Currents in Naturalism

 March - April 2008

~ Center for Naturalism Newsletter ~

~ Worldview Naturalism - a status report as Naturalism.Org turns 10.

~ Getting Lucid about Consciousness - experience might be a virtual reality.

~ Don't Forget About Me - how to avoid demoralization by determinism.

~ Living with Darwin - not surprisingly, we are of two minds about science (Darwin Day op-ed).

_________________________________________________

Heads Up

~ American Atheists national conference, March 21-23 in Minneapolis.

~ Inter-Faith Dialog on Consciousness and Inner Technologies, April 5, 5 pm, Woburn, MA, including a presentation on "The science of consciousness" with CFN director Tom Clark.   

~ Tufts Freethought Society presents Freethought Week, April 7-13, including April 7 panel on "Keeping Public Schools Secular" with Ken Miller, Barbara Forrest, and Ellery Schempp; details forthcoming.

~ Greg Graffin, 2008 Cultural Humanism awardee, will appear April 26, 8 pm in Cambridge, MA, details here; more on Graffin's work here.

~ Carl Zimmer and Michael Gazzaniga discuss the MacArthur Foundation Law and Neuroscience Project.

~ The Secular Web's "Great Debate" between naturalism and theism continues, with Part 3 and Part 4 now online.

~ Psychologist John Baer on why determinism is your friend.

~ Apex Naturalism - an online magazine for the naturalistic community.

~ Translations of the CFN Guide to Naturalism and other materials are now becoming available.

~ Books of note: 

The Myth of Free Will (2nd edition, revised and expanded) by Cris Evatt, see below.

The Secular Conscience: Why Belief Belongs in Public Life by Austin Dacey.

Short Takes

New Edition of The Myth of Free Will

Hawaiian writer Cris Evatt has revised and expanded her book The Myth of Free Will, making for an even better debunking. The new edition can be found here. This is not for academic philosophers, but for folks who have started to suspect that the immaterial homunculus inside the head, aka the soul, might have gone missing. In a playful and sympathetic voice, and with plenty of informal graphics and sidebars, Evatt guides us through readings and quotes from well-known thinkers (including several academic philosophers), all of which expose contra-causal free will for the sometimes convenient but ultimately disempowering fiction that it is. She adds exposition that frames the material into common-sensical chunks, and gives useful recommendations for further reading, online and elsewhere.  Her own responses to letting go of free will ("The Tale of a Transformed Woman") illustrate the psychological benefits of taking an essentially naturalistic view of ourselves. In short, this is the "pillow book" about human nature I'd give to every awakening mind that's ready (or maybe even not quite ready, because the approach is so gentle) to have their beliefs about free will challenged.

Contributors to this volume include Susan Blackmore, Richard Dawkins, Daniel Dennett, Sam Harris, Steven Pinker, Michael Shermer, and many other skeptics about the soul. Since I'm also a contributor, observe the usual precautions in taking my recommendation.  - Tom Clark

The Next Stage in the Science-Religion Debate

The National Catholic Reporter's cover story on The Mystery of the Mind raises the possibility that the status of consciousness, the self and free will might be the next arena in the science-religion debate.  It says early on that

It is a fascinating field of study that is luring some of the nation’s best and brightest scientists, including some with a religious bent. They are drawn because they know that the explanation, when it comes, will be as stunningly mind-boggling as the discovery of DNA or the development of quantum physics. And -- because it stands to potentially overthrow the reigning scientific assumption that everything has a material explanation -- it could unite science and religion in a way no discovery has before.

The story goes on to suggest that the debate will be between physicalist/materialists such as Steven Pinker and those who think explanations of mental phenomena will likely involve something non-physical, such as Andrew Newberg, Mario Beauregard, Jeffrey Schwartz and John Haught. 

But the real debate isn't between materialism and anti-materialism, it's about whether or not we should stick with good science in our explanations. Science doesn't assume materialism or naturalism, it only cares about finding transparent explanations consistent with experimental and intersubjective evidence. If the final best scientific explanation of consciousness involves something categorically non-physical, so be it. David Chalmers (discussed in the article) is a "naturalistic dualist" who thinks this might indeed turn out to be the case. To suppose that science is limited to a simplistic materialism, as the quote above suggests, doesn't do science justice. We know it by its methods, not its conclusions. What would really shake up the science-religion debate is if a better, non-scientific method for discerning the nature of reality were to emerge. This seems unlikely, but if a more reliable way of securing our beliefs about the world comes along, naturalists will be happy to adopt it.

Alternatives to Incarceration

Retributive, get-tough approaches to crime turn out to be very costly. By ignoring the causes of criminality they guarantee new crops of wrongdoers, and they further damage the offenders caught up in our extremely punitive prison system, making them more dangerous upon release. The financial and humanitarian costs of merely punishing, instead of preventing and modifying criminal behavior, might give retributivists pause.

An alternative sentencing program in New York, the Juvenile Justice Initiative (discussed here), is a good example of a non-retributive, rehabilitative alternative to incarceration. The program involves home visits by trained therapists who teach juvenile offenders and their families how to handle interpersonal conflict and impulsive behavior, and thus head off a return to crime. The therapy provides the sort of basic life-skills training that comes automatically for most kids in stable homes and communities, but is too often absent in households in high crime areas. According to the article, in-home therapy costs $17,000, compared with $140,000 to $200,000 to incarcerate a juvenile for one year, and recidivism rates for those receiving therapy have been less than half for those sent to correctional facilities.

Ideally, these sorts of programs would be available to families in advance of any serious wrongdoing, thus serving as a crime prevention measure. Such initiatives would supplement, or remediate, the familial transmission of non-violent, cooperative and productive behavior. They would help break the cycle of crime and punishment at a very early stage, making later and more costly interventions such as imprisonment unnecessary. For those who think kids just choose to become bad apples, whatever their circumstances, such programs might seem an ill-advised intrusion on personal and family autonomy. And of course bad apples primarily deserve punishment, not rehab. But for those who understand that people and their behavior are fully caused functions of genetics and environment, helping families to learn and transmit basic behavioral life skills makes perfect sense. So long as families' privacy rights are scrupulously protected, there's no good reason on a naturalistic view of ourselves to withhold assistance that would help make incarceration the last resort, not the preferred alternative, for controlling crime. For both humanitarian and financial reasons, it's a far better way to go.

 Self-Compassion

Sometimes it's harder to forgive yourself than anyone else. Those who are chronically and destructively self-critical could do worse than visit Self-Compassion.Org, a website hosted by Dr. Kristin Neff, associate professor in Human Development at the University of Texas at Austin. Neff takes an essentially naturalistic view of the human condition as the basis for developing self-compassion:

...self-compassion involves recognizing that suffering and personal inadequacy is part of the shared human experience - something that we all go through rather than being something that happens to “me” alone. It also means recognizing that personal thoughts, feelings and actions are impacted by “external” factors such as parenting history, culture, genetic and environmental conditions, as well as the behavior and expectations of others. Thich Nhat Hahn calls the intricate web of reciprocal cause and effect in which we are all imbedded “interbeing.” Recognizing our essential interbeing allows us to be less judgmental about our personal failings. After all, if we had full control over our behavior, how many people would consciously choose to have anger issues, addiction issues, debilitating social anxiety, eating disorders, and so on?  Many aspects of ourselves and the circumstances of our lives are not of our choosing, but instead stem from innumerable factors (genetic and/or environmental) that we have little control over.  By recognizing our essential interdependence, therefore, failings and life difficulties do not have to be taken so personally, but can be acknowledged with non-judgmental compassion and understanding.

We won't of course let ourselves entirely off the hook for our shortcomings, since we still want to do better. So self-compassion doesn't become self-indulgence (see here). Rather, it provides the emotional resilience we need to carry on and maybe do better despite our shortcomings. As Neff recognizes above, the realization that personal failings aren't ultimately self-chosen can help in self-compassion. So paradoxically enough, there's a kind of personal strength made available by seeing that we are indeed completely natural, caused creatures.

Memeing Naturalism
 

Naturalism and Nihilism

In an article based on his recently published book, God and the New Atheism, theologian John Haught argues that the new atheism is just as bad as “the politically and culturally insipid kind of theism it claims to be ousting.” He says the new atheism is essentially faith-based, replacing faith in god with faith in scientism. It’s “creedal,” dogmatic, a “life-numbing religiosity.” It’s therefore epistemically and morally inferior to the theism Haught champions, which has no truck with faith, at least not the insipid, life-numbing kind. Haught’s belief in god is instead based in what he calls a “richer empiricism” which goes beyond science, as explained in his book Is Nature Enough?, reviewed here.

But is Haught being fair to tar atheism, and therefore naturalism, with the brush of religiosity and faith? Are naturalists creedal about scientism, which Haught defines as the idea that “science alone is a reliable road to true understanding of anything”? No. Naturalists don’t (or shouldn’t) suppose that all truths are scientific truths, only that science is our best guide to understanding the ultimate constituents of reality and the things they compose – the “furniture of the universe.” (More on distinguishing science from scientism is here, here and here.) Naturalists’ commitment to science in this regard isn’t a matter of faith, it’s based on experience – the widely shared experience that beliefs about the world based in science are generally more reliable than those that aren’t. If we want reliable beliefs, then it’s rational to stick with science, not a matter of faith. So it isn’t, as Haught says, self-contradictory to assert we shouldn’t base beliefs about the world on faith, but rather on science, since this assertion isn’t based on faith...

- continued here

Playing Catch with Dr. Tallis

Raymond Tallis, physician, philosopher, poet and novelist, is a very smart and amusing champion of free will against determinism. You can see him in action as a panelist in Fora TV’s Battle of Ideas, where he read a paper denying that neuroscience can help us decide about criminal culpability (comments here). He’s also defended free will at the Manifesto Club in London (comments here), and most recently in the pages of Philosophy Now, in an article titled Who caught that ball? (warning: sports metaphors ahead). Tallis is a one man whirlwind of well intentioned, well expressed, but ultimately misguided arguments to the effect that in order to be free and responsible, human beings must transcend causation in some respect. Here I’ll respond to his latest sally, returning the ball to his court.

Tallis considers a cricket player who’s just made an amazing catch, and asks whether he deserves the praise coming from his teammates. On a close analysis of the rapid fire physical processes underlying the catch, most of which were necessarily carried out automatically and unthinkingly, it might appear that the player himself didn’t do much. He’s just the “lucky possessor of bodily mechanisms” that did the real work. Tallis points out that much of our behavior is in fact automatic and mechanistic, it “does itself” without intention on our part. If so, that seems to leave the conscious agent without much of a role to play... 

- continued here

[back to contents]

_______________________________________________________________

Ongoing Activities

~ Naturalism Meetups - monthly get-togethers for those wanting to explore and meme naturalism.

~ Davis Square Philosophy Cafe  - will become Philosophy Cafe at Harvard Book Store, starting April 16.

~ Lowell Philosophy Cafe meets in Chelmsford, Massachusetts, Steve Berthiaume, moderator.

[back to contents]

_______________________________________________________

Resources

For those interested in learning more about naturalism, or in participating in outreach, research, and writing in collaboration with the CFN, here are a few resources, online and otherwise.

Applied Naturalism Group - a forum to explore the personal and social applications of naturalism; membership by application.

Naturalism Philosophy Forum  - to facilitate the investigation of scientific naturalism, its assumptions, structure, and logical implications; open membership.

Naturalism as a World View - Richard Carrier's page devoted to explaining and defending naturalism.

Religious Naturalism - an online group explores the spiritual implications of naturalism, see Religious Naturalism and its associated Yahoo group.

Psychological Self-Help - an excellent resource, see in particular two chapters on determinism applied to issues of self-acceptance and self-control.  

Cause and Effect World - a smart and skeptical take on this crazy thing called life with host Samantha Clemens; her radio shows, including one on naturalism, are linked here.

Garden of Forking Paths - a free will/moral agency blog with knowledgeable contributors on the leading edge of current academic debates.

[back to contents]
 

_______________________________________________________

Feedback.  Your suggestions about the form and content of this newsletter are most welcome. Want to contribute?  Complain?  Correct?  Unsubscribe? Don't be shy - write today.

Support.  The Center for Naturalism is on the front lines of progressive cultural change, promoting an explicit, thorough-going naturalism as a viable alternative to dualist worldviews. Please consider making a donation to support our work. We are a 501c3 non-profit, so your contributions are tax-deductible. And visit our online store for a practical gift that supports the propagation of naturalism. 

Subscribe to the newsletter and CFN events notification - newsletter appears approximately every two months, events announced at occasional intervals not to exceed twice a month. 

[back to contents]

_______________

Contents

Additions

Heads Up

Short Takes

Memeing Naturalism

Ongoing Activities

Online Resources

Feedback

Support

Subscribe

News Archives

___________
 

Naturalism.Org

Center for Naturalism

Background on Naturalism

Viability of Naturalism

Philosophy

Applied Naturalism

Spirituality