The Great Partnership (book)

The Great Partnership: God, Science and the Search for Meaning by Jonathan Sacks
My rating: 5 of 5 stars

Book description: Writing with his usual grace and fluency, Jonathan Sacks moves beyond the tired arguments of militant atheists such as Dawkins and Hitchens, to explore how religion has always played a valuable part in human culture and far from being dismissed as redundant, must be allowed to temper and develop scientific understanding in order for us to be fully human. Ranging around the world to draw comparisons from different cultures, and delving deep into the history of language and of western civilisation, Jonathan Sacks shows how the predominance of science-oriented thinking is embedded deeply even in our religious understanding, and calls on us to recognise the centrality of relationship to true religion, and thus to see how this core value of relationship is essential if we are to avoid the natural tendency for science to rule our lives rather than fulfilling its promise to set us free.

My review: This is a brilliant discourse on the relationship between science, faith, and religion. It should be read by three groups of people: 1) religious fundamentalists who have rejected science; 2) secular fundamentalists who have rejected religion; and 3) everyone in between.

The author, Jonathan Sacks, Baron Sacks, Kt is the Chief Rabbi of the United Hebrew Congregations of the Commonwealth. His Hebrew name is Yaakov Zvi.

In THE GREAT PARTNERSHIP Sacks rejects the extremism of both religious and secular fundamentalists who wish to but an unbreachable barrier between religion and science. And unlike Stephen J Gould's suggestion that religion and science should be kept separate, Sacks argues for a complementarity (a partnership) between them.

This book is one of the most clearly articulated discussions on why both science and religion are necessary to maintain a full humanity and the way in which both need each other to avoid extremism. My finger was almost worn out with all the highlighting I was song on my Kindle. Sacks is very, very widely read, a deep thinker, and yet writes in a beautiful, easy-to-read narrative style making profound and memorable statements simply.

His essential point is that science takes things apart to see how they work. Religion puts things together to see what they mean. The idea is simple but extremists on both ends of the alleged science vs religion divide have burdened this idea with some very destructive unhealthy nonsense. Sacks is gently critical of both religious and secular fundamentalists appealing for a respectful conversation which, all too often, neither side are willing to engage in.

I can't speak highly enough of this book. It's one of the best I've read for ages. In fact, I nearly didn't read it, thinking that there can't be much more to say on the topic given the myriad books and debates on the topic. But I took the plunge and was incredibly rewarded. If you have any issues regarding the relationship between religion and science - whether you are an atheist or a “believer” - don't miss this brilliant, thought provoking read. It's easily digested meat for the mind!

View all my reviews

Book Review: The Logic of the Heart (James R Peters)

James Peters' The Logic of the Heart: Augustine, Pascal and the Rationality of Faith is a profound exploration of what it means to believe in God. I've been struggling with the tension between reason and faith for many years and have found few answers that were satisfying. Enlightenment rationalism which refuses to accept the legitimacy of any belief without empirical evidence, radical postmodernist relativism which promotes the idea that all truth is merely the construction of human culture(s) and the rejection of any form of meta-narrative (other than its own), and the blind faith of the fundamentalist theist who firmly shoves their head in the sand and denies the legitimacy of modern scientific understandings of the cosmos - all of these just don't stand up to rigorous scrutiny - at least not for me. What a breath of fresh air, then, to come across James Peters' thorough, in-depth, nuanced discussion of these matters.

The book is essentially a Socratic "dialogue" between the ideas of Augustine, Pascal and Hume. Intriguingly, Peters describes the similarities between Hume (one of the most famous a-theists) and Augustine's and Pascal's critique of the possibility of human rationalism/empiricism in the pursuit of truth. There is a deep desire in humans to inquire and discover with a paradoxical human limitation in succeeding at that pursuit. So Peters passionately affirms the legitimacy of much that Hume writes about the limits of reason.

Just as passionately, Peters shows how Hume, when he comes to discuss Christianity, seems to argue inconsistently with his own understanding. Peters ultimately shows how an Augustinian and, in particular, Pascalian approach to reason and faith is more holistic than Hume's.

One of the strongest features of this book is a sustained analysis of radical postmodernism and, in particular, a great analysis of Richard Rorty's thinking - a telling critique highlighting the self-referentially undermining nature of his approach.

So, what is the essential point of The Logic of the Heart? I hesitate because I know I'm not going to do justice to the ideas and argument in this book. It is that there are some things we need to commit to in order to know the truth of them. One example is trust in another person. When we first meet someone we need to commit ourselves to trusting them before we can enter into a relationship to test their trustworthiness. For Peters, it is the same with belief in God. In order to know of God's existence it is necessary to take a leap of faith in order to know of God's existence through direct experience.

Now this is a paltry statement of the essential point of the book. Peters has a broad and deep knowledge of philosophical literature and demonstrates the rationality of such a position though extended discussion, argument and dialogue with a host of "interlocutors" past and present. His perspective offers a midway between Enlightenment "worship" of reason and postmodernist emphasis on freedom and self-rule.

Who should read this book? The first criteria is that the reader needs to be familiar with general philosophical concepts related to epistemology and, in particular, the debates that arise from the dialogue between empiricists and postmodernists over epistemology. Apart from that, you need to be prepared for a dense, challenging read. Peters' argument is sustained and rich and it's most definitely not a book you can read in a few hours. There is much to chew over. In my opinion, every well educated Christian and atheist would benefit from this book. Peters provides a view worth considering for those who are unhappy with so-called new atheist perspectives and naive fundamentalist evangelicalism. And for Christians who are constantly berated for believing in in the irrational it is a rigorous argument demonstrating that faith can be a rational act of believing.

To finish: a quote from the book (p 22):

I have written this book out of the conviction that the basic Augustinian and Pascalian position on faith and understanding is well suited for a post-modern age disillusioned with the idols of hard facts, passionless reason, absolute foundations,mand the amoral rhetoric of consumerism and materialism. Augusrine’s and Pascal’s conception of a situated and dialectical reason, of a reason dependent on the heart, of a reason nurtured and transformed by God’s love, provides a viable middle ground between the Enlightenment idolatry of reason and the radical postmodernist’s idolatry of autonomy and its call for the end of traditional philosophy and theology as unwarranted and oppressive metanarratives. Both Hume and Pascal tried in their own ways to caution us against the pretensions of philosophers who insist that we live by reason alone. I shall attempt in what follows to place these two dialectical opponents against each other. In the end, whether we opt for Hume’s or Pascal’s position on the merits of Christian faith depends on a question at the core of our human nature: “What are people for?"

For a refreshingly challenging read go get this book!

Book details: James R Peters (2009), The Logic of the Heart: Augustine, Pascal, and the Rationality of Faith. Baker Academic.

 

Book Review: 36 Arguments for the Existence of God: A Work of Fiction

On the shelf in the bookstore, Rebecca Goldstein's work of fiction, 36 Arguments for the Existence of God: A Work of Fiction, looked like it promised to be a meaty and entertaining philosophical novel on a topic that has had high public profile in recent years. But it was a disappointment.

Cass Seltzer (get the joke – Alka-Selstzer – there are lots of these), the main protagonist of the novel, is a psychologist who has leapt to fame following the publication of his book The Varieties of Religious Illusion. He has been called ‘the atheist with a soul’ by the media and his approach to religion has resonated with a wide readership. As the novel progresses, we meet various people Cass knows including a philosopher who has very strong delusions of grandeur. As the story tediously meanders through 344 pages Cass develops a relationship with a six-year-0ld mathematical wizard who is part of a fundamentalist sect and who is destined to become its leader. There’s also a past lover that turns up who is pursuing immortality. These are just a few of the many characters populating the story, none of whom we really come to feel much care for. Cass, his philosophical mentor, and his love interest, and the math genius are really the only characters that are developed with any degree of depth.

According to the author’s comments on Amazon.com, because ‘Arguments alone can’t capture all that is at stake for people when they argue about issues of reason and faith’, she wished to

… place in fiction, in its power to make vividly present how different the world feels to each of us and how these differences are sometimes what is really being expressed in the great debates of our day on the existence of God.

Unfortunately, 36 Arguments suffers from the author’s uninhibited exploration into all sorts of esoteric subjects which distract from the narrative arc of the book and mostly prove how clever and knowledgeable she is.  There is a tenuous relationship between these forays of obtrusiveness and the theme of religious experience. If you read the book, keep a dictionary handy! It’s almost unreadable at times and I have to admit to skipping a few chapters during the last third of the book.

I did appreciate Chapter 34 which describes a debate between Cass and a Christian apologist which articulates the nature and basis of a secular morality wrapped within an argument on the existence of God. I was relieved to arrive at this chapter as the essential perspective of the author coalesced in a moment of clarity.

In case my readers jump to the conclusion that I am biased against this book because I am a theist and it essentially argues against the existence of God, I hasten to tell you that the Appendix following the story is worth the price of the book! In this appendix, Goldstein outlines 36 arguments often used in support of the existence of God. For each one, she identifies the significant flaws that undermine their power. This is done concisely, articulately, and, at times, with wit. Anyone wishing a brief summary of the best arguments and counterarguments on the existence of God will find this very valuable and deeply thought provoking. It is a shame the novel itself did not have these same characteristics.

Technorati Tags: "36 Arguments for the Existence of God",religion,faith

Interview with Peter Hitchens about 'The Rage Against God'

Did you know that Christopher Hitchens, the outspoken atheist, has a brother, Peter, who became a Christian after being an atheist? Peter has written a book called The Rage Against God: How atheism led me to faith. I haven't read it but it is on my list. Here is a brief video of an interview with Peter Hitchens.

Book Review: Have a Little Faith

Have a little faith: a true story is a beautiful, gentle reflection on Mitch Albom's (the author's) spiritual journey as he gets to know two people who become highly significant in his life.

The story begins with Albom being approached by a Jewish rabbi who asks him to write his eulogy believing that, when the time came, he would know what to say. Albom realises that he is going to need to get to know the rabbi if he is going to write an authentic eulogy. So he spends the next eight years visiting the rabbi who becomes very influential in Albom's own spiritual journey.

Over the same period, the author also gets to know a man from a very different world and spiritual faith — a black ex-drug dealer and criminal who had spent years in prison and was now pastoring a Christian church in Detroit that was collapsing around the parishioners' ears due to profound poverty. But Albom is intrigued by this pastor whom he finds it difficult to trust, given his history, but who does so much to help those in need.

As Albom gets to know these two men, he has to move between two very different worlds — Christian/Jewish; African-American/white; poor/rich. As he does so he is "forced" to explore two very different approaches to faith and spirituality.

Have a Little Faith is a wonderful book. As Albom shares his friendships with these two men and meditates on the meaning of each for his own life and spiritual journey, we learn much of what it means to deeply respect a diversity of approaches to living one's life — how to deal with suffering; the nature of heaven; the role of forgiveness; doubt; and the role of faith. As Albom moves through his relationships he comes to see the unity in the diversity of the two faiths.

Ultimately, the title of the book becomes the one thing that Albom learns is at the heart of all faith — the fundamental need that all people have for believing in something greater than themselves. Have a Little Faith is a beautiful story, beautifully written, and deeply moving.

Book details
Albom, Mitch (2009), Have a Little Faith, Hyperion, New York. (Buy it here)

Technorati Tags: Have a Little Faith,spirituality,faith,religion

'Creation or Evolution? Yes!' (Christianity Today)

Christianity Today magazine have published an interview by Stan Guthrie with Francis Collins, head of the Genome Project, who has also recently published a book entitled, The Language of God: A Scientist Presents Evidence for Belief (Free Press, 2006). In the interview, he explains why he wrote the book:

One of the main reasons I wrote The Language of God was to try to put forward a comfortable synthesis of what science teaches us about the natural world and what faith teaches us about God. Yet it seems to be a pretty well kept secret these days that the scientific approach and the spiritual approach are compatible. I think we've allowed for too long extreme voices to dominate the stage in a way that has led many people to assume that's all there is. The thesis of my book is that there is no need for this battle. In fact, it's a destructive battle. And we as a society would be well served to recover that happy middle ground where people have been for most of human history.

You can read the whole interview here.

The Ends of Science (First Things)

Check out Eric Cohen's opinion piece entitled The Ends of Science for another view on the relationship between science and faith - an enduring issue!! You can read the article here.

"I don't know" - the most important thing to be able to say

Sir John Houghton is a physicist considered to be one of the world's experts in global warming. He was Professor in Atmospheric Physics at Oxford University. He has won a number of awards including Gold Medal of the Royal Astronomical Society. He is also a Christian. Have a listen to this interview with PBS's Bill Moyers on the program Faith & Reason where he discusses his views on science and faith. He concludes with the assertion that one of the most important things a believer needs to be prepared to say is, 'I don't know'.