The rejection of God, alas, is not, in and of itself, a sufficient basis for admiring a contemporary intellectual. None of the current slate of popular atheist thinkers—Hitchens, Dawkins, Dennett and Harris—balance that negative position with an appropriately well-reasoned defense of scientific realism. Harris pays lip service to such realism, and even argues for a scientific ethics founded on that perspective. But he does not offer a strong defense for the philosophical and epistemological competence of human intelligence. To do so would require that he specifically address the traditional skeptical arguments of philosophers such as David Hume and Immanuel Kant. Hitchens, in particular, speaks well of both, and offers no criticism of their fundamental views on the impotence of the human mind. In the absence of such an assault on skepticism, these writers take their place alongside the forgotten secular voices from the past who offered nothing that could possibly serve as a rational replacement for religion. Those who accept their logic are generally willing to live with a level of metaphysical doubt that is utterly intolerable to most people. This is not an admirable quality. On the contrary, it suggests a willingness to face life devoid of anything resembling a philosophical foundation. Such authors are unlikely to write books addressed to independent readers in search of a clear understanding of the world in which they live. Hitchens, et. al, despite their atheism, appear to lack genuine independence and/or philosophical depth, and—to that extent—may well come from an entirely different intellectual perspective than the typical Objectivist.
Hitchens is certainly a very clever and entertaining writer. I enjoyed reading God Is Not Great. His arguments against those who ascribe the horrors of 20th Century tyranny (both communism and fascism) to the influence of secularism are brilliant and provide valuable factual ammunition in support of the Objectivist viewpoint. But it is simply not enough to be against religion. Historically speaking, cultural periods marked by the prevalence of doubt and skepticism have often been followed by fervent religious fanaticism and the persecution of heresy. It is human nature to want to understand the world, and it is only in terms of absolutes that such understanding can truly be attained. Hitchens and his atheist cohorts could suddenly step forth to advocate a reverential view of the human mind and reclaim the efficacy of reason from the ravages of modern philosophical history, but I am not holding my breath.
|
