While we wait for Bush to take us to the next stage in what may yet turn
into the nastiest war of all time ('cos we are really talking of a war for
those resources which are the basis of modern civilisation), we might as
well read the words of, probably, the bleakest philosopher of all time --
one John Gray, ex-Oxford don and presently Professor of European Thought at
London school of Economics.

John Gray is a brilliant thinker -- so everybody agrees -- but is a total
sceptic. He's savaged almost everything else so far in a stream of books,
and if he lives long enough he's probably going to write a book telling
everybody not to read his books because they're worthless. I'm intrigued by
this fellow who is acquiring the same sort of (questionable) guru status in
philosophy as Stephen Hawking has in science.

In today's Independent, Will Self -- a writer who's as iconoclastic as
anybody (until John Gray came along!) -- interviews Gray about his latest
book, "Straw Dogs" and pronounced himself disturbed. Wow!

So I thought some FWers with philosophical leanings might like to read an
extract from "Straw Dogs". I'll append it below.

My own criticism is that John Gray, who puts himself forward as a polymath,
thus well qualified to speak on anything -- whether religion, philosophy,
humanism, liberalism, economics, evolution, science and so forth (savaging
them all of course) -- is, however, totally oblivious to the greatest
intellectual product of the last century, viz quantum physics, and its
philosophical byproducts which includes a far more constructive and
hopeful, albeit mysterious, interpretation of "religion, philosophy,
humanism . . . . .". 

But I won't go on about quantum physics and the missing element in John
Gray's education. Instead, I'll just point out where John Gray trips
himself up with his own words in the following extract. After stating that
we are mere automatons in the whole scheme of things, he then writes in the
penultimate paragraph:

"We control very little of what we most care about; many of our most
fateful decisions are made unbeknownst to ourselves."

He should have had the courage of his total scepticism and written:

"We control nothing of what we we most care about; all of our most fateful
decisions are made unbeknownst to ourselves."

He didn't have the courage to write that, and that is what damns his whole
approach.

Keith Hudson

<<<<
Three extracts from 'Straw Dogs'

Science vs Humanism 

Most people today think that they belong to a species that can be master of
its destiny. This is faith, not science. We do not speak of a time when
whales or gorillas will be masters of their destinies. Why then humans?

We do not need Darwin to see that we belong with other animals. A little
observation of our lives soon leads to the same conclusion. Still, since
science has today an authority that common experience cannot rival, let us
note that Darwin teaches that species are only assemblies of genes,
interacting at random with each other and their shifting environments.

Species cannot control their fates. Species do not exist. This applies
equally to humans. Yet it is forgotten whenever people talk of "the
progress of mankind". They have put their faith in an abstraction that no
one would think of taking seriously if it were not formed from cast-off
Christian hopes.

If Darwin's discovery had been made in a Taoist or Shinto, Hindu or animist
culture it would very likely have become just one more strand in its
intertwining mythologies. In these faiths humans and other animals are kin.
By contrast, arising among Christians who set humans beyond all other
living things, it triggered a bitter controversy that rages on to this day.

In Victorian times, this was a conflict between Christians and unbelievers.
Today it is waged between humanists and the few who understand that humans
can no more be masters of their destiny than any other animal.

Humanism can mean many things, but for us it means belief in progress. To
believe in progress is to believe that, by using the new powers given us by
growing scientific knowledge, humans can free themselves from the limits
that frame the lives of other animals. This is the hope of nearly everybody
nowadays, but it is groundless. For though human knowledge will very likely
continue to grow and with it human power, the human animal will stay the
same: a highly inventive species that is also one of the most predatory and
destructive.

Darwin showed that humans are like other animals; humanists claim they are
not. Humanists insist that by using our knowledge we can control our
environment and flourish as never before. In affirming this, they renew one
of Christianity's most dubious promises -- that salvation is open to all.
The humanist belief in progress is only a secular version of this Christian
faith.

In the world shown us by Darwin, there is nothing that can be called
progress. To anyone reared on humanist hopes this is intolerable. As a
result, Darwin's teaching has been stood on its head, and Christianity's
cardinal error � that humans are different from all other animals � has
been given a new lease on life.

Post-Modernism 

Post-Modernists tell us there is no such thing as nature, only the floating
world of our own constructions. All talk of human nature is spurned as
dogmatic and reactionary. Let us put these phoney absolutes aside, say the
Post-Modernists, and accept that the world is what we make of it.

Post-Modernists parade their relativism as a superior kind of humility �
the modest acceptance that we cannot claim to have the truth. In fact, the
Post-Modern denial of truth is the worst kind of arrogance. In denying that
the natural world exists independently of our beliefs about it,
Post-Modernists are implicitly rejecting any limit on human ambitions. By
making human beliefs the final arbiter of reality, they are in effect
claiming that nothing exists unless it appears in human consciousness.

The idea that there is no such thing as truth may be fashionable, but it is
hardly new. Two-and-half-thousand years ago, Protagoras, the first of the
Greek sophists, declared: "Man is the measure of all things." He meant
human individuals, not the species; but the implication is the same. Humans
decide what is real and what is not. Post-Modernism is just the latest fad
in anthropocentrism.

At the masked ball 

"I should liken Kant to a man at a ball, who all evening has been carrying
on a love affair with a masked beauty in the vain hope of making a
conquest, when at last she throws off her mask and reveals herself to be
his wife." In Schopenhauer's fable the wife masquerading as an unknown
beauty was Christianity. Today it is humanism.

What Schopenhauer wrote of Kant is no less true today. As commonly
practised, philosophy is the attempt to find good reasons for conventional
beliefs. In Kant's time the creed of conventional people was Christian, now
it is humanist. Nor are these two faiths so different from one another.

Over the past 200 years, philosophy has shaken off Christian faith. It has
not given up Christianity's cardinal error � the belief that humans are
radically different from all other animals.

Philosophy has been a masked ball in which a religious image of humankind
is renewed in the guise of humanist ideas of progress and enlightenment.
Even philosophy's greatest unmaskers have ended up as figures in the
masquerade. Removing the masks from our animal faces is a task that has
hardly begun.

Other animals are born, seek mates, forage for food and die. That is all.
But we humans � we think � are different. We are persons, whose actions are
the results of their choices. Other animals pass their lives unawares, but
we are conscious. Our image of ourselves is formed from our ingrained
belief that consciousness, selfhood and free will are what define us as
human beings, and raise us above all other creatures.

In our more detached moments, we admit that this view of ourselves is
flawed. Our lives are more like fragmentary dreams than the enactments of
conscious selves. We control very little of what we most care about; many
of our most fateful decisions are made unbeknownst to ourselves. Yet we
insist that mankind can achieve what we cannot: conscious mastery of its
existence. This is the creed of those who have given up an irrational
belief in God for an irrational faith in mankind.

But what if we give up the empty hopes of Christianity and humanism? Once
we switch off the soundtrack � the babble of God and immortality, progress
and humanity � what sense can we make of our lives?

'Straw Dogs' by John Gray is published by Granta, �12.99
>>>> 

 

----------------------------------------------------------------------------
--------------

Keith Hudson,6 Upper Camden Place, Bath BA1 5HX, England
Tel:01225 312622/444881; Fax:01225 447727; E-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
________________________________________________________________________

Reply via email to