This book is a collection of essays
by the two authors the former of whom used to be the editor of the humanist
magazine Free Inquiry, the philosophy journal Philo and the
medical journal The Scientific Review of Alternative Medicine while the
latter is the current executive editor of Philo, visiting research
professor of philosophy at SUNY Buffalo and director of educational programs at
the Center for Inquiry. Both have published books and articles in their field.

The essays are organized in such a
way as to argue for the following seventeen humanist propositions:

1.      Human
beings are superior to the rest of nature in their value, powers, and place in
the world.

2.      We are
physical systems with minds, but devoid of immaterial souls.

3.      This
earthly life is the only one we can hope for and the only one we need.

4.      Humanity
is not fallen by nature and is capable of moral self-improvement.

5.      We
are not determined beings in a determined universe but are in some sense free
to choose our own paths.

6.      Humans
are not controlled by fate or divine power but are sometimes free to do
otherwise.

7.      Morality
cannot be based on the supernatural or the nonrational.

8.      Morality
has a rationalist or naturalistic basis.

9.      We
can know many things through reason and unfettered inquiry, but skepticism and
faith block understanding.

10.  Even in a world without God
and ultimate authorities, there is such a thing as objective truth.

11.  Science is a privileged
source of knowledge about the world.

12.  Science undermines
supernatural religion.

13.  There is no warrant for
believing in God, as traditionally conceived.

14.  There is good reason to deny
the existence of God, as traditionally conceived.

15.  All people have equal moral
rights and deserve corresponding political rights.

16.  Governments and other public
institutions should not favor a religious faith or religion in general.

17.  A good society nurtures
freedom of conscience, toleration, and open, critical dialogue.

The authors are at pains to
emphasize that several of these propositions are shared by people holding a
bewildering variety of religious and non-religious views. They are also honest
enough to admit that humanism, like so many things, is a spectrum and that some
people who may term themselves ‘humanists’ might actually not agree with some
of the propositions. They point out that during the Renaissance people such as
Erasmus and Thomas More would have been happy to enjoy the epithet ‘humanist’.
However, their essays are meant to inform the reader about contemporary secular
humanism.

The seventeen propositions are
covered in a set of eight chapters. On the whole, these are fairly dense — the
book is serious reading — and very well argued pieces. Each chapter shows an
extent of reading and research that is both deep and wide, embracing ancient,
mediaeval and the most contemporary of writers. The book is very ambitious in
its scope since it has to cover everything from theology through politics to
quantum physics. To readers with a rationalist, enquiring mind, this book is a
goldmine of precious nuggets. To open-minded religious people, the essays are
going to be thought-provoking. This reviewer’s only reservation concerns this
intended audience. Because the essays are so dense and philosophical, will the
book end up in the hands of those who are really interested in weighing up the
pros and cons of the secular versus the religious arguments? In many ways we
are living in a world that is becoming more polarized between secular and
religious. President Bush’s slip of the tongue in describing the war in Iraq as
a crusade, is a reminder of how much evil has been committed in the name of the
world’s religions. If nothing else, this should prompt thinking people to
reflect upon the possible differences between Religion and religions as well as
the differences between any religious view and that of the secular humanist

This reviewer has degrees in both
philosophy and theology and found the book’s arguments scrupulously fair. The
authors give full scope to the position of contemporary philosophers who
support the religious position. Religious readers should not therefore be offended.

As so often, a few small errors
have crept in. The monk who argued against Anselm’s ontological proof for God’s
existence was Gaunilo and not Guanilo (p.163), ‘civil official’ (p.205) should
read ‘civil officials’ and ‘phenomena’ (p.214) should read ‘phenomenon’. A more
serious error is the confusion over whether it was Joseph Priestley or
Antoine-Laurent (misspelled as Lavrent in the text) Lavoisier who believed in
phlogiston (p.141). It was not the case that "Lavoisier’s understanding of
the situation was based on his belief in phlogiston." On the contrary, it
was Lavoisier who debunked the phlogiston theory by identifying and naming
oxygen as is made clear later in a quotation at the bottom of p.141.  Not so
much an error but a highly contentious point is the inclusion of the Hebrew God
Yahweh among the finite gods "laden with limitations such as weakness,
fallibility, and immorality" (p.157) in contradistinction to the infinite
God of Judaism. This is likely to raise a few Jewish eyebrows!

This book is, despite the above
comments, thorough and profound. It is not an easy read and is possibly best
read as a set of quasi-independent essays. For any intelligent thinker who is
interested in the secular versus the religious arguments, this is an excellent
compendium. There are extensive quotations from a wide range of authors, a
summary as well as study questions, discussion questions, a field problem,
suggestions for further reading and a superb list of endnotes with
bibliographical references at the end of each chapter. All of this means that
the book would be of greatest use as a set text in a study group meeting weekly
or monthly.

 

 

 

© 2005 Kevin M. Purday

 

 

Kevin M. Purday
is Head of the Cambridge International High School in Jordan and recently completed the Philosophy & Ethics of
Mental Health course in the Philosophy Dept. at the University of Warwick.

Categories: Philosophical