{"id":7552,"date":"2014-11-29T10:00:13","date_gmt":"2014-11-29T10:00:13","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/maverickphilosopher.blog\/index.php\/2014\/11\/29\/do-you-think-your-views-will-ever-change-1\/"},"modified":"2014-11-29T10:00:13","modified_gmt":"2014-11-29T10:00:13","slug":"do-you-think-your-views-will-ever-change-1","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/maverickphilosopher.blog\/index.php\/2014\/11\/29\/do-you-think-your-views-will-ever-change-1\/","title":{"rendered":"Do You Think Your Views Will Ever Change?"},"content":{"rendered":"

The question was put to atheist A. C. Grayling. His response<\/a>:<\/span><\/p>\n

\n

No, my views will not change; I am confident in the rationalist tradition which has evaluated the metaphysical and ethical claims of non-naturalistic theories, and definitively shown them to be vacuous in all respects other than the psychological effect they have on those credulous enough to accept them.<\/span><\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n

Should we perhaps speak here of the faith of  a rationalist?  And isn't there something unphilosophical about Grayling's stance?  He is sure that his views will not change and confident in the rationalist tradition.  He is not open to having his views changed by further thought or argument or evidence.  Not very philosophical, not very Socratic.  Socrates knew only that he did not know.  Grayling knows<\/em>. <\/span><\/p>\n

He blusters when he speaks of what has been "definitely shown."  Nothing of a substantive nature has ever been definitively shown in philosophy, and certainly not the "vacuousness" of the metaphysical and ethical claims  of non-naturalism.  Besides, it is simply false to say that these claims are "vacuous."  Though they may be false, for all we know, they are quite definite and meaningful claims.  'Vacuous' means 'empty.'  In this context it means empty of sense or significance.  <\/span><\/p>\n

What you have to understand about Grayling and his New Atheist ilk is that they are ideologues, no different in this respect from their anti-naturalist, religious counterparts.  (Compare the Thomist view that it has been definitely shown that God exists, that the existence of God is knowable with certainty by unaided human reason.)  Grayling and Co.  are not philosophers who love the truth and seek it because they don't have it; they fancy themselves possessors of the truth and its guardians against the benighted.<\/span><\/p>\n

So if unshakable confidence in the definitive truth of one's position can lead to violence and oppression, why is this a danger only on the religious side of the ideological divide and not on the anti-religious side?  That is a question that ought not be evaded.  Don't forget what the communists did to the religious people, instituitions, monuments, and sites in the lands where they gained control.
<\/span><\/p>\n

Grayling posts<\/a><\/span> of mine.  They are polemical.  He polemicizes; I polemicize right back.  Meet polemics with polemics, civil truth-seeking dialog with civil truth-seeking dialog.
<\/span><\/p>\n

As one of my aphorisms has it:  Be kind, but be prepared to reply in<\/em> kind.<\/span><\/p>\n

\nRelated articles<\/legend>\n
\n
\"\"<\/a>Woody Allen, Meet Reginald Garrigou-Lagrange<\/a><\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/fieldset>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

The question was put to atheist A. C. Grayling. His response: No, my views will not change; I am confident in the rationalist tradition which has evaluated the metaphysical and ethical claims of non-naturalistic theories, and definitively shown them to be vacuous in all respects other than the psychological effect they have on those credulous … Continue reading “Do You Think Your Views Will Ever Change?”<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":2,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[191],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-7552","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-atheism-and-theism"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/maverickphilosopher.blog\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/7552","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/maverickphilosopher.blog\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/maverickphilosopher.blog\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/maverickphilosopher.blog\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/2"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/maverickphilosopher.blog\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=7552"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/maverickphilosopher.blog\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/7552\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/maverickphilosopher.blog\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=7552"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/maverickphilosopher.blog\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=7552"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/maverickphilosopher.blog\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=7552"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}