Famed atheist philosopher Anthony Flew converted to philosophical theism on the basis of scientific discoveries and related reasoning, which had convinced him that there is an intelligent designer of the natural universe.
I've read about his recent interviews and discussions. I think there's a great deal of uncertainty as to what his actual beliefs are these days, and he's obtuse in actually clearing that up.
He's made a number of interesting and contradicting statements... however, even if he is a deist, he explicitly rejected the Judeo-Christian God, endorsing a "first cause" / "prime mover" and not an interventionsist / moralizing entity.
Xavier: The claim doesn't speak of an interventionist / moralising entity.
Do you see a distinction between what Flew describes as "first cause", "prime mover", and what that claim calls "an intelligent designer of the natural universe"? What distinction?
...throughout his life, Einstein was consistent in rejecting the charge that he was an atheist. "There are people who say there is no God," he told a friend. "But what makes me really angry is that they quote me for support of such views." And unlike Sigmund Freud or Bertrand Russell or George Bernard Shaw, Einstein never felt the urge to denigrate those who believed in God; instead, he tended to denigrate atheists. "What separates me from most so-called atheists is a feeling of utter humility toward the unattainable secrets of the harmony of the cosmos," he explained.
In fact, Einstein tended to be more critical of debunkers, who seemed to lack humility or a sense of awe, than of the faithful. "The fanatical atheists," he wrote in a letter, "are like slaves who are still feeling the weight of their chains which they have thrown off after hard struggle. They are creatures who-in their grudge against traditional religion as the 'opium of the masses'--cannot hear the music of the spheres."
(end of excerpt)
Granted, Einstein did not believe in a personal God who meddles.
A Boston University professor argues that Americans, though 'spiritual,' are woefully ignorant about religion.
By Lisa Miller
"The hard-core atheist," Prothero writes, "once a stock figure in American life, has gone the way of the freak show." Well, except for Sam Harris, Richard Dawkins and Daniel Dennett, whose books on atheism have topped the best-seller lists for two years. In Prothero's utopian world, Americans would have enough religious knowledge to debate ethics positions using holy texts, to understand Biblical references in political speeches, to question their own beliefs about God—and to encourage others to question theirs. Only then will we enjoy one of the greatest privileges of the educated, which is to change our minds.
Correct, except for the "theism" part.... Flew sagely continues to reject the absurd idea of a tinkerer God whose Creation is imperfect enough to require continued intervention.... I would almost call Flew a deist, although he seems to hold onto more agnosticism than committed deists....
I would also take issue with Flew being a "famed atheist." I never thought of him as famous outside of a very narrow field of intellegensia, and I thought he was better known as a philosopher than as an atheist.
Richard Dawkins is the world's most notorious atheist these days. The fact that the person who has a financial interest in selling a book claims in the books title that someone is "The most notorious X" in the world means exactly dick. Please find me a credible reference that doesn't have a financial interest who calls him that.
Nancy R. Pearcey writes on page 498 of Total Truth Study Guide:
What brought such an entrenched atheist to change his mind? The scientific case for Intelligent Design (ID). Investigation of DNA "has shown, by the almost unbelievable complexity of the arrangements which are needed to produce (life), that intelligence must have been involved," Flew says in a video (Has Science Discovered God?" The Institute for Metascientific Research, 2004). Though atheist colleagues were outraged by his change of mind, Flew replied calmly, "My whole life has been guided by the principle of Plato's Socrates: Follow the evidence, wherever it leads."
Nancy R. Pearson is selling a book trying to convince people of a particular religious bent. Like most people with an axe to grind, she's not necessarily telling the unbiased truth.
You want to sell me on his "famed atheism," find me a single atheist source (who's still an atheist) who claims him either before or after this incident happend.
Jim, even though Flew changed his mind, it was not to theism, but to deism as I pointed out above.... theism by definition requires an active God, so the claim is still false.
Discussion (17)
Summarize.
I've read about his recent interviews and discussions. I think there's a great deal of uncertainty as to what his actual beliefs are these days, and he's obtuse in actually clearing that up.
He's made a number of interesting and contradicting statements... however, even if he is a deist, he explicitly rejected the Judeo-Christian God, endorsing a "first cause" / "prime mover" and not an interventionsist / moralizing entity.
Xavier: The claim doesn't speak of an interventionist / moralising entity.
Do you see a distinction between what Flew describes as "first cause", "prime mover", and what that claim calls "an intelligent designer of the natural universe"? What distinction?
Oh noes! An atheist changed his mind! Quick, I must change mine as well!
Wait.. no, that's not right.
D'A
I disagreed with this claim because, to all evidence I am aware of, his current philosophical position is very difficult to determine.
Also, it's irrelevant anyway. An old man turns to God in his twilight years? Film at 11!
The distinction is that a "first cause" need not be sentient or sapient.
Time Magazine:
Einstein & Faith
by Walter Isaacson
April 16, 2007
Page 47-48
...throughout his life, Einstein was consistent in rejecting the charge that he was an atheist. "There are people who say there is no God," he told a friend. "But what makes me really angry is that they quote me for support of such views." And unlike Sigmund Freud or Bertrand Russell or George Bernard Shaw, Einstein never felt the urge to denigrate those who believed in God; instead, he tended to denigrate atheists. "What separates me from most so-called atheists is a feeling of utter humility toward the unattainable secrets of the harmony of the cosmos," he explained.
In fact, Einstein tended to be more critical of debunkers, who seemed to lack humility or a sense of awe, than of the faithful. "The fanatical atheists," he wrote in a letter, "are like slaves who are still feeling the weight of their chains which they have thrown off after hard struggle. They are creatures who-in their grudge against traditional religion as the 'opium of the masses'--cannot hear the music of the spheres."
(end of excerpt)
Granted, Einstein did not believe in a personal God who meddles.
Newsweek
March 12, 2007
page 50
The Gospel of Prothero
A Boston University professor argues that Americans, though 'spiritual,' are woefully ignorant about religion.
By Lisa Miller
"The hard-core atheist," Prothero writes, "once a stock figure in American life, has gone the way of the freak show." Well, except for Sam Harris, Richard Dawkins and Daniel Dennett, whose books on atheism have topped the best-seller lists for two years. In Prothero's utopian world, Americans would have enough religious knowledge to debate ethics positions using holy texts, to understand Biblical references in political speeches, to question their own beliefs about God—and to encourage others to question theirs. Only then will we enjoy one of the greatest privileges of the educated, which is to change our minds.
Correct, except for the "theism" part.... Flew sagely continues to reject the absurd idea of a tinkerer God whose Creation is imperfect enough to require continued intervention.... I would almost call Flew a deist, although he seems to hold onto more agnosticism than committed deists....
I would also take issue with Flew being a "famed atheist." I never thought of him as famous outside of a very narrow field of intellegensia, and I thought he was better known as a philosopher than as an atheist.
There Is a God: How the World's Most Notorious Atheist Changed His Mind
If he's that notorious, why have I never heard of him before now?
Richard Dawkins is the world's most notorious atheist these days. The fact that the person who has a financial interest in selling a book claims in the books title that someone is "The most notorious X" in the world means exactly dick. Please find me a credible reference that doesn't have a financial interest who calls him that.
Nancy R. Pearcey writes on page 498 of Total Truth Study Guide:
What brought such an entrenched atheist to change his mind? The scientific case for Intelligent Design (ID). Investigation of DNA "has shown, by the almost unbelievable complexity of the arrangements which are needed to produce (life), that intelligence must have been involved," Flew says in a video (Has Science Discovered God?" The Institute for Metascientific Research, 2004). Though atheist colleagues were outraged by his change of mind, Flew replied calmly, "My whole life has been guided by the principle of Plato's Socrates: Follow the evidence, wherever it leads."
JIm,
Nancy R. Pearson is selling a book trying to convince people of a particular religious bent. Like most people with an axe to grind, she's not necessarily telling the unbiased truth.
You want to sell me on his "famed atheism," find me a single atheist source (who's still an atheist) who claims him either before or after this incident happend.
Jim, even though Flew changed his mind, it was not to theism, but to deism as I pointed out above.... theism by definition requires an active God, so the claim is still false.
His classic treatise, 'God in Philosophy' is due to be republished, but with a new introduction. It's one of the most high profile conversions of modern theological debate.
Claims inspired by this comment
As a general rule, when someone feels the need to call someone "famous" or their book "influencial," in order to make a point, they aren't and it isn't.