Atheism and Theism ( A Debate )

 The original invitation to engage in a debate about atheism and theism
was appealing. Although our principal areas of philosophical activity lie
outwith philosophy of religion per se, we are each deeply engaged by issues
in metaphysics and the philosophy of mind which bear directly on such
questions as whether regularity and intelligibility have or need an explanation;
and if they need one, what the form of this might be. Beyond that, we are
each personally engaged by such questions as whether the fact that there
is anything at all indicates a supernatural cause, and whether intimations of
apparent meaning in human experience signify some objectively  transcendent point or purpose. As well as speaking and writing about such issues within professional
philosophical contexts, we have also reflected upon them in non-academic
fora, believing them to be among the most important questions for human
beings to try to answer. Although professional philosophers may be well

equipped by their intellectual training to make conceptual distinctions and to
evaluate the cogency of arguments, they have no preserve of experiential
wisdom, or sole proprietorial claim to the serious discussion of these matters.
Moreover, if they start, as we each believe they should, with the facts of
experience (as against some pure a priori foundation), then they must also
attend to the reports of working scientists, psychologists, sociologists, and
plain, common folk.
Turning to the more narrowly philosophical, neither of us is disposed to
think that all philosophical questions are narrowly conceptual (in this respect
we endorse the criticism by Quine of the analytic/synthetic distinction), but
nor do we suppose, with post-modernists, that everything is in radical flux:
that all is really and equally revisable, reformable and rejectable. To that
extent we are common-sense realists, believing that there is a great deal
in the common stock of human knowledge that is and will remain beyond
significant revision, and that this alone provides a basis on which to work in
constructing philosophical accounts of reality.
In the Introduction to the first edition we expressed this view by writing
that ‘in opposition to current trends [we hold that] that there is a world
independent of human thought and language which may yet be known through
observation, hypothesis and reflection’. In this second edition Haldane presents
a line of argument that maintains this commitment but also considers that
such a realism may only make sense on the basis of the assumption that what
may elude human cognition, or that of other finite beings, is yet known – by
an omniscient mind, i.e. the mind of God.
In the years since its first printing (in 1996), Atheism and Theism has been
extensively reviewed and made the subject of discussions in the writings of
others. The authors of these publications have made a number of interesting
points, often critical but sometimes supportive of one or other argument or
idea. Many of them have also commented that it is a pity that we did not
have the opportunity to develop points further or to take up other matters.
In this second edition the original material remains as previously published
(subject to some typographical corrections and additions to the bibliography)
but we have each added a chapter in which we address many of those writers’
concerns and try to answer at least the main ones, including some omissions.
Space did not allow more extensive discussions and, such being the nature of
philosophy, there is always more that could be said.
Since the primary purpose was not to engage in a further round of exchanges
between ourselves but to take note of points from the audience, generally
addressed to us individually (though in some cases jointly), we wrote the
chapters simultaneously and without reference to one another. It is interesting
to note, therefore, that while for the most part we discussed different issues
there are points at which our discussions address the same topics, though in
different ways, for example, on the matter of necessary existence and on the
question of whether biology offers evidence of design.
The majority of reviewers chose to observe the friendly and respectful
character of our exchange. It is interesting that this is something that should
seem to merit comment. Perhaps the explanation is that – notwithstanding
the ‘Debate’ context – we were and are less interested in scoring points than
in sharing our wonder and speculation in face of the fact that there are things
and that they are intelligible. As philosophy has become more of an academic
profession it has not necessarily become more profound, and we can think of
no better starting point for an exchange on atheism and theism than mutual
respect for sincerely held, and seriously formed opinions. As the ancients
were inclined to say, philosophy is best practised when it is an exchange
between those who have a benign regard for one another and conceive
themselves as engaged in a shared search for truth. We hope this extended
discussion will re-engage earlier readers and draw new ones into that common
search for the truth about atheism and theism.

To download this book for free click here