History Carnival #26

History Carnival #26 is up at "World History Blog". I found the post on Newfoundland vs. Iceland particularly interesting. Also recommended is When Scientists Dabble in History.

A New Poem Draft

Electakyria

the garden fountains pour
living streams refreshed by shower
greening leaf and blooming flower
around the lily white

fresh and dewy-petalled light
surrrounds her, silver scented
where God on earth is tented
spreading grace and fire
calming wrath and fear

see her many-gifted hand
spreading graces dear
granting merci to her knights
vital sips of paradise
vivid dreams of sainted lands
beyond the ken of learning wise

see how beneath the maddened moon
in lights bewitching to a swoon
she walks on rain-wet paths
through shades of minds demented
boiling with an inner wrath
calming with her touch and song
the ache of heart that, maddened, longs
for better world and wonder

as the mover moves the stars
as cloud to earth calls in thunder
she calls, she moves, she draws
the knight to learn of loving awe
making every heart renewed
a fresher flower touched by dew

inspires she to seek the true
by gentle kiss of breath
a wind outracing wings of death
bringing hoping heart to light
speaking troth and giving life

Ordinary Language

The Maverick Philosopher has had a series of posts on ordinary language philosophy. I'm in full sympathy with his position. It just reminded me, however, that some time ago I summarized Gilbert Ryle's article, "Ordinary Language," on this weblog, because I thought that it presented an interestingly different take on ordinary language philosophy than I had previously come across. The post originally also had an evaluation of Ryle's argument, but (for some reason) I put it in the comments. Since I have Haloscan Basic, the comments are long gone. I also must apologize for the many typos in the post.

I think Ryle's approach would lead to ordinary language philosophy meeting up in some ways with the sort of philosophical approach to which Vallicella is contrasting it. (Of course, there would still be legitimate questions. For example, is Ryle's characterization an idealized version of ordinary language philosophy, a sort of dream of what it might be or become; or was it a realized project, something ordinary language philosophers were actually and systematically doing? And in what ways does ordinary language philosophy, understood in this way, also suffer from limitations?)

For some reason I remember Ryle saying in this article that the phrase 'ordinary language' in 'ordinary language philosophy' meant not 'standard language' but 'language set in order'. This would be a fascinating take, if so; but as I can't find any hint of it in the summary, there's a good chance I'm misremembering.

Rethinking the World

"This is what you're to do," God said. "You will help humankind to survive its greedy, murderous, wasteful adolescence. Help it to find less destructive, more peaceful, sustainable ways to live."

Martha stared at him. After a while, she said feebly, "… what?"

"If you don't help them, they will be destroyed."

"You're going to destroy them … again?" she whispered.

"Of course not," God said, sounding annoyed.

From Octavia Butler, The Book of Martha

So That's What Leads to Philosophy Majors

The TWoP recap for last week's Battlestar Galactica had a hilarious passage in it that I just had to quote. Tom Zarek, of course, is talking to Gaius Baltar:

"You'd be surprised how many people crave the assurances of cold science, as opposed to the superstitious ravings of the Geminese," says Zarek, and sits, because if there's one thing anarchists know, it's that the quickest way to an atheist's heart is through his deep superiority to everybody else. "I know there's no Santa Claus! Everybody else in the whole first grade is stupid babies!" Which has a cuteness grace period of exactly one semester from starting college, and can sometimes lead to a Philosophy major, if not down the Ayn Rand road, which is like atheism squared in precisely this way.

The New Hume

One of the major disputes in Hume scholarship in the past twenty years or so has been the "New Hume" position. On the older reading of Hume, often called the 'Postivist' or the 'orthodox' view Hume denies that there are real causal connections among external objects. The New Hume interpretation is a popular counter-interpretation, which holds that Hume does not deny that there are real causal connections among external objects. Rather, he is a "Skeptical Realist" about them: real causal connections exist, but we 'cannot conceive them'. Part of the inspiration for this is that Hume does talk a lot about the 'hidden powers' of things, and one way to take these statements is to interpret them as affirmations that there are hidden powers.

I tend Old Hume myself, and in any case I think it matters less than most people seem to think; but one argument that can't be used against the New Hume interpretation is that, since Hume says we can't conceive of what real causal connections are, it makes no sense for him to believe there are real causal connections. What this overlooks is that Hume does on occasion allow that we can suppose things to exist that we can't conceive -- for example, we can't conceive of an exact standard of equality, but we can suppose one to exist.

Incidentally, you can get back issues of Hume Studies online; the newer issues are restricted to members of the International Hume Society, but the older ones are public. (If you do work in Hume or involving Hume and are not a member of the Hume Society, you need to be; it's a great group.)

Twelve Tribes Wandering in the Desert

An interesting article at Beliefnet.com tries to divide up the complicated American religious-political landscape (HT: GetReligion). Using poll results relative to the last election, it divides Americans into twelve tribes. I've arranged them from smallest to largest. My summaries may be a little misleading in parts, due to diversity in the groups; see the article for further details.

Jews (about 1.7% of the voting population)
46% liberal, 36% moderate, 68% Democrat. Heavy emphasis on foreign policy.

Muslims and Other Faiths (about 3% of the voting population)
Muslims, Buddhists, Hindus, Wiccans, and other smaller groups. 46% moderate, 44% liberal, 55% Democrat. Heavy emphasis on the economy.

Spiritual but not Religious (about 5.3% of the voting population)
Most report spiritual beliefs--85% believe in God and more than half are sure there is some kind of life after death--but they don't much like houses of worship or organized religion. They report no formal religious affiliation and a majority report seldom or never attending worship services. 47% are under age 35. 49% moderate, 37% Independent, 35% Democrat.

Latinos (about 7.3% of the voting population)
Majority Catholic, but with a large Protestant minority. Fairly conservative in practice (53% report attending worship once a week or more) and belief (60% of the Catholics agreed with papal infallibility; 58% of the Protestants are biblical literalists). 45% moderate, 54% Democrat. Heavy emphasis on the economy, but also a strong emphasis on the importance of faith to politics.

White Bread Protestants (about 8% of voting population)
The core members of the Protestant "mainline" churches-- United Methodist Church, Presbyterian Church in the USA, American Episcopal Church, United Church of Christ, and so forth. About one-quarter report regular church attendance and just 19% are biblical literalists; 47% agree that "all the world's great religions are equally true and good." 43% moderate, 37% conservative, 46% Republican, 33% Democrat. Liberal on social issues, conservative on economic issues; heavy emphasis on the economy.

Convertible Catholics (about 8.1% of voting population)
The core of the white Catholic community, they outnumber conservative Catholics by nearly two to one. Religiously moderate in practice (42% claim to attend worship weekly) and belief (less than one-half agree with papal infallibility). 52% agree that "all the world's great religions are equally true and good." 49% moderate, 47% Democrat, 34% Republican. Heavy emphasis on the economy.

Black Protestants (about 9.6% of the voting population)
Fairly conservative in practice (59% report attending worship once a week or more) and belief (56% are biblical literalists). However, the experience of slavery and segregation has produced a distinctive theology. 48% moderate, 71% Democrat. Heavy emphasis on the economy, but highly conservative on social issues, and comfortable with religious involvement in politics.

Seculars (about 10.7% of the voting population)
Non-religious, atheists, and agnostics. 48% moderate, 35% liberal, 47% Democrat. Liberal on social issues; 47% young.

Moderate Evangelicals (about 10.8% of voting population)
These white evangelical Protestants hold less conservative religious beliefs (54% are biblical literalists) and don’t show up in church quite as often as the "religious right" (35% go weekly or more often), but they belong to evangelical churches and regard themselves as born-again Christians. 48% conservative, 47% Republican, 31% Democrat. Heavy emphasis on economic issues. Support religious involvement in politics, but tend not to say that their faith is important to their politics.

Heartland Culture Warriors (about 11.4% of voting population)
Conservative Catholics and conservative mainline Protestants, Latter-day Saints, and other smaller groups. Slightly less conservative than the Religious Right (54% of the Protestants are biblical literalists; 60% of the Catholics agree with papal infallibility) and more theologically diverse. But they are regular churchgoers (three-quarters report attending worship service weekly or more often). 50% conservative, 41% moderate, 54% Republican. Heavy emphasis on social issues.

Religious Left (about 12.6% of the voting population)
Theologically liberal Catholics, mainline and evangelical Protestants. Less church-bound (less than one-quarter report weekly worship attendance) and pluralistic in their beliefs (two-thirds agree that "all the world's great religious are equally true and good".) 50% moderate, 51% Democrat. Liberal on social issues; tend to oppose religious involvement in politics.

Religious Right (about 12.6% of the voting population)
Religiously conservative white evangelical Protestants: 88% believe the Bible is literally true; 87% report attending worship once a week or more; 44% live in the South. 66% conservative, 70% Republican. Strongly supportive of religious involvement in politics. Heavy emphasis on social issues.

Of course, as one might expect with this sort of thing, it's entirely possible to criticize various aspects of the division. But it's an interesting thing to think about, and is much better than the simplistic dichotomies that are usually used. (One of my particular frustrations with the usual ways of classifying this sort of thing is that Latino Christians and Black Protestants tend to drop out of consideration entirely, despite the fact that they are essential for understanding the interaction between religion and politics in the U.S.)