Hungary Italy Japan Poland Portugal Singapore South Korea Switzerland Thailand Turkey Ukraine Vietnam Oxford is a registered trade mark of Oxford University Press in the UK and in certain other countries Published in the United States by Oxford University Press Inc., New York © J. M. Finnis, 2011 The moral rights of the author have been asserted Crown Copyright material reproduced with the permission of the Controller, HMSO (under the terms of the Click Use licence) Database right Oxford University Press (maker) First published 2011 All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted, in any form or by any means, without the prior permission in writing of Oxford University Press, or as expressly permitted by law, or under terms agreed with the appropriate reprographics rights organization.
  • VU Research Portal

    VU Research Portal

    VU Research Portal Science and Scientism in Popular Science Writing de Ridder, G.J. published in Social Epistemology Review and Reply Collective 2014 document version Publisher's PDF, also known as Version of record Link to publication in VU Research Portal citation for published version (APA) de Ridder, G. J. (2014). Science and Scientism in Popular Science Writing. Social Epistemology Review and Reply Collective, 3(12), 23-39. http://wp.me/p1Bfg0-1KE General rights Copyright and moral rights for the publications made accessible in the public portal are retained by the authors and/or other copyright owners and it is a condition of accessing publications that users recognise and abide by the legal requirements associated with these rights. • Users may download and print one copy of any publication from the public portal for the purpose of private study or research. • You may not further distribute the material or use it for any profit-making activity or commercial gain • You may freely distribute the URL identifying the publication in the public portal ? Take down policy If you believe that this document breaches copyright please contact us providing details, and we will remove access to the work immediately and investigate your claim. E-mail address: [email protected] Download date: 02. Oct. 2021 Social Epistemology Review and Reply Collective, 2014 Vol. 3, No. 12, 23-39. http://wp.me/p1Bfg0-1KE Science and Scientism in Popular Science Writing Jeroen de Ridder, VU University Amsterdam Abstract If one is to believe recent popular scientific accounts of developments in physics, biology, neuroscience, and cognitive science, most of the perennial philosophical questions have been wrested from the hands of philosophers by now, only to be resolved (or sometimes dissolved) by contemporary science.
  • Agency: Moral Identity and Free Will

    Agency: Moral Identity and Free Will

    D Agency AVID Moral Identity and Free Will W DAVID WEISSMAN EISSMAN There is agency in all we do: thinking, doing, or making. We invent a tune, play, or use it to celebrate an occasion. Or we make a conceptual leap and ask more ab- stract ques� ons about the condi� ons for agency. They include autonomy and self- appraisal, each contested by arguments immersing us in circumstances we don’t control. But can it be true we that have no personal responsibility for all we think Agency and do? Agency: Moral Ident ty and Free Will proposes that delibera� on, choice, and free will emerged within the evolu� onary history of animals with a physical advantage: Moral Identity organisms having cell walls or exoskeletons had an internal space within which to protect themselves from external threats or encounters. This defense was both and Free Will structural and ac� ve: such organisms could ignore intrusions or inhibit risky behav- ior. Their capaci� es evolved with � me: inhibi� on became the power to deliberate and choose the manner of one’s responses. Hence the ability of humans and some other animals to determine their reac� ons to problema� c situa� ons or to informa- � on that alters values and choices. This is free will as a material power, not as the DAVID WEISSMAN conclusion to a conceptual argument. Having it makes us morally responsible for much we do. It prefi gures moral iden� ty. A GENCY Closely argued but plainly wri� en, Agency: Moral Ident ty and Free Will speaks for autonomy and responsibility when both are eclipsed by ideas that embed us in his- tory or tradi� on.
  • Vision of Universal Identity in World Religions: from Life-Incoherent to Life- Grounded Spirituality – John Mcmurtry

    Vision of Universal Identity in World Religions: from Life-Incoherent to Life- Grounded Spirituality – John Mcmurtry

    PHILOSOPHY AND WORLD PROBLEMS – Vision of Universal Identity in World Religions: From Life-Incoherent to Life- Grounded Spirituality – John McMurtry VISIONS OF UNIVERSAL IDENTITY IN WORLD RELIGIONS: FROM LIFE-INCOHERENT TO LIFE-GROUNDED SPIRITUALITY John McMurtry University of Guelph,Guelph NIG 2W1, Canada Keywords: atman, breath, Buddhism, capitalist religion, civil commons, death, dream model, dualities, externalist fallacy, false religion, God, the Great Round, I- consciousness, idolatry, illusionism, integral yoga, invisible hand, incentives, Islam, Jesus, Krishna, Lao, life necessities/needs, life-coherence principle, prophets, sacrifice levels, self/self-group, social orders, spiritual ecology, structures of life blindness, suffering, Sufis, sustainability, Tantric, theo-capitalism, Vedas/Vedanta, war Contents 1. Understanding False Religion across History and Cultures 1.1 Spiritual Consciousness versus False Religion 1.2 Variations of Sacrificial Theme 1.3 The Unseen Contradictions 2. From Life Sacrifice for Selfish Gain to Offerings for Renewal of the Great Round 2.1. Sustainability of Life Systems versus Sustainability of Profit 3. The Animating Breath of Life: The Unseen Common Ground of the Spiritual Across Religions 4. Sacrificing Self to Enable Life across Divisions: The Ancient Spiritual Vision 5. What Is the I That Has a Body? Rational Explanation of the Infinite Consciousness Within 6. Counter-Argument: How Analytic Philosophy and Science Explain Away Inner Life 7. From the Soul of the Upanishads to the Ecology of Universal Life Identity 8. Reconnecting Heaven to Earth: The Inner-Outer Infinitude of Spiritual Comprehension 9. Re-Grounding Spirituality: From the Light-Fields to Universal Life Necessities 9.1. Why the Buddhist Reformation of Hinduism Still Does Not Solve the Problem 9.2.
  • Bertschausen, Roger

    Bertschausen, Roger

    1 “THE INTERSECTION OF SCIENCE AND RELIGION: 1) SCIENCE AND RELIGION IN CONFLICT” by the Rev. Roger Bertschausen Fox Valley Unitarian Universalist Fellowship2600 E. Philip Ln. P.O. Box 1791 Appleton, WI 54912-1791 (920) 731-0849 Website: http://www.focol.org/~fvuuf January 28, 2001 Call to Gather: “When we consider what religion is for (humanity) and what science is, it is no exaggeration to say that the future course of history depends upon the decision of this generation as to the relations between them.” —Alfred North Whitehead, 19251 Readings: From The History of the Conflict Between Religion and Science by William Draper, 1874 Will modern civilization consent to abandon the career of advancement which has given it so much power and happiness…Will it submit to the dictation of a power (religion)…which kept Europe in a stagnant condition for many centuries, ferociously suppressing by the stake and the sword every attempt at progress; a power that is founded in a cloud of mysteries; that sets itself above reason and common sense; that loudly proclaims the hatred it entertains against liberty of thought and freedom in civil institutions… Then has it in truth come to this, that Roman Christianity and Science are recognized by their respective adherents as being absolutely incompatible; they cannot exist together; one must yield to the other; mankind must make its choice—it cannot have both.2 From the First Vatican Council— Let him be anathema… Who shall say that no miracles can be wrought, or that they can never be known with certainty, and that the divine origin of Christianity cannot be proved by them… Who shall say that human sciences ought to be pursued in such a spirit of freedom that one may be allowed to hold as true their assertions, even when opposed to revealed doctrine.
  • Intentional Systems in Cognitive Ethology: the "Panglossian Paradigm" Defended

    Intentional Systems in Cognitive Ethology: the "Panglossian Paradigm" Defended

    THE BEHAVIORAL AND BRAIN SCIENCES (1983) 6, 343-390 Printed in the United States of America Intentional systems in cognitive ethology: The "Panglossian paradigm" defended Daniel C. Dennett Department of Philosophy, Tufts University, Medford, Mass. 02155 Abstract: Ethologists and others studying animal behavior in a "cognitive" spirit are in need of a descriptive language and method that are neither anachronistically bound by behaviorist scruples nor prematurely committed to particular "information-processing models. "Just such an interim descriptive method can be found in intentional system theory. The use of intentional system theory is illustrated with the case of the apparently communicative behavior of vervet monkeys. A way of using the theory to generate data - including usable, testable "anecdotal" data - is sketched. The underlying assumptions of this approach can be seen to ally it directly with "adaptationist' theorizing in evolutionary biology, which has recently come under attack from Stephen Gould and Richard Lewontin, who castigate it as the "Panglossian paradigm." Their arguments, which are strongly analogous to B. F. Skinner's arguments against "mentalism," point to certain pitfalls that attend the careless exercise of such "Panglossian" thinking (and rival varieties of thinking as well), but do not constitute a fundamental objection to either adaptationist theorizing or its cousin, intentional system theory. Keywords: adaptation; animal cognition; behaviorism; cognitive ethology; communication; comparative psychology; consciousness;
  • "Good Without God": Happiness and Pleasure Among the Humanists

    "Good Without God": Happiness and Pleasure Among the Humanists

    Matthew Engelke "Good without God": happiness and pleasure among the humanists Article (Published version) (Refereed) Original citation: Engelke, Matthew (2015) "Good without God": happiness and pleasure among the humanists. HAU: Journal of Ethnographic Theory, 5 (3). pp. 69-91. ISSN 2049-1115 DOI: 10.14318/hau5.3.005 Reuse of this item is permitted through licensing under the Creative Commons: © 2015 The Author CC BY 4.0 This version available at: http://eprints.lse.ac.uk/65522/ Available in LSE Research Online: February 2016 LSE has developed LSE Research Online so that users may access research output of the School. Copyright © and Moral Rights for the papers on this site are retained by the individual authors and/or other copyright owners. You may freely distribute the URL (http://eprints.lse.ac.uk) of the LSE Research Online website. 2015 | Hau: Journal of Ethnographic Theory 5 (3): 69–91 SPECIAL ISSUE “Good without God” Happiness and pleasure among the humanists Matthew Engelke, London School of Economics and Political Science In this article, I explore conceptions of happiness and pleasure among secular humanists in Britain. Based on fieldwork among members of the British Humanist Association, and its associated local groups, I argue that happiness for the humanists is both the promise and demand of enlightenment, of an appeal to reason over and against what they see as the irrationality of religion. For them, happiness and pleasure are subjective experiences, but they are also indices of philosophical and ethical commitments.