The limits of science in discerning Ultimate Reality have brought Westerners to "as sharp an impasse in history as we have faced, " says Huston Smith. This new edition of critically acclaimed essays explores possible breakthroughts in the direction of reaching a liberated and enlightened consciousness. It contains a new preface and new final chapter.

Responses and clarifications are given to the three respondents to my recent book, Why Religion Matters, in which I discuss what I see as the drawbacks and inconsistencies of Darwinism. While certain of their criticisms are understandable, others are based on a misreading of my work. Finally, my critics fail to show that my book is mistaken in its central claim that the modern loss of faith in transcendence, basic to the traditional/religious worldview, is unwarranted, because science has not been (...) able to disprove the metaphysical claim that transcendence exists. (shrink)

This classic companion to The World's Religions articulates the remarkable unity that underlies the world's religious traditions.

George F. Dole, Harvard Ph.D., has translated and arranged by theme a selection of passages from Swedenborg's works on life, heaven and hell, and the nature of God. This book is an accessible introduction for the reader new to Swedenborg, as well as a concise reference for those familiar with his philosophy. [Swedenborg's] philosophy is about as practical as one could ask. Ascetism is not the way to God.... A good person can be saved with any religion or with no (...) religion. "George F. Dole... has done us a great service in bringing Emanuel Swedenborg back to the attention of our distracted age." -from the foreword by Huston Smith. (shrink)

This book covers the issue of tyranny and freedom. Included are selections from Hobbes, Rousseau, Jefferson, Machiavelli, Sophocles, Aristotle, Locke, Montesquieu, Madison, Calhoun, Plato, Milton, Mill, Tocqueville, Douglass, Chief Joseph, Thoreau, King, Arendt, and Holocaust documents. Co-published with Lynchburg College.

The use of intuition abounds in modern analytic philosophy. In particular, intuition is considered evidence that is used in the analysis of concepts, often in an attempt to find the individually necessary and jointly sufficient conditions of the concept under consideration. Alternatively, intuition is used as evidence that one or more of the proposed necessary conditions is unacceptable, as in Gettier counterexamples to the classical analysis of knowledge. This view of intuition can be thought of as a form of rationalism. (...) However, in the middle part of the 20th century intuition cam under attack through the influence of Quine's project of naturalizing philosophy. The two very general positions on intuition are: intuition provides evidence, but only of necessary truths or intuition does not provide evidence at all. ;I critically analyze the philosophical positions on intuition of many modern philosophers. I pay particular attention to the defense of moderate rationalism presented by Bealer and Bonjour, who place intuition at the heart of rationalism. I criticize their respective views by arguing that their defenses are viciously circular because they overtly appeal to intuition in order to defend intuition as a source of evidence. I further criticize the inability of the moderate rationalists to defend their stipulation that intuition must be of apparent necessary truths. ;On the positive side, I defend that intuition is best thought of as a basic source of evidence that provides evidence for both necessary and some contingent truths. This is how I split the difference between and from above. This view has many virtues, with one if its primary virtues being its ability to account for contingent, grammatical intuitions of he sort used in modern day linguistics. Finally, I argue that my view is more amenable to modern evolutionary psychology by giving a genealogy of intuition. (shrink)

This new edition of critically acclaimed essays explores possible breakthroughs in the direction of reaching a liberated and enlightened consciousness.

In this essay, at the epistemological level I focus on groups, and not merely individuals, when examining medical errors on behalf of both the medical industry and patients who engage in medical conspiracy theories. Specifically, I use the work in virtue and vice epistemology by Quassim Cassam and Miranda Fricker to diagnose some of the problems that arise with medical conspiracism. Cassam identifies the vice conspiracist mentality to help explain the preponderance of conspiracy theorizing. Fricker provides a framework for thinking (...) about group errors by identifying the vices of testimonial and hermeneutic injustice. I argue that medical conspiracists present a warped version of Fricker’s vices by acting as if they are the victims of these injustices instead of the purveyors of them. In addition, I argue that errors on behalf of various medical groups, such as hospitals and health organizations, reinforce many conspiracy theories. (shrink)

(1993). What are the greatest challenges for Evolutionary theory in our times? World Futures: Vol. 38, Theoretical Achievements and Practical Applications of General Evolutionary Theory, pp. 107-121.

Part of the National Placebo Initiative in Canada included public consultations, based on the belief that the views of the public should inform Canadian policy development on what constitutes appropriate placebo use. Public consultations took place nationally in 2003. A deliberative dialogue approach was used, or a structured discussion format designed to facilitate the consideration of complex issues and build consensus. The placebo debate was characterized as having 3 distinct approaches and each were explored. The first approach “Maximize Patient Protection” (...) identified the need for experts to determine appropriate placebo use and that placebos should only be allowed under very restricted conditions. The second approach “Maximize Medical Knowledge” identified that placebos give essential information about the safety and efficacy of new drugs, and are appropriate when the rights, safety and well-being of research participants are ensured. The third approach “Maximize Patient Autonomy” identified that the current system of regulating placebo use is paternalistic and that patients should be able to define what is in their best interests and have more leeway to determine for themselves if they wish to participate in a placebo-controlled trial. Advantages and disadvantages of each approach were considered and feedback on what constitutes appropriate placebo use was sought. The major findings were that: PCTs were considered a valuable and acceptable part of advancing medical knowledge; research using placebos must be valid and justifiable; a patient-centred approach needs to be fostered; patient autonomy (choice) should be a first consideration and take clear precedence in trials of low to medium risk; patient protection (or health) may need to “trump” patient autonomy at higher levels of risk and/or patient vulnerability; placebos are not a violation of the duty of care as duty of care is best met by identifying a choice for patients, whenever a choice is available. These consultations clearly were not designed to produce conclusive evidence, but rather to provide some useful insights into what the public may think about placebo use; additional studies are indicated. (shrink)

China's regard for nature, as expressed in Sung landscape painting, is clear and well recognised. What the Chinese believed to exceed the natural world, the realm of ‘the ten-thousand things’, is less clear. The present essay tries to explore this question systematically.

Accepting Lyotard’s “incredulity toward metanarratives” as its definition of postmodernism, and Derrida’s “openness to the other” as deconstruction’s contribution to it this essay distinguishes three species of postmodernism: minimal (we have no believable metanarratives), mainline (they are unavailable in principle), and polemical (“good riddance!”). It then argues that the religious impulse challenges all three of these contentions. Contra polemical postmodernism, metanarratives/worldviews are needed. Contra mainline postmodernism, reliable ones are possible. And contra minimal postmodernism, they already exist - in the world’s (...) great, enduring religious traditions. (shrink)

Yet a little thought gives pause. How, exactly, are we to conceive this survival ? From Vico, through Brooks Adams, to Spengler and Toyn- bee, ...