Abstract
In the twenty-first–century God debate in the West two forms of humanism have emerged. On the atheist side of the debate, Christopher Hitchens and Richard Dawkins have propagated a Socratic humanism that holds reason to be capable of providing a road map for the good life. On the religious apologist side of the debate, literary critic Terry Eagleton has advocated a form of tragic humanism. Hitchens and his fellow New Atheists contend that once our dark, superstitious, and religious past is expunged, reason will lead us toward an enlightened dawn. Eagleton rejects the New Atheist’s vision of a secular utopia. He argues that the Western tradition of tragedy is more in line with the way in which we experience ourselves in the world. We argue that despite the God debaters’ professed commitment to self effacement and objectivity, their positions are shaped by their intensely personal engagement with the stories of Socrates and Jesus, their cultural milieux and by their autobiographical attempts to apply these stories to their own life narratives. As a result, both sides of the God debate fashion selective portraits of their chosen exemplar. By examining the motivations behind their positions as well as their employment of their portraits of Socrates and Jesus, we demonstrate the importance of the literary dimension within the God debate.
Recommended Citation
Rosenfeldt, Adrian and Doidge, Scott
(2023)
"Socrates or Jesus: Forms of Humanism in the God Debate,"
Budhi: A Journal of Ideas and Culture: Vol. 27:
No.
1, Article 4.
Available at:
https://archium.ateneo.edu/budhi/vol27/iss1/4
