In his article “In Defense of Intelligent Design[1] , William Dembski takes Barbara Forrest, Eugenie Scott and others to task for supposing that science is governed by “methodological naturalism” or “methodological materialism.” This is to suppose that in investigating the world, science should consider only natural or materi
Writing at Wittingshire, Amanda Witt likens the battle she sees between naturalism and human freedom to the epic struggle in The Lord of the Rings. As those familiar with Tolkien’s trilogy will know, the hobbits' mission is to destroy the evil master Ring – that which confers ultimate but corrupting power on its wearer. For Witt, what must be destroyed is the Ring of Naturalism. Why? Because
As a worldview, naturalism depends on a set of cognitive commitments from which flow certain propositions about reality and human nature. These propositions in turn might have implications for how we live, for social policy, and for human flourishing. But the presuppositions, basis, and implications of naturalism are not uncontested, and indeed there’s considerable debate about them among naturalists themselves.
Jared Diamond’s recent book, Collapse: How Societies Choose to Fail or Succeed, presents a sobering analysis of what might be in store for the seemingly solid culture we inhabit. If we don’t heed the object lessons of some failed societies, we may end up failed as well – out of gas, out of food, out of space, with life an increasingly exigent proposition. Diamond summarizes his thesis as follows:
To stay current with the New Age movement and its underlying philosophy, it’s useful to conduct an occasional analysis of its popular literature. What’s the current state of play among those who are decidedly unskeptical in their modes of understanding themselves and the world? What sorts of assumptions now drive the New Age agenda as it competes with naturalistic worldviews for adherents?
The Objectivist Center and the Ayn Rand Institute, organizations devoted to safeguarding and disseminating Ayn Rand’s legacy of radical libertarianism, did an effective job of letting the world know about her 100th birthday in February. Op-eds about Rand’s philosophy appeared in newspapers across the US and abroad, celebrating the sovereignty of the individual and condemning the infringements of big government on personal freedoms.
Blame Society First by Brian Doherty REASON, June 1998
Individual responsibility is the truly unthinkable.
An individual, or small group of individuals, commits a heinous act. The first reaction on the part of our nation's political and intellectual classes: Blame everyone else.
