Atheism and Theism JJ Haldane - Common Sense Atheism
Atheism and Theism JJ Haldane - Common Sense Atheism
Atheism and Theism JJ Haldane - Common Sense Atheism
You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles
YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.
<strong>Atheism</strong> <strong>and</strong> <strong>Theism</strong> 77<br />
In this respect, <strong>and</strong> in the robustness of his own sense of the real, he<br />
reminds me of figures in our common intellectual ancestry, viz. the Scottish<br />
‘<strong>Common</strong> <strong>Sense</strong> Realists’ – most famously Thomas Reid (1710–96) whose<br />
best known writings are directed against the philosophical scepticism of his<br />
fellow-Scot, <strong>and</strong> arguably the greatest British born philosopher, viz. David<br />
Hume (1711–76). In those days, particularly in Scotl<strong>and</strong>, philosophers debated<br />
issues of general importance in styles that were intended to be accessible, so<br />
far as possible, to the educated reader. In this century, however, <strong>and</strong> especially<br />
since the Second World War, philosophy has become resolutely academic<br />
<strong>and</strong> professional. There have been clear gains from this <strong>and</strong> from the associated<br />
trend towards specialization; but there have also been real losses, one<br />
of which is the unwillingness or inability of many philosophers to engage in<br />
wide-ranging but serious discussions in a manner accessible to those who are<br />
not already familiar with a specific agenda or technical vocabulary. Smart is<br />
an exception to this, <strong>and</strong> chapter 1 is a good example of how one can range<br />
far, making points that are of general interest, while observing professional<br />
st<strong>and</strong>ards of clarity <strong>and</strong> rigour. I shall try to emulate his good example.<br />
We would hardly be ‘in debate’ if we did not hold opposing views, <strong>and</strong><br />
given the depth <strong>and</strong> extent of the issues encompassed by atheism <strong>and</strong> theism<br />
it will be no surprise that there is much about which we disagree. Nevertheless<br />
I want to begin by emphasizing a point of common conviction. I do<br />
so not for the sake of initial courtesies, but because the point in question<br />
is a central philosophical thesis, now much controverted, <strong>and</strong> because it is<br />
intimately connected with my commitment to theism – <strong>and</strong>, indeed, with<br />
Smart’s attachment to atheism. This is the belief in metaphysical realism:<br />
the idea that there exists a world independent of any finite mind <strong>and</strong> that<br />
the nature of this mind-independent world is something it possesses<br />
independently of <strong>and</strong> prior to its description by common sense, science or<br />
philosophy.<br />
Smart is a metaphysical realist <strong>and</strong> so am I. We differ in what exactly we<br />
think reality is like <strong>and</strong> more relevantly we differ over the question of whether<br />
reality is to be explained as the creation of a divine being or is something<br />
whose existence <strong>and</strong> fundamental character call for no explanation. But<br />
although these are major disagreements we find ourselves united in opposing<br />
a strong anti-realist current in contemporary philosophy. Anti-realism is the<br />
view (or rather, a grouping of views) that ‘reality’ is not independent of us, in<br />
particular of our ways of thinking. One kind of anti-realism is the ‘phenomenalism’<br />
discussed by Smart <strong>and</strong> mentioned above. Another is ‘ontological<br />
relativism’ – the idea that there is no saying what exists independently of<br />
some scheme of classification. This is not the harmless claim that unless<br />
we have the means to describe things – the relevant concepts <strong>and</strong> words – we<br />
can’t describe them; but rather the striking thesis that the things in question