The Humanist Delusion?

In his book, Straw Dogs (Farrar, Straus and Giroux, 2002), professor of European thought, John Gray, argues that the humanist belief in progress is deluded in part because our experience of “consciousness, selfhood, and free will” are uneven at best (p. 38):

Our lives are more like fragmentary dreams than the enactments of conscious selves. We control very little of what we most care about; many 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 gave 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?

Gray’s observations and questions here are good ones, and I find the thrust of his critique of humanism hard to answer. Perhaps the best I can suggest is that a collection of unevenly conscious humans that record their moments of rational lucidity in the form of books, podcasts, blogs, etc. are ratcheting humanity slowly forward and upward even as we are, individually, and in our average moments, mostly irrational and out of focus. Just as capitalist public spaces like Starbucks tend to be cleaner, more organized, and more rational than the average suburban household, so it might be that the efforts directed toward humanist education and the practice of rationality have the effect of making humanity as a whole more humanist and rational than it would otherwise be.  

Then again, maybe rational lucidity—critical thinking—modelled, taught, and practiced is simply another form of vanity, a striving after wind (as the writer of Ecclesiastes might have put it). Perhaps there is no escaping our irrational selves.

But shouldn’t we still try? Isn’t that civilization? Where would humanity be today without books and dialogue; without the scientific method? The answer, quite obviously, is that life would be far more brutish, nasty, and short than it already is.

The more I’m writing here in response to John Gray, the less impressed I am by his skepticism.

I knew blogging was for something.

About Santi Tafarella

I teach writing and literature at Antelope Valley College in California.
This entry was posted in Uncategorized and tagged , , , , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

3 Responses to The Humanist Delusion?

  1. well, we know humans are real

    so it makes more sense to be the best humans we can be

    and at least that way, we have a way to tell when we’re achieving our best or falling far short of the mark, without the pressure of an unproven eternal afterlife riding in the balance

  2. Josh W says:

    I think you’ll be interested in the current work of the RSA, they have been focusing on the idea of treating enlightenment and “self-directing reasonable people” as something contingent, something that is not essential to us but worthy of producing, then trying to work out what we need to do to secure it.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s