Naturalism (Interventions) [Paperback]

Stewart Goetz (Author), Charles Taliaferro (Author)

Book Description

Series: Interventions | Publication Date: April 2008

Most, if not all, other books on naturalism are written for professional philosophers alone. Stewart Goetz and Charles Taliaferro offer a book that - without losing anything in the way of scholarly standards - is primarily aimed at a college-educated audience interested in learning about this pervasive worldview. Naturalism groups the various terms of this philosophy into two general categories: strict naturalism and broad naturalism. According to the strict version, all that exists can be exhaustively described and explained by the natural sciences. As Goetz and Taliaferro explain it, broad naturalism allows that there may be some things beyond physics and the natural sciences, but insists that there can be no reality beyond nature - i.e., God - and explicitly rules out the possibility of souls. The authors argue that both categories face substantial objections in their failure to allow for consciousness, human free will, and values. They offer sustained replies to the naturalist critique of the soul and the existence of God and engage in critical evaluations of works by scholarly and popular advocates of naturalism - Daniel Dennett, Richard Dawkins, Thomas Nagel, Jaegwon Kim, and others.

Editorial Reviews

From Booklist

Goetz and Taliaferro make the most rigorous popularly accessible reply yet to the new atheists, as Richard Dawkins, Daniel Dennett, and their lesser-known confreres have been dubbed. They critique philosophical naturalism, the bedrock of the new atheism, which holds that all phenomena can be accounted for by material physical processes, and also naturalist rejections of mind and the soul. They discriminate between strict and broad naturalisms. Strict naturalism rejects consciousness and so flies in the face of everyday notions of human decision making, motivation, and conceptualization, hence of behavioral ethics. Broad naturalism accepts consciousness, primarily out of lack of present understanding of it, assured that someday what consciousness is will be discovered. Neither naturalism admits teleological or purposive explanations, and strict naturalism tends to dispense with causality. Saving the naturalist response to theism and their counterresponse until the final chapter, Goetz and Taliaferro generally pursue rational analysis to show naturalism’s failure to constitute an adequate account of human action—indeed, of action in general. Though demanding very focused reading, this is a sterling work of popular philosophy. --Ray Olson

Product Details

• Paperback: 132 pages
• Publisher: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company (April 2008)
• Language: English
• ISBN-10: 0802807682
• ISBN-13: 978-0802807687
• Product Dimensions: 8.9 x 6.3 x 0.4 inches
• Shipping Weight: 3.2 ounces (View shipping rates and policies)
• Average Customer Review: 3.6 out of 5 stars  See all reviews (9 customer reviews)
• Amazon Best Sellers Rank: #281,124 in Books (See Top 100 in Books)

More About the Author

Discover books, learn about writers, read author blogs, and more.

Customer Reviews

Most Helpful Customer Reviews

17 of 19 people found the following review helpful:

5.0 out of 5 stars A Meticulous, Yet Brief Critique of Naturalism, October 7, 2008

By 

G. Kyle Essary (Melaka, Malaysia) - See all my reviews
(REAL NAME)   

Amazon Verified Purchase

This review is from: Naturalism (Interventions) (Paperback)

This is a fascinating, yet concise book. At only 122 pages (including the appendix) one might assume that the book is too short to argue against a philosophical methodology such as naturalism, yet this is not the case. In fact, the brevity serves a greater purpose that I will mention below. Let me begin with a brief discussion of the title followed by some strengths and weaknesses.

A commenter above suggests that the title is misleading, and states, "Given the title, you would think this book would introduce and explain 'Naturalism.'" I'm assuming that the reviewer merely skimmed the book for one cannot deny that the book does introduce and explain both strict and broad naturalism. Outside of the final chapter (and a few very brief sections in the first four chapters) this book could very easily have been written by naturalists. The book actually excels in describing both strict and broad naturalistic worldviews, mainly relying on extensive quotes from some of naturalism's most well respected proponents. It then suggests gaps and logical problems within their methodologies. The book could have very well been written (with the few exceptions mentioned above) by a naturalist, and then simply replaced the final chapter with a naturalistic attempt to answer the critiques of the previous four chapters. Books like this are typical in every field, and thus I must contend that "Naturalism" is the correct title for the work, that the previous reviewer was unjustified, and that naturalism is the topic of discussion throughout. Now for some strengths and weaknesses:

Strengths

1. The language is easily understandable for the average reader. The book avoids philosophical language when possible, which is to its benefit. Occasionally the authors are required to use philosophical language, but I believe that this will not be an issue for anyone who has had at least an introductory philosophy course in high school or college.

2. The book is brief. This may be a weakness for some (as I'll discuss below), but for me added value to the book. The work is not intended to answer the questions as much as give trajectories through which the reader may find an answer. As such, in response to the brevity and the quality of the arguments, I often found myself taking the arguments much further, and also coming up with other arguments and responses. I believe the success in prompting the reader to think through the issues more thoroughly for themselves is due much in part to the brevity of the work combined with the strong arguments.

3. The argument is strong and builds throughout the work. As I read the first chapter I was not entirely sure where the discussion was headed. In the next few chapters the argument grew extensively, and by the section on naturalism and values, it was clear that the case being made was both extensive and strong. As such, I must agree with Robert P. George (on the back of the book), when he says, "Patiently, gently, but in the end decisively, Goetz and Taliaferro demolish the dogmas of naturalism." The strength of the argument has affected me personally as well. I'm someone who, though a theist, tends to side with non-reductive physicalists more often than not. This work has opened my thinking to certain forms of non-Cartesian dualism.

4. The quotes from external sources are usually long and shown in proper context. Too often in critiques quotes are taken radically out of context in order to make a point. This is not the case with this book as it is clear that the authors both understand and respect the naturalists they are critiquing.

Weaknesses

1. Many will see the brevity of this work as a weakness. The book may not provide all of the answers you may be seeking in response to the critique of the naturalistic worldview. I personally see this as a strength since it provides trajectories for self-thought, but others may see this as a weakness.

2. The book ends as a critique. The final chapter assesses some of the stronger naturalistic arguments against theism showing their weaknesses, and thus indirectly (until the final line quoted in another review above) suggesting that the best interpretation of the world (beliefs, reason, intention, causality, free will, etc.) comes through a theistic worldview. As such, a reader may be left wanting more information as to how a theistic worldview better represents reality than the brief suggestions within the book. Fortunately, the book does include a good (and current) bibliography including (among many others) works by Goetz and Taliaferro that with more specificity and depth describe the theistic worldview.

In the end, I must say that I truly enjoyed this book. Having never read either of the authors, I was initially interested in reading it as a result of the strong endorsements by John Milbank and John F. Haught, both of whom I highly respect. Now I am intrigued to read more by each of these authors as this book has shown that they rigorously make an argument, but have the ability to do this in an easily understood and readable style.

4 of 4 people found the following review helpful:

5.0 out of 5 stars A great intro to Naturalism, December 20, 2009

By 

M. OLSON (Arizona USA) - See all my reviews
(REAL NAME)   

Amazon Verified Purchase

This review is from: Naturalism (Interventions) (Paperback)

Having never really studied naturalism specifically, I picked up this book and have not been disappointed. There are many quotes from atheists that do seem to make a person take extra care in reading.
Generally I have to read philosophical stuff over about three times to really understand all they are saying, and this is no exception. What I really like about "Naturalism" is how fairly the views are presented. Many times I have quoted from this book while debating with atheists and have found they will not argue with the views presented by Goetz and Taliaferro, since the authors accurately represent the positions and beliefs of the naturalists.
If you want to understand naturalism, and are willing to take the time to work through it, you will have a competent grasp of the subject after this book.

10 of 13 people found the following review helpful:

5.0 out of 5 stars Concise yet Rigorous, June 27, 2008

By 

Ryan Mullins (Deerfield, IL) - See all my reviews

This review is from: Naturalism (Interventions) (Paperback)

This book is truly a gem. It is short and sweet, and offers a great look at the heart of Naturalism. The authors have done a great job of examining philosophical Naturalism without the language being too technical. The chapters on Morality and Consciousness are by far the best in my opinion. The appendix on the argument from reason is solid as well. I would recommend it to anyone who is doing work in philosophy of religion, worldviews, and apologetics. It is simply one of those must-reads in philosophy.