Sunday, June 12, 2022

My Second Book Ready for Publication

The book God,Science and Ideology, by Joseph Hinman. I argue that atheists and skeptics who use science as a barrier to belief in God are not basing doubt on science itself but upon an ideology that adhere's to science in certain instnces. This ideology, "scietism," assumes that science is the only valid form of knowlege and rules out religious blief. Science is neutral with repect to beleif in God.

While he [Hinman] is professedly theistic, the work exudes care and some respect for the various perspectives. Its sheer breadth and depth of scholarship and capacity in articulating it attests the generally due respect of the many sides, which often exhibit the rational and irrational in one commentator. The central theme, which ties the various sub-arguments together, is that ideologies outside of the sciences themselves are informing science-based, evidential arguments about divine existence. Many sides of the debate, including the monotheistic, are equally guilty. Hinman’s ideology-scorning approach, in the end, exerts notable force and a new voice in the controversy. His book has brought together many positions in the debate. Hinman’s most persistent targets are the contemporary theories maintaining that a divine’s existence can be decided solely by scientific theories. Most thinkers, except possibly extreme agnostics, seem to harbor ideologies. Perhaps ideologies have their place somewhere in the life of the mind. That caveat, and whatever place ideologies may hold, are not the point here. Rather, it is that too many researchers in this area either do not admit their own ideology or deny its importance to the discussion of divine existence. Hinman details how many a contribution to the discussion is steeped in ideology, without their authors’ acknowledging—or even seeing—it. Only by bringing these ideologies explicitly into the discussion can it gain significant traction to get the discussion out of the mud.[1]


It should be out June 16th.

[1] Philosophy in Review Vol. 42 no. 2 (May 2022)

10 comments:

Ficciones said...

Curious as to how you're using the word ideology here. For me it always has overtones of being the justifying body of thought for the order of the day. If so I can agree with that usage, having seen what the group loosely known as new atheists has turned itself into in the last decade and a half or so - into one of the most reactionary forces in the modern Western world, and which has largely abandoned the project of secularism in favour of pure chauvinism and revanchism.

Joseph Hinman (Metacrock) said...

Ideology has always been used of socialism and communism those are nit the established order, Ideology is one idea used to explain the whole world in a programmatic fashion. I deal with the term at length in the book.

Ficciones said...

Hmm, no, I'm not using ideology the way it's used of socialism and communism but the way it's used by them, for example in Marx and Engels' The German Ideology where they develop the concept of ideology as a superstructure, the ideas of the ruling class that form and maintain the existing order.

IMO atheism revealed itself as a kind of pseudo radicalism that thought of itself as progressive but ended up supporting neoliberalism and all kinds of traditional Western hierarchies, through its overlap with libertarianism, techno-nerdism and dudebro culture.

Joseph Hinman (Metacrock) said...

yes Ideology is a dynamic word with both good and bad connotations. I think when it's their ideology it's bad when it's ours it's good.

The thing is with atheism they want to think they are being scientific when they are being ideological.

Ficciones said...

OK well when you say atheism is an ideology or is ideological it is obviously in some pejorative sense, implying that they have tacit motivations or goals that are not about their professed attachment to scientific objectivity. And furthermore, that those motivations or goals are not merely about the individual, in which case you'd say they're psychological rather than ideological. So in a nutshell, what are they? (the tacit motivations or goals)

Joseph Hinman (Metacrock) said...

Ok first, I do not say all atheists are ideologues. Sorry if I gave that impression. The branch known as "new atheism" is, I think, more ideological than philosophical. Secondly, the problem of dichotomy between ideology and psychology is a pseudo problem. We all have psychological motivations so ideology is supported by psychology.

Some psychological motivations are valid and some are pretexts or excuses. Valid one's would be like love or defense.

im-skeptical said...

Ideology is one idea used to explain the whole world in a programmatic fashion.
- A perfect description of religion.

Kristen said...

This book has been a long-anticipated event. So glad it's coming to fruition at last!

Joseph Hinman (Metacrock) said...

Thanks Kristen I appreciate that. It would not be without you.

Joseph Hinman (Metacrock) said...

im-skeptical said...
Ideology is one idea used to explain the whole world in a programmatic fashion.
- A perfect description of religion.

ought like your idea of science, It is quite fallacious to say that about religion. I never said religion replaces all other knowledge. Like you think science does