{"id":8444,"date":"2013-10-07T13:51:36","date_gmt":"2013-10-07T13:51:36","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/maverickphilosopher.blog\/index.php\/2013\/10\/07\/progressivism-as-religion-peter-berkowitz-on-ronald-dworkin\/"},"modified":"2013-10-07T13:51:36","modified_gmt":"2013-10-07T13:51:36","slug":"progressivism-as-religion-peter-berkowitz-on-ronald-dworkin","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/maverickphilosopher.blog\/index.php\/2013\/10\/07\/progressivism-as-religion-peter-berkowitz-on-ronald-dworkin\/","title":{"rendered":"Progressivism as Religion: Peter Berkowitz on Ronald Dworkin"},"content":{"rendered":"

Here<\/a>.  Excerpt:<\/span><\/p>\n

\n

For Dworkin, the meaning of religion consists in \u201ctwo central judgments about value\u201d that he believes religious people — theists and some atheists — regard as objectively true. First, \u201ceach person has an innate and inescapable responsibility to try to make his life a successful one: that means living well, accepting ethical responsibilities to oneself as well as moral responsibilities to others, not just if we happen to think this important but because it is in itself important whether we think so or not.\u201d Second, \u201cwhat we call \u2018nature\u2019 — the universe as a whole and in all its parts — is not just a matter of fact but is itself sublime: something of intrinsic value and wonder.\u201d<\/span><\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n

If this is what Dworkin maintains, then his characterization of religion leaves a lot to be desired, to put it mildly.  This is obviously NOT what the meaning of religion consists in<\/em> on any adequate understanding of religion.  Religion cannot be reduced to axiology.  True, the religious will accept that there are objective values and disvalues.  But such acceptance, even if necessary for being religious, is not sufficient.  <\/span><\/p>\n

All or most of the following are beliefs essential to anything that can be legitimately called a religion:<\/span><\/p>\n

1.
\nThe belief that there is what William James calls an "unseen order."
\n(Varieties of Religious Experience<\/em>, p. 53)  This is a realm of absolute
\nreality that lies beyond the perception of the five outer senses and their
\ninstrumental extensions.  It is also inaccessible to inner sense or
\nintrospection.  It is also not a realm of mere abstracta or thought-contents. 
\nSo it lies beyond the discursive intellect.  It is accessible from our side via
\nmystical and religious experience.  An initiative from its side is not to be
\nruled out in the form of revelation.<\/span><\/p>\n

2.
\nThe  belief that there is a supreme good for humans and that "our supreme good
\nlies in harmoniously adjusting ourselves" to the "unseen order."
\n(Varieties<\/em>, p. 53)<\/span><\/p>\n

3.
\nThe conviction that we are morally deficient, and that this deficiency impedes
\nour adjustment to the unseen order.  Man is in some some sense fallen from the
\nmoral height at which he would have ready access to the unseen order.  His moral
\ncorruption, however it came about, has noetic consequences.  <\/span><\/p>\n

4.
\nThe conviction  that our moral deficiency cannot be made sufficiently good by
\nour own efforts to afford us ready access to the unseen order.<\/span><\/p>\n

5. 
\nThe conviction that adjustment to the unseen order requires moral
\npurification\/transformation.<\/span><\/p>\n

6.
\nThe conviction that help from the side of the unseen order is available to bring
\nabout this purification and adjustment.<\/span><\/p>\n

7.
\nThe conviction that the sensible order is not plenary in point of reality or
\nvalue, that it is ontologically and axiologically derivative.  It is a
\nmanifestation or emanation or creation of the unseen order.<\/span><\/p>\n

In a word, Dworkin's characterization leaves out Transcendence;<\/em> it leaves out what is absolutely central to religion, namely, the conviction that there is a transcendent dimension, an "unseen order," (see #1 supra) and that adjustment to this order is essential to human flourishing  (see #2 supra).<\/span><\/p>\n

What Dworkin has delivered is a miserable leftist substitute for religion.  Being a leftist, he of course cannot value or perhaps even understand the genuine article; but he at least could have had the intellectual honesty not to try to redefine something whose definition is tolerably clear.  Berkowitz has it right:<\/span><\/p>\n

\n

. . . Dworkin redefines religion to conform to his progressive sensibilities. What he presents as the offering of an olive branch to believers may seem to a person of faith, with justice, as a hostile takeover attempt. The steps by which Dworkin appropriates the religious label for his own left-liberal and atheistic outlook provide a case study in how the progressive mind, under the guise of conciliation, seeks to command the moral high ground exclusively and discredit that which differs from it.<\/span><\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n

"Hostile takeover" is right.  Berkowitz also perceptively notes that<\/span><\/p>\n

\n

Dworkin also overlooks a formidable problem latent in his sanctification of the progressive perspective. If progressivism counts as a religion, then enacting the left-liberal policy agenda would seem to represent an establishment of religion in violation of the First Amendment.<\/span><\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n

But of course progressivism is not<\/em> a religion, but an anti-religious political ideology.  Nevertheless, one can and must ask:  if it is wrong for the State to impose religion on its citizens, why isn't it also wrong  for the State to impose leftist ideology on its citizens as it now doing here in the USA?
<\/span><\/p>\n

I take a stab at this question in Separation of Leftism and State<\/a>.<\/span><\/p>\n

\nRelated articles<\/legend>\n
\n
\"\"<\/a>Hitchens: No Understanding of Religion<\/a><\/div>\n
\"\"<\/a>Morality, Religion, Law<\/a><\/div>\n
\"\"<\/a>Religious Belief and What Inclines Me to It<\/a><\/div>\n
\"\"<\/a>Would Naturalism Make Life Easier?<\/a><\/div>\n
\"\"<\/a>Thomas Nagel Reviews Alvin Plantinga<\/a><\/div>\n
\"\"<\/a>A Non-Coercive Attempt to Dissuade Me From Religious Belief<\/a><\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/fieldset>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Here.  Excerpt: For Dworkin, the meaning of religion consists in \u201ctwo central judgments about value\u201d that he believes religious people — theists and some atheists — regard as objectively true. First, \u201ceach person has an innate and inescapable responsibility to try to make his life a successful one: that means living well, accepting ethical responsibilities … Continue reading “Progressivism as Religion: Peter Berkowitz on Ronald Dworkin”<\/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":[163,139,48],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-8444","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-leftism-and-political-correctness","category-religion","category-social-and-political-philosophy"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/maverickphilosopher.blog\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/8444","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=8444"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/maverickphilosopher.blog\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/8444\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/maverickphilosopher.blog\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=8444"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/maverickphilosopher.blog\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=8444"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/maverickphilosopher.blog\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=8444"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}