‘Habitude’ is a philosophy associated with Rupert Sheldrake’s alternative science, which depends for its justification on orthodox science not being able to explain everything. I said this about orthodox science:

It is only 370 years since Descartes’ Discourse on the Method, and 320 years since Newton’s Principia, a period which coincides with the rise and the heyday of capitalism. That coincidence is significant, because a popular belief in the whole universe being governed by laws, is very convenient in a world controlled by central government on behalf of the capitalist class, which is why that model of science has not been swept away by the doubts cast upon it. Science as the study of a material universe, determined by and obedient to eternal laws of nature, has been brought into question by the last century’s theoretical physics, which questions objectivity, and where absolute law has given way to tentative models expressed as new kinds of mathematical functions involving probability and uncertainty.
(from http://www.habitude.org.uk/proofdelusion.htm)

Sheldrake’s science favours the idea of habits to that of laws, for all observable phenomena and patterns from stars to pet parrots. Habits interest me as a philosopher because social behaviours can more usefully be studied as learned and taught habits than as immutable laws.

I have recently read Richard Dawkins’ book, The God Delusion, and found it surprisingly congenial – as are two of his on-line lectures that I have watched – when I had expected him to be shrill and strident. One might have hoped that Dawkins, as an evolutionary biologist, would be positioned in between the absolute laws of astronomers and physicists and Sheldrake’s morphic resonance, but he is firmly wedded to scientific explanation as necessary and sufficient for understanding the world and living well in it.

Review from http://richarddawkins.net/godDelusion

A preeminent scientist – and the world's most prominent atheist – asserts the irrationality of belief in God and the grievous harm religion has inflicted on society, from the Crusades to 9/11.

With rigor and wit, Richard Dawkins examines God in all his forms, from the sex-obsessed tyrant of the Old Testament to the more benign (but still illogical) Celestial Watchmaker favored by some Enlightenment thinkers. He eviscerates the major arguments for religion and demonstrates the supreme improbability of a supreme being. He shows how religion fuels war, forments bigotry, and abuses children, buttressing his points with historical and contemporary evidence. The God Delusion makes a compelling case that belief in God is not just wrong, but potentially deadly. It also offers exhilarating insight into the advantages of atheism to the individual and society, not the least of which is a clearer, truer appreciation of the universe's wonders than any faith could ever muster.

Richard Dawkins is the Charles Simonyi Professor of the Public Understanding of Science at Oxford, a position he has held since 1995. The Wall Street Journal said his "passion is supported by an awe-inspiring literary craftsmanship." The New York Times Book Review has hailed him as a writer who "understands the issues so clearly that he forces the reader to understand them too." Among his previous books are The Ancestor's Tale, The Selfish Gene, The Blind Watchmaker, Climbing Mount Improbable, Unweaving the Rainbow, and A Devil's Chaplain.

Dawkins’ book is good on the evil that is done in the name of religion, but on his web site is an article about the good that comes from belief.

[T]he most fascinating finding [of a study of spirituality among young Australians] was the difference between the religious and the distinctly non-religious. The religiously active are more likely to have positive civic attitudes, display high levels of social concern and be actively involved in community service. Active Christians, for example, do much more hours of volunteer work per month than secular youth. On a measure of the extent to which a person holds positive human values — favouring an ethical life, justice for all and having an orientation to the common good — we also found the religiously active to be streets ahead.

These findings make sense when we consider that regular attendees at religious services are encouraged to lead altruistic and ethical lives and given ample opportunities to partake in community service.

What about the young atheists? Most secular-minded youth are more self-oriented because there is no widely understood or shared ethical alternative paradigm on which to model their lives. Despite recent commentary about "generation Y" being community-minded, our evidence suggests that the prevailing ethos of the past decade — individualism and consumerism — afflicts young people in spades. And the secular humanists and rationalists do not seem to be putting up a credible, earthly alternative way of life.

So where does this leave the new breed of atheists? Perhaps the vociferous anti-religious types such as Dawkins could afford to be a little less triumphalist. Some may see religion as a tired old superstition, but it does produce our most ethical and caring young adults — believe it or not.

Andrew Singleton, ‘The good that comes from belief’, The Age, November 10, 2007
http://www.theage.com.au/news/opinion/the-good-that-comes-from-belief/2007/11/09/1194329510058.html

Where does that leave habitude, as a philosophy with world-changing/saving potential (http://www.habitude.org.uk/whatishabitude.htm)? And where does it leave me as a lifelong atheist? At least it should leave me open to Christians being sincere world changers in the direction I favour: towards a Revolution to end capitalism and bring in socialism (or communism or anarchism), and recently I was referred to this site for such people: http://anarchism.jesusradicals.com.

top