William James wrote that the life of religion “consists of the belief that there is an unseen order, and that our supreme good lies in harmoniously adjusting ourselves thereto.” Naturalism organizes our experiences of the universe within a science-grounded philosophical and/or religious framework aligning it with what is supremely good for our lives. This article describes a science-grounded specific “Framework of Spirituality” identifying part of this unseen order that opens a “spiritual core” within persons as a source of healing and (...) happiness. A cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT) expanded process shows how experiences of human worth and dignity are keys to this new awareness and provides speculation for a brain function and evolutionary explanation. Details of this knowledge are related to various perspectives and authors of naturalism—scientific, religious, ecstatic, and ecological—to contribute to a future direction for the understanding, development, and further expression of naturalism. (shrink)

Democracy is usually contrasted with the concept of dictatorship, and is defined as a type of government in which power flows from the citizens to the leaders of government, who are selected through free elections. This article argues, that if the concept of democracy is generalized to be universally applicable, then the concept of hypothetical gods’ right to rule results in dictatorship. Whereas the concepts of dictator and tyrant originally had a more positive meaning, those meanings have changed. However, the (...) concept of the gods in the philosophical debate has avoided a similar redefinition in light of democracy, despite the fact, that it involves the same negation of modern fundamental rights. The basic democratic idea posits that all of its members have a full and equal status. If this status is generalized to be universally applicable, then it follows that humankind likewise are not second and first class among hypothetical gods. The existence or nonexistence of the gods is here defined as the secondary question, whereas the principal acceptance of hypothetical gods’ right to rule in a democratic context with respect to concepts of freedom is defined as the primary question. The position of heroical apatheism is argued as an alternative to positions such as theism, atheism, and agnosticism. These positions only concern themselves with the ontological or epistemological question of whether the gods exist, whereas heroical apatheism concerns itself with the primary component missing so far, namely democratic rights and dignity. This is a discussion that I consider as having been overlooked in modern philosophical discussions. (shrink)

This paper addresses the plausibility of practical apatheism: an attitude of apathy or indifference about philosophical questions pertaining to God’s existence grounded in the belief that they lack practical significance. Since apatheism is rarely discussed, we begin by clarifying the position and explaining how it differs from some of the other positions one may take with regard to the existence of God. Afterward, we examine six distinct objections to practical apatheism. Each of these objections posits a different reason for thinking (...) that belief in God is practically significant. Five of these objections prove unsuccessful. The sixth, which appeals to the practical significance of belief in God with respect to our fates in the afterlife, is more promising but nonetheless encounters significant obstacles. Since the success of this objection is controversial, whether we have good grounds to reject practical apatheism should be similarly controversial, and the view should be given further examination. (shrink)

Many people look to religion to help resolve the serious moral and legal issues associated with assisted reproductive technologies. Doing so presupposes that religion is the cornerstone of ethics, but this assumption is not well founded. While various faiths are entitled to articulate their views on matters of human reproduction, the contradictions involved in doing so make it unwise to rely on religion in the formulation of law and policy. These contradictions – such as the indeterminacy about what revealed truths (...) means – make moral secular philosophy a better guide for the protection of human welfare. (shrink)

It has been alleged against divine command theory that we cannot justify our acceptance of it without giving it up. For if we provide moral reasons for our acceptance of God’s commands, then those reasons, and not God’s commands, must be our ultimate moral standard. Kai Nielsen has offered the most forceful version of this objection in his book, Ethics Without God. My principal aim is to show that Nielsen’s charge does not succeed. His argument crucially relies upon the assumption (...) that the moral judgments one employs to justify acceptance of a normative theory are more fundamental to one’s moral outlook than the theory itself. I argue that this assumption presupposes a questionable foundationalist view of theory justification, and if we instead adopt a coherentist reflective equilibrium stance, we can thoughtfully evaluate DCT without abandoning it. (shrink)

در سنت برهان‌آوری کلاسیک، برهان‌های اخلاقی برای اثبات خدا اقامه شده است. به موازات این برهان‌ها و هم‌ارز با آنها براهین اخلاقی برای انکار خدا اقامه شده است. این سؤال مطرح می‌شود که آیا وجود برهان‌های اخلاقی در ردّ خدا به معنای بی‌اعتباری براهین اخلاقی در اثبات خداست؟ و آیا این براهینِ ضد باعث نمی‌شود ایمان خداباوران نامعقول باشد؟ ادعای ما این است که طرحی در زمینه بازتعریف برهان یافته‌ایم که می‌تواند سبب برون‌رفت براهین اخلاقی خداباوری از چالش برهان‌های اخلاقی (...) ضد باشد. در این پژوهش هشت برهان اخلاقی الحادی را در تاریخ فلسفه استخراج کردیم و طرح اصلاح ماهیت برهان از سوی ماورودس را بر آنها پیاده کردیم و نشان دادیم که خداباور می‌تواند همچنان از براهین اخلاقی خداباورانه دفاع کند و در باور به وجود خدا معقول باشد. البته توجه داریم که طرح اصلاح ماهیت برهان هزینه‌ای معرفت‌شناختی در پی دارد و آن این که براهین ضد نیز می‌توانند در چشم‌اندازها و دیدگاه‌های مورد پذیرش خود معقول انگاشته شوند. (shrink)