Throughout a childhood spent questioning the nature of biblical tales and the dissolution of a tumultuous first marriage, Andra Miller knew that she still believed in goodness.
Read her story in our latest JourneysToHumanism series.
https://thehumanist.com/features/profiles/journeys-to-humanism-the-universe-is-the-answer
Monday, April 29, 2024
atheism before the Enlightenment
'Ultimately, the student of atheism remains in a hall of mirrors. Bedazzled by images of doubt and disbelief, we still can't easily tell if our eyes are deceiving us.'
Alexandra Walsham on uncovering evidence of atheism before the Enlightenment:
https://www.lrb.co.uk/the-paper/v46/n08/alexandra-walsham/trickes-of-the-clergye
Alexandra Walsham on uncovering evidence of atheism before the Enlightenment:
https://www.lrb.co.uk/the-paper/v46/n08/alexandra-walsham/trickes-of-the-clergye
Monday, April 22, 2024
Religion as Make-Believe
The Fake Fake-News Problem and the Truth About Misinformation | The New Yorker
...Sperber concluded that there are two kinds of beliefs. The first he has called "factual" beliefs. Factual beliefs—such as the belief that chairs exist and that leopards are dangerous—guide behavior and tolerate little inconsistency; you can't believe that leopards do and do not eat livestock. The second category he has called "symbolic" beliefs. These beliefs might feel genuine, but they're cordoned off from action and expectation. We are, in turn, much more accepting of inconsistency when it comes to symbolic beliefs; we can believe, say, that God is all-powerful and good while allowing for the existence of evil and suffering.
In a masterly new book, "Religion as Make-Believe" (Harvard), Neil Van Leeuwen, a philosopher at Georgia State University, returns to Sperber's ideas with notable rigor. He analyzes beliefs with a taxonomist's care, classifying different types and identifying the properties that distinguish them. He proposes that humans represent and use factual beliefs differently from symbolic beliefs, which he terms "credences." Factual beliefs are for modelling reality and behaving optimally within it. Because of their function in guiding action, they exhibit features like "involuntariness" (you can't decide to adopt them) and "evidential vulnerability" (they respond to evidence). Symbolic beliefs, meanwhile, largely serve social ends, not epistemic ones, so we can hold them even in the face of contradictory evidence...
https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2024/04/22/dont-believe-what-theyre-telling-you-about-misinformation?_gl=1*5wkxo5*_up*MQ..&gclid=05dc19316ca81fce994f7f12f1af4029&gclsrc=3p.ds
...Sperber concluded that there are two kinds of beliefs. The first he has called "factual" beliefs. Factual beliefs—such as the belief that chairs exist and that leopards are dangerous—guide behavior and tolerate little inconsistency; you can't believe that leopards do and do not eat livestock. The second category he has called "symbolic" beliefs. These beliefs might feel genuine, but they're cordoned off from action and expectation. We are, in turn, much more accepting of inconsistency when it comes to symbolic beliefs; we can believe, say, that God is all-powerful and good while allowing for the existence of evil and suffering.
In a masterly new book, "Religion as Make-Believe" (Harvard), Neil Van Leeuwen, a philosopher at Georgia State University, returns to Sperber's ideas with notable rigor. He analyzes beliefs with a taxonomist's care, classifying different types and identifying the properties that distinguish them. He proposes that humans represent and use factual beliefs differently from symbolic beliefs, which he terms "credences." Factual beliefs are for modelling reality and behaving optimally within it. Because of their function in guiding action, they exhibit features like "involuntariness" (you can't decide to adopt them) and "evidential vulnerability" (they respond to evidence). Symbolic beliefs, meanwhile, largely serve social ends, not epistemic ones, so we can hold them even in the face of contradictory evidence...
https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2024/04/22/dont-believe-what-theyre-telling-you-about-misinformation?_gl=1*5wkxo5*_up*MQ..&gclid=05dc19316ca81fce994f7f12f1af4029&gclsrc=3p.ds
faith in reason
"To save the world requires faith and courage: faith in reason, and courage to proclaim what reason shows to be true."
— Bertrand Russell, The Prospects of Industrial Civilization
— Bertrand Russell, The Prospects of Industrial Civilization
May 4
Every May 4, nontheists recognize the importance of reason, critical thought, and free inquiry to solve social problems and promote humankind's welfare. Read AHA Staff recommendations for how you can show your support for a national or local Day of Reason. https://bit.ly/443IFvP
Saturday, April 20, 2024
Daniel Dennett (1942-2024)
Remembering speaking with Dennet in Chicago at the APA February 2020, Told him I appreciated his email correspondence back in the 90s (and then later when I asked if he could arrange a meeting with Dawkins). Sat across the aisle from him listening to Philip Kitcher and Martha Nussbaum at that meeting.
"...I saw with greater clarity than ever before in my life that when I say "Thank goodness!" this is not merely a euphemism for "Thank God!" (We atheists don't believe that there is any God to thank.) I really do mean thank goodness! There is a lot of goodness in this world, and more goodness every day, and this fantastic human-made fabric of excellence is genuinely responsible for the fact that I am alive today. It is a worthy recipient of the gratitude I feel today, and I want to celebrate that fact here and now…" https://www.edge.org/conversation/daniel_c_dennett-thank-goodness
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)