Modern Liberalism Born of Enlightenment Thought

Here’s the link to this article.

James A. Haught | March 31, 2023 | Kiosk Article

Ethics-Morality | Freethought | Philosophy | Politics | Rationalism ]


Values that later grew into liberalism began stirring in the epoch now known as the Enlightenment, starting more than three centuries ago, chiefly in England and France. It was an era when kings still ruled brutally by “divine right,” and the church still sought to execute “heretics” holding irregular beliefs, or jail skeptics for blasphemy. Most people were agricultural serfs, working on lands inherited by wealthy barons and counts. The bottom-rung majority had virtually no rights.

But the Enlightenment roused a new way of thinking: a sense that all people should have some control over their lives, a voice in their own destiny. Absolute power of authorities—either the throne or the cathedral—was challenged. Reformers asserted that human reason and the scientific method can improve society and benefit nearly everyone.

The 1600s were a time of ugly intolerance, much of it stemming from alliances between church and throne. In England’s notorious Star Chamber, controlled by the Anglican archbishop, Puritan and Presbyterian dissenters were forced to testify against themselves, then sentenced to have their ears cut off or their faces branded with markings such as S. L. (for seditious libeler). One victim, John Lilburne, became a public hero because he wrote pamphlets claiming that all people deserved “freeborn rights” not subject to king or church.

Europe was emerging from horrors of religious wars and massacres between Catholics and Protestants. Catholic France persecuted Huguenot Protestants. Jews were attacked cruelly and banned from certain nations, including England. Sporadic executions of “heretics” and “witches” still occurred. England’s last accused witch was put to death in 1684. A few others were executed around Europe and the New World for another century.

This was the background that helped spawn Enlightenment reform.

England was shattered by civil war in the 1640s between Parliament and Puritans on one side versus King Charles I and Anglicans on the other. Charles was beheaded and the power of kings was reduced—expanding an erosion that began four centuries earlier when barons forced King John to sign the Magna Carta, yielding certain rights.

By the late 1600s, some thinkers began pondering society and government.

Thomas Hobbes (1588-1679) wrote Leviathan asserting that people need a “social contract” to secure safe lives. In a dog-eat-dog natural state, he said, everyone suffers from “continual fear and danger of violent death; and the life of man [is] solitary, poor, nasty, brutish and short.” Therefore, he said, people must yield power to a sovereign government to enforce order and protect them. Hobbes supported a king as the sovereign—but the tide away from absolute kings already was flowing. Hobbes raised awareness that the social order is made by humans, not by God.

In his many writings, Hobbes repeatedly affronted the clergy. A bishop accused him of atheism, possibly punishable by death. The allegation subsided, then flared again. Nearing 80 years old, Hobbes hastily burned some of his papers and eluded prosecution.

John Locke (1632-1704) hatched notions of democracy, arguing that all people, male and female, deserve a degree of equality. He dismissed the divine right of kings, and advocated separation of church and state to avert religious conflict.

John Milton (1608-1674) was more than an epic poet who wrote in four languages. He also supported popular government and attacked state-mandated religion. When Parliament imposed censorship on writings, he defied a licensing requirement and published an Areopagitica pamphlet claiming that all thinking people are entitled to free expression of their beliefs. “Books are not absolutely dead things,” he said. “He who destroys a good book kills reason itself.” The principle of free speech and free press was furthered.

In France, Baron de Montesquieu (1689-1755) championed democracy and envisioned an elected government with power divided between executive, legislative and judicial branches.

Francois Marie Arouet (1694-1788)—”that consuming fire called Voltaire,” as Will Durant called him—was a brilliant French writer who became a heroic champion of human rights. Endlessly, he denounced cruelties of bishops and aristocrats. Here’s an example: In the devout town of Abbeville, a teen-age youth, Francois de la Barre, was accused of marring a crucifix, singing impious songs and wearing his hat while a church procession passed. He was sentenced to have his tongue torn out, his head chopped off, and his remains burned. Voltaire wrote bitter protests against this savagery. He helped appeal the youth’s case to Parliament, which showed “mercy” by affording the blasphemer a quick death by beheading—with a copy of Voltaire’s Philosophical Dictionary nailed to his body.

Voltaire’s protest writings roused ferment across Europe and won reversal of a few cases. He freed Jean Espinas, who had spent 23 years aboard a penal galley ship because he sheltered a fugitive Protestant minister for one night. Likewise, he freed Claude Chaumont from a galley bench, where he had been sentenced for attending a Protestant worship service.

In The Rights of Man, Thomas Paine wrote that Voltaire’s “forte lay in exposing and ridiculing the superstitions which priestcraft, united with statecraft, had interwoven with governments.”

At first, Enlightenment ideas were somewhat suppressed in Europe, where kings and archbishops still prevailed, but they found fertile ground in America’s colonies. Brilliant radicals such as Thomas Jefferson, John Adams, Benjamin Franklin and James Madison read them ardently and adopted them as a pattern for the first modern democracy, the United States of America. In the Declaration of Independence, Jefferson summed up the essence:

All men are created equal and endowed by their creator with certain inalienable rights, among these life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.

Less-known founding father George Mason incorporated the principles into the Bill of Rights, keeping church and state apart, guaranteeing free speech, and protecting each person from abuses by the majority. Similarly, the personal liberties were reiterated in the Rights of Man and the Citizen adopted by the French Revolution, and eventually in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights that Eleanor Roosevelt helped craft for the United Nations.

Thus democracy became self-contradictory. A basic premise is majority rule—yet a bill of rights prevents majority rule. For example, the Christian majority cannot vote to banish minority Jews or skeptics. Personal beliefs are exempt from majority rule.

The Enlightenment was the seedbed that sprouted most of the liberal freedoms now enjoyed in democracies everywhere. It projected a model for humane, safe, fair modern life.

James A. Haught: Religion fading as intelligence rises

Here’s the link to this article.

The Religion News Foundation, Religion News Service, Associated Press and The Conversation recently announced the creation of a global religion journalism initiative, an effort to expand religion news reporting in the United States and around the world.

The initiative is funded by a $4.9 million grant from Lilly Endowment.

The endowment says part of its mission is to “deepen and enrich the religious lives of American Christians” and to “foster public understanding about religion and help lift up in fair and accurate ways the contributions that people of diverse religious faiths make to our greater civic well-being.”

Columnist James A. Haught, former editor of West Virginia’s largest newspaper, The Charleston Gazette-Mail, said he “suspects that Lilly is trying to buy a whitewash to offset endless ugly headlines about religious horrors and cruelties around the world. I wanted to give the project a jolt. Half sarcastically, I offered to write ‘curmudgeon columns’ for the Lilly-funded enterprise. Here is my first one (which I assume is doomed to rejection).”

By James A. Haught

Supernatural religion is a colossal system of falsehoods. Invisible gods, devils, heavens, hells, angels, demons and other magical church entities don’t actually exist. They’re just concoctions of the human imagination. Yet they’re the basis of a trillion-dollar labyrinth of worship around the planet.

Widespread belief in such spirits shows a deep flaw in the supposedly logical minds of our species. It’s akin to fairy tale beliefs of children.

The most dishonest people are clergy who endlessly declare God’s commands, as if an imaginary being really gave commands. I wonder how many ministers realize, at least subconsciously, that they’re spouting lies?

Studies show that religious skeptics have higher intelligence than religious believers. Maybe that’s why brilliant thinkers throughout history have doubted religion.

In Ancient Greece, thinker Prodicus reportedly said: “The gods of popular belief do not exist.”

In medieval times, while the Holy Inquisition burned skeptics, Michel de Montaigne wrote: “Man is certainly stark mad. He cannot make a worm, yet he will make gods by the dozen.”

As American radicals launched the first modern democracy, Thomas Jefferson wrote: “The day will come when the mystical generation of Jesus, by the supreme being as his father in the womb of a virgin, will be classed with the fable of the generation of Minerva in the brain of Jupiter.”

Jefferson also wrote, in an 1820 letter, that ministers “dread the advance of science as witches do the approach of daylight.”

Thomas Edison scoffed: “Religion is all bunk.”

Albert Einstein told The New York Times in 1930 that he couldn’t believe in a personal god, adding: “Neither can I believe that the individual survives the death of his body, although feeble souls harbor such thoughts through fear or ridiculous egotism.”

There you have it. The brightest people have always known that supernatural church dogmas are untrue.

The Flynn Effect shows that the average American I.Q. rises three points per decade. Educated folks are getting smarter. Maybe that’s why religion is dwindling rapidly in the United States, as it has done in Europe.

At least one-fourth of American adults now say their religion is “none” — and the ratio is one-third among those under 30. Supernatural faith is dying, right before everyone’s eyes. A new secular age is taking shape. Scientific honesty prevails. Hurrah.

It may seem harmless that millions of older Americans still attend church and pray to imaginary spirits that don’t exist. But religion has a dark side that is profoundly harmful.

It has cropped up since the time of human sacrifice, Crusades, Inquisitions, witch hunts, holy wars and pogroms against Jews.

Today, the vile side of faith erupts in Muslim suicide massacres, child molestation by Catholic priests (and Protestant evangelists), opposition to the teaching of evolution, resistance to sex education and birth control, cruel hostility to gays, opposition to lifesaving stem cell research, etc.

Another vile aspect of religion is the adherence of white evangelicals to the Republican Party. Jesus was allegedly a liberal who urged followers to help the poor, feed the hungry, heal the sick, clothe the naked and aid underdogs.That’s the formula of the social “safety net” backed by Democrats. Yet, white fundamentalists vote overwhelmingly for the GOP, which seeks to slash the safety net. In effect, those believers oppose Jesus.

It’s fortunate that supernatural religion is fading as America grows more intelligent. Bring it on. The faster the better.

James A. Haught is editor emeritus of West Virginia’s largest newspaper, the Charleston Gazette-Mail.

Battling Demons of the Mind

Here’s the link to this article.

James A. Haught | January 1, 1997 | Modern Library


(1997)

[This article was originally published in the Spring 1997 issue of Free Inquiry.]

Sincere seekers of reliable knowledge lost a friend when Carl Sagan died too young at 62.

Like all good scientists, the brilliant Cornell astronomer spent his life pursuing secrets of nature, looking for facts that can be documented, tested, and retested.

Like some maturing thinkers, he decided late in life to escalate his criticism of mystical mumbo-jumbo into an all-out, no-holds-barred attack. His last book, The Demon-Haunted World: Science as a Candle in the Dark, urged intelligent people to repudiate:

Astrology horoscopes, faith-healing, UFO “abductions,” religious miracles, New Age occultism, fundamentalist “creationism,” Tarot card reading, prayer, prophecy, palmistry, Transcendental Meditation, satanism, weeping statues, “channeling” of voices from the dead, holy apparitions, extrasensory perception, belief in life after death, “dowsing,” demonic possession, “magical powers” of crystals and pyramids, “psychic phenomena” etc., etc.

Sagan’s farewell message was simple:

— Many people believe almost anything they’re told, with no evidence, which makes them vulnerable to charlatans, crackpots and superstition.

— Only the scientific outlook, mixing skepticism and wonder, can give people a sensible grasp of reality.

He scorned supernatural aspects of religion. The Demon-Haunted World abounds with comments like these:

“If some good evidence for life after death were announced, I’d be eager to examine it; but it would have to be real scientific data, not mere anecdote…. Better the hard truth, I say, than the comforting fantasy.” (p. 204)

“If you want to save your child from polio, you can pray or you can inoculate…. Try science.” (p. 30)

“Think of how many religions attempt to validate themselves with prophecy. Think of how many people rely on these prophecies, however vague, however unfulfilled, to support or prop up their beliefs. Yet has there ever been a religion with the prophetic accuracy and reliability of science? There isn’t a religion on the planet that doesn’t long for a comparable ability — precise, and repeatedly demonstrated before committed skeptics — to foretell future events. No other human institution comes close.” (p. 30)

“Since World War II, Japan has spawned enormous numbers of new religions featuring the supernatural…. In Thailand, diseases are treated with pills manufactured from pulverized sacred Scripture. ‘Witches’ are today being burned in South Africa…. The worldwide TM [Transcendental Meditation] organization has an estimated valuation of $3 billion. For a fee, they promise through meditation to be able to walk you through walls, to make you invisible, to enable you to fly.” (p. 16)

“The so-called Shroud of Turin… is now suggested by carbon-14 dating to be not the death shroud of Jesus, but a pious hoax from the 14th century — a time when the manufacture of fraudulent religious relics was a thriving and profitable home handicraft industry.” (p. 46)

Sagan quoted the Roman philosopher Lucretius:

“Nature… is seen to do all things spontaneously of herself, without the meddling of the gods.” (p. 310)

And he quoted the Roman historian Polybius as saying the masses can be unruly, so “they must be filled with fears to keep them in order. The ancients did well, therefore, to invent gods and the belief in punishment after death.” (p. 213)

Sagan recounted how the medieval church tortured and burned thousands of women on charges that they were witches who flew in the air, coupled with Satan, turned into animals, etc. He said “this legally and morally sanctioned mass murder” was advocated by great church fathers.

“In Italy, the Inquisition was condemning people to death until the end of the 18th century, and inquisitional torture was not abolished in the Catholic Church until 1816,” he wrote. “The last bastion of support for the reality of witchcraft and the necessity of punishment has been the Christian churches.” (p. 413)

The astronomer-author was equally scornful of New Age gurus, UFO buffs, seance “channelers” and others who tout mysterious beliefs without evidence.

He denounced the tendency among some groups, chiefly fundamentalists and marginal psychologists, to induce people falsely to “remember” satanic rituals or other non-existent events they supposedly experienced as children.

Sagan, a laureate in the International Academy of Humanism, had been a member of the Committee for the Scientific Investigation of Claims of the Paranormal since its founding in 1976 by Dr. Paul Kurtz. The astronomer said CSICOP serves a valuable public purpose by offering the news media “the other side of the story” in response to supernatural declarations by “every levitating guru, visiting alien, channeler, and faith-healer…. CSICOP represents a counterbalance, although not yet nearly a loud enough voice, to the pseudo-science gullibility that seems second nature to so much of the media.” (p. 299)

Again and again in his last book, Sagan said wonders revealed by science are more awesome than any claims by mystics. He said children are “natural scientists” because they incessantly ask “Why is the moon round?” or “Why do we have toes?” or the like.

He urged that youngsters be inculcated with the scientific spirit of searching for trustworthy evidence, to guide them through “the demon-haunted world.” That’s a noble wish for the young.

I’m a friend of Sagan’s sister, Cari Greene, who donated bone marrow repeatedly in a desperate attempt to fend off his marrow disease. Through her, I watched the family’s pain.

Although his unstoppable illness was cruel, I’ll bet the wise scientist didn’t personalize his misfortune, but saw it factually as part of the random lottery of life, which takes some victims early, some late.

Meanwhile, we who admired him can be grateful that his last act was a courageous battle against the many demons of the mind.

Three little words: I don’t know

Here’s the link to this article.

James A. Haught | February 11, 1997 | Modern Library


[This speech was delivered to the Marshall University chapter, Campus Freethought Alliance, Feb. 11, 1997.]

When I was a young reporter about your age, I hung out with my newspaper buddies in all-night diners (liquor clubs were illegal in those days), earnestly debating the meaning of life.

Some of us couldn’t swallow the standard explanation — that the purpose of life is to be saved by an invisible Jesus and go to an invisible heaven — but we couldn’t see any alternatives that made sense.

One day I asked my city editor, a disciple of H.L. Mencken, how an honest person can answer the ultimate questions: Is there life after death? Is there a spirit realm of unseen gods and devils, heavens and hells? Is there a divine force running the universe? Since there’s no tangible evidence, one way or the other, how can you make a sincere answer?

He replied: “You can say, I don’t know.”

That rang a bell in my mind. I suppose I had half-known it all along, in my confused search for answers, but now I saw clearly how to be truthful and straightforward about an extremely touchy, emotional subject. I felt liberated, because it gave me a way to maintain integrity. Saying “I don’t know” isn’t really an answer, but it’s the only answer I could give without lying or guessing or pretending.

Of course, those were the naive days of youth. I hadn’t yet learned of a thousand philosophers who sweated through the same dilemma and reached the same conclusion. But it became a foundation stone of my psyche, never to leave me.

Once you say “I don’t know,” you’re in conflict with the majority culture. All the supernatural religions and ministers claim that they do know. They say absolutely that invisible spirits exist. Hundreds of millions of Americans go to churches and pray to the unseen beings. Successful politicians always invoke the deities. When you say “I don’t know,” you’re clashing with all these people who claim to know.

It puts you out of step with the world — but I don’t think a truthful person can take any other stance. From my viewpoint, the only honest mind is the unsure mind, the doubtful mind. It’s the only outlook that doesn’t claim knowledge which nobody actually possesses. This is the agnostic, skeptical, rationalist, scientific posture. To me, anything else is dishonest, because it requires people to swear they know things they really don’t.

To me, priests and theologians are lying when they declare that supernatural beings are real, that people are rewarded or punished after death. It isn’t dishonest to speculate about such ideas — but the clergy flatly say spirits exist, and pray to them, and even claim to know how the spirits want us to behave. That’s absurd.

As Voltaire said, “Doubt is not a pleasant condition, but certainty is a ridiculous one.”

Once you’ve crossed the “I don’t know” threshold, maybe you’ll take some logical steps that lead you further, beyond just a neutral, hands-off position. If you’re scientific-minded, always looking for trustworthy evidence, you’ll see that there isn’t a shred of reliable proof for mystical, magical, miraculous things.

What’s the evidence for an invisible heaven or hell? For invisible deities and devils? None, except ancient tribal writings and the pronouncements of priests. It’s rather like the evidence for witches, ghosts, vampires, fairies, werewolves, demons, leprechauns, etc. Educated people know that the latter spooks are just imaginary.

By the time you reach this point, you may be pretty much convinced that the mystical beings worshiped by religions are just imaginary, too — that the whole rigmarole is a gigantic, worldwide, billion-member, trillion-dollar fantasy, a universal human delusion and self-deception that has been going on for 10,000 years.

And you may extend your skepticism to other fantastic things: astrology horoscopes, UFO abductions, seances with the dead, Ouija boards, New Age “channeling” of spirits, psychic prophecies, palm-reading, “dowsing” rods, etc., etc., etc.

See how far you can be led by three little words: I don’t know.

If you proceed along this mental path, as I did, you’ll face a tough decision: whether to dispute the True Believers you encounter, or whether to stay silent.

There’s little point in arguing with worshipers. They often become angry when challenged. (Bertrand Russell said it’s because they subconsciously realize their beliefs are irrational — so they can’t tolerate having them questioned.)

Time after time, I vow to avoid theological quarrels. But when an ardent believer tells me that God wants us to punish homosexuals, or that prayer cures cancer, or that Jesus opposes birth control, or that God disapproves of nudity and sex, I can’t restrain myself. I don’t want to be a religion-basher, yet I turn into one.

Perhaps you and I should take a pledge: When believers confront us with dogmatic declarations about miraculous things, we will just smile sweetly and say, I don’t know.


Modern Liberalism Born of Enlightenment Thought

Here’s the link to this article.

James A. Haught | March 31, 2023 | Kiosk Article


Values that later grew into liberalism began stirring in the epoch now known as the Enlightenment, starting more than three centuries ago, chiefly in England and France. It was an era when kings still ruled brutally by “divine right,” and the church still sought to execute “heretics” holding irregular beliefs, or jail skeptics for blasphemy. Most people were agricultural serfs, working on lands inherited by wealthy barons and counts. The bottom-rung majority had virtually no rights.

But the Enlightenment roused a new way of thinking: a sense that all people should have some control over their lives, a voice in their own destiny. Absolute power of authorities—either the throne or the cathedral—was challenged. Reformers asserted that human reason and the scientific method can improve society and benefit nearly everyone.

The 1600s were a time of ugly intolerance, much of it stemming from alliances between church and throne. In England’s notorious Star Chamber, controlled by the Anglican archbishop, Puritan and Presbyterian dissenters were forced to testify against themselves, then sentenced to have their ears cut off or their faces branded with markings such as S. L. (for seditious libeler). One victim, John Lilburne, became a public hero because he wrote pamphlets claiming that all people deserved “freeborn rights” not subject to king or church.

Europe was emerging from horrors of religious wars and massacres between Catholics and Protestants. Catholic France persecuted Huguenot Protestants. Jews were attacked cruelly and banned from certain nations, including England. Sporadic executions of “heretics” and “witches” still occurred. England’s last accused witch was put to death in 1684. A few others were executed around Europe and the New World for another century.

This was the background that helped spawn Enlightenment reform.

England was shattered by civil war in the 1640s between Parliament and Puritans on one side versus King Charles I and Anglicans on the other. Charles was beheaded and the power of kings was reduced—expanding an erosion that began four centuries earlier when barons forced King John to sign the Magna Carta, yielding certain rights.

By the late 1600s, some thinkers began pondering society and government.

Thomas Hobbes (1588-1679) wrote Leviathan asserting that people need a “social contract” to secure safe lives. In a dog-eat-dog natural state, he said, everyone suffers from “continual fear and danger of violent death; and the life of man [is] solitary, poor, nasty, brutish and short.” Therefore, he said, people must yield power to a sovereign government to enforce order and protect them. Hobbes supported a king as the sovereign—but the tide away from absolute kings already was flowing. Hobbes raised awareness that the social order is made by humans, not by God.

In his many writings, Hobbes repeatedly affronted the clergy. A bishop accused him of atheism, possibly punishable by death. The allegation subsided, then flared again. Nearing 80 years old, Hobbes hastily burned some of his papers and eluded prosecution.

John Locke (1632-1704) hatched notions of democracy, arguing that all people, male and female, deserve a degree of equality. He dismissed the divine right of kings, and advocated separation of church and state to avert religious conflict.

John Milton (1608-1674) was more than an epic poet who wrote in four languages. He also supported popular government and attacked state-mandated religion. When Parliament imposed censorship on writings, he defied a licensing requirement and published an Areopagitica pamphlet claiming that all thinking people are entitled to free expression of their beliefs. “Books are not absolutely dead things,” he said. “He who destroys a good book kills reason itself.” The principle of free speech and free press was furthered.

In France, Baron de Montesquieu (1689-1755) championed democracy and envisioned an elected government with power divided between executive, legislative and judicial branches.

Francois Marie Arouet (1694-1788)—”that consuming fire called Voltaire,” as Will Durant called him—was a brilliant French writer who became a heroic champion of human rights. Endlessly, he denounced cruelties of bishops and aristocrats. Here’s an example: In the devout town of Abbeville, a teen-age youth, Francois de la Barre, was accused of marring a crucifix, singing impious songs and wearing his hat while a church procession passed. He was sentenced to have his tongue torn out, his head chopped off, and his remains burned. Voltaire wrote bitter protests against this savagery. He helped appeal the youth’s case to Parliament, which showed “mercy” by affording the blasphemer a quick death by beheading—with a copy of Voltaire’s Philosophical Dictionary nailed to his body.

Voltaire’s protest writings roused ferment across Europe and won reversal of a few cases. He freed Jean Espinas, who had spent 23 years aboard a penal galley ship because he sheltered a fugitive Protestant minister for one night. Likewise, he freed Claude Chaumont from a galley bench, where he had been sentenced for attending a Protestant worship service.

In The Rights of Man, Thomas Paine wrote that Voltaire’s “forte lay in exposing and ridiculing the superstitions which priestcraft, united with statecraft, had interwoven with governments.”

At first, Enlightenment ideas were somewhat suppressed in Europe, where kings and archbishops still prevailed, but they found fertile ground in America’s colonies. Brilliant radicals such as Thomas Jefferson, John Adams, Benjamin Franklin and James Madison read them ardently and adopted them as a pattern for the first modern democracy, the United States of America. In the Declaration of Independence, Jefferson summed up the essence:

All men are created equal and endowed by their creator with certain inalienable rights, among these life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.

Less-known founding father George Mason incorporated the principles into the Bill of Rights, keeping church and state apart, guaranteeing free speech, and protecting each person from abuses by the majority. Similarly, the personal liberties were reiterated in the Rights of Man and the Citizen adopted by the French Revolution, and eventually in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights that Eleanor Roosevelt helped craft for the United Nations.

Thus democracy became self-contradictory. A basic premise is majority rule—yet a bill of rights prevents majority rule. For example, the Christian majority cannot vote to banish minority Jews or skeptics. Personal beliefs are exempt from majority rule.

The Enlightenment was the seedbed that sprouted most of the liberal freedoms now enjoyed in democracies everywhere. It projected a model for humane, safe, fair modern life.