Note: the comments below refer to the following review:
Thank you for sending the Leon Wieseltier review of Martin Amis' The Second Plane, a review that I thought seemed thoughtful and contentious and very specifically skeptical of much of what he characterizes as Amis' bluster. I don't see anything wrong with that. Quite the contrary, this review seems as though it would spark a very good discussion, and a much needed one on secularism and morality. Not too long ago, a Harvard theologian was interviewed on NPR and was asked if he thought atheists could be moral and he answered "no." I was choking with indignation, particularly since his religious authority shouldn't be allowed to just stand in for unassailable moral rectitude, which might or might not exist, but he wasn't questioned further, and I wondered why.
Too much is said in America and left unresponded to. I do hope that this Leon Wieseltier review is responded to, and seriously, as much of what he accuses Amis of, he seems somewhat guilty of himself, and yet I do take his point about secularism. I believe Saddam Hussein was a secularist, and though he was brutal, I think the argument is made that he kept all the various factions of Iraq together because he was secular. Of course, that's not all he was! So, claiming higher moral ground for secularism might be dicey in many instances. I don't know; I'm not a very good historian. I have always said that man will find some rationale for killing his fellow man, if not religion, some other belief or credo, or gold or diamonds, or what have you. I'm not very hopeful that way.
Another aspect of the Wieseltier piece that I think might be discussed is aesthetics and truth. I don't see aesthetics as necessarily undermining seriously intellectual discussion--or the search for truths--but Wieseltier seems to feel there's a cheapening of rigor. I'm not sure he's right, but it depends on the writer, of course.
No comments:
Post a Comment