Secularism Has a Problem Reasonably Proving Itself

Curt at Northwestern Winds links to this First Things Article, "A Clash of Orthodoxies," by Robert P. George. He proves that Christian orthodoxy, as well as jewish, certain islamic and classical philosophical traditions outreason what he calls Orthodox Secularism. The irony is that Orthodox Secularism has claimed that religion in general, and Christianity in particular, only support moral positions from "Divine command", or religious revelation. Since not everyone believes the claims of any particular religion, no policies or ideology based on these claims must ever reach the Public Square. It's simply to unreasonable. Mr. George demonstrates that this is not the case. On the contrary, Christianity--and certain other religions--appeal to reason and draw conclusions accessible to any person that can think rationally. He then illustrates the intellectual poverty of Orthodox Secularism:

Secularists would have us believe that, apart from revelation, we have no reason to affirm the intrinsic goodness and moral inviolability of human life. That simply isn’t true. In fact, the secularist proposition that bodily life is merely instrumentally good entails a metaphysical dualism of the person and the body that is rationally untenable.

Implicit in the view that human life is merely instrumentally and not intrinsically valuable is a particular understanding of the human person as an essentially non–bodily being who inhabits a nonpersonal body. According to this understanding—which contrasts with the Judeo–Christian view of the human person as a dynamic unity of body, mind, and spirit—the "person" is the conscious and desiring "self" as distinct from the body which may exist (as in the case of pre– and post–conscious human beings) as a merely "biological," and, thus, sub–personal, reality.{2} But the dualistic view of the human person makes nonsense of the experience all of us have in our activities of being dynamically unified actors—of being, that is, embodied persons and not persons who merely "inhabit" our bodies and direct them as extrinsic instruments under our control, like automobiles. We don’t sit in the physical body and direct it as an instrument, the way we sit in a car and make it go left or right.

This experience of unity of body, mind, and spirit is itself no mere illusion. Philosophical arguments have undermined any theory that purports to demonstrate that the human being is, in fact, two distinct realities, namely, a "person" and a (sub–personal) body. Any such theory will, unavoidably, contradict its own starting point, since reflection necessarily begins from one’s own conscious awareness of oneself as a unitary actor. So the defender of dualism, in the end, will never be able to identify the "I" who undertakes the project of reflection. He will simply be unable to settle whether the "I" is the conscious and desiring aspect of the "self," or the "mere living body." If he seeks to identify the "I" with the former, then he separates himself inexplicably from the living human organism that is recognized by others (and, indeed, by himself) as the reality whose behavior (thinking, questioning, asserting, etc.) constitutes the philosophical enterprise in question. And if, instead, he identifies the "I" with that "mere living body," then he leaves no role for the conscious and desiring aspect of the "self" which, on the dualistic account, is truly the "person." As a recent treatment of the subject sums up the matter: "Person" (as understood in dualistic theories) and "mere living body" are "constructs neither of which refers to the unified self who had set out to explain his or her own reality; both of them purport to refer to realities other than that unified self but somehow, inexplicably, related to it." In short, "person/body dualisms" purport to be theories of something, but cannot, in the end, identify something of which to be the theory.

From these arguments one rationally concludes that the body, far from being a nonpersonal and indeed sub–personal instrument at the direction and disposal of the conscious and desiring "self," is irreducibly part of the personal reality of the human being. It is properly understood, therefore, as fully sharing in the dignity—the intrinsic worth—of the person and deserving the respect due to persons precisely as such.

The heart of Secular Orthodoxy's worldview rests on the duality of mind and body. The belief in the essential separation of the "person" from his or her "body" enables the orthodox secularist to see all morality in instrumental terms. Intrinsic good or evil remains denied. If this duality is rationally contradicted, then any legitimacy to an all-instrumental morality collapses. Mr. George demonstrates how Christianity contradicts this illusory concept of self without one reference to any exclusive doctrine.

In other words, the Reasonable that subscribe to secular orthodoxy are kidding themselves. They have constructed a philosophical tower of babble made up of rationalizations that cover a raw will-to-power. Their worldview is for naught; it can't hold up under the clear light of true reason and common sense. The Reasonable can only scream myths and lies at the Fools that so clearly have proved them wrong. Any effort by the State to establish this absurd Reasonableness as the only appropriate and "neutral" philosophical framework for the public square dooms society to a collision course with Reality.

The tragedy of our time is that the Reasonable refuse to consider reason. They've tasted the forbidden fruit and have sought to be God, deciding for themselves what is right and wrong, and even real or illusory. It's left for Fools to embrace what reason truly is and witness to the integrated life. When we live in the truth and make appropriate use of the ordered goods of creation, we live in integrity. Living this way opens us to communion with God, for we have followed the path of virtue that leads to his Cross. It is the path carved by the Father's hand into the very fabric of creation. This path is more commonly known as the Natural Law.

We can forget it only at our peril. The Reasonable have chosen that peril, whether they know it or not. Since their influence on society alarmingly large, Fools have their work cut out for them. We have one big thing on our side, however. We have the Truth. For if Christ is Truth, as we foolish Christians seem determined to believe, then any truth that we witness will ultimately end in him. This means that even when we face the Reasonable with only the arguments of authentic reason, Christ becomes present to us through the very reason that we employ. For reason, properly understood, seeks out truth through rational inquiry. Reason reveals truth, and thus, reveals Christ.

Let's not forget that the next time we face the Reasonable. There's no reason to despair because Truth stands. The advent of a civilization of Love is not beyond our reach. It's as close as the next truly reasoned argument that we make to silence the Reasonable.