John Dewey'in Naturalistik Din Anlayışı

Abstract

One of the leading figures in pragmatism, John Dewey expresses his views on religion in his A Common Faith . From a naturalistic perspective, he builds his views about religion on the distinction which he has made between religion and religious. The religion refers to a particular body of beliefs or practices of a religion or the institutional structure formed around these beliefs and practices. In contrast, the religious means an attitude that can be adopted towards all human ideal ends in the life. Basically, his view is the rejection of historical religions, institutions or teachings that identify the religious with supernatural, and thus is to liberate the religious elements of experience from encumbrances such beliefs, dogmas which come from historical religions. Therefore, he argues that religious experience should be interpreted within the contingent conditions of the natural world without referring to the supernatural. In this study, Dewey’s claims on religion will be analyzed critically. For this purpose, his views on religion will be presented descriptively in detail and then their value will be discussed. Firstly, we will claim that Dewey cannot be considered as a theist or realist when his views on religion and God are compared with traditional theist and realist approaches. Secondly, although his views cannot be considered in a realist or theist approach, we will argue that he also has not a purely anti-realist or atheist point of view, but rather he adopts a middle way. Summary John Dewey, a prominent figure in pragmatism, makes important claims on religion and God in his A Common Faith . Dewey’s views on the subject is based on the distinction between “religion” as a substantive noun and “religious” as an adjective which points to the quality of experience. According to the distinction, while religion refers to beliefs, practices and institutions, religious designates an attitude that can be adopted towards whole existence, objects and ideal ends. So it is possible to express religious as a modus of experience. Dewey’s basic thesis is to leave aside any religion or institutional structure that bases on supernatural and to evaluate the religious quality of experience within the contingent conditions of the natural world. According to him, when historical religions or institutions are rejected, the value of religious experience will be understood more appropriately since it will liberate from encumbrances such beliefs, doctrines and dogmas which come from historical religions. He argues that the identification of religion with belief in supernatural will inevitably lead to a distinction between religious and secular. When religion is confined in a particular compartment, this leads to the division mind and energy of religious person. As a result, religious believer will not use his energy for social ends and ideals since he gives priority to supernatural. Dewey links the religious quality of experience with its function and asserts that this function is a permanent and profound harmony of the self, both among its components and with the world. According to him, the permanent and profound harmony of the self, both among its components and with the world, is essentially an ideal because it requires the self to extend beyond itself and the real world. Therefore, it is possible to say that religious is basically ideal. In contrast to a constant and determined the realm of existence, the ideal means potentials or possibilities that do not exist in fact. The foundation for enhancing one’s ideals is the imagination power which human beings have. Based on this, Dewey defines God as “the unity of all ideal ends arousing us to desire and actions.” When we recall that the source of ideal ends is imagination, the idea of God will be the product of imagination. This brings us to the most controversial point in Dewey’s thought of religion or God. For his claim that the idea of God is a product of human imagination led to many his commentators to interpret his views in an atheistic or secular way. Firstly, it should be expressed obviously that he rejects traditional realist approaches. For he does not accept the idea of God as a fixed or constant entity beyond the physical and social world, independent of human ends and ideals. Considering that traditional theistic view bases on such a realist approach, it can readily be said that Dewey will not adopt a theistic idea of God. Indeed, he repeatedly states that approaches that identify the religion with supernatural must be rejected. Secondly, as we have stated, many commentators who consider these claims interpret his views in a completely naturalistic or secular way, placing him in an anti-realist or atheistic position. However, it is possible to say that these comments fail for a few reasons. First, Dewey expresses that his goal is not merely to provide a purely naturalistic explanation of religious experience or to deny its importance for life. Second, if his goal is to provide a purely naturalistic explanation of religious experience, then why does he continue to employ religious concepts such as God or Divine? Third, he is well aware that his views may be misunderstood: “The view I have advanced is sometimes treated as if the identification of the divine with ideal ends left the ideal wholly without roots in existence and without support from existence.” And he emphasizes strongly that the identification of God with the possibilities within nature, rather than a realm of entity beyond nature, does not mean that God is an idea that exists only in human imagination. Given these reasons, although his views cannot be considered in a realist or theist approach, it can be argued that he also has not a purely anti-realist or atheist point of view, but rather he adopts a middle way.