ently Shafai, to ve a the er, lomEd :ay, lands :ed to Her two seems a lX :anadian letting I1try. Univer- and thE: st IOting ,ngement :t nation :yand lIOn with :his lay aociation I1g, 'til , you Adolf cel do me , somewhat lain : big t believe ?eech, and sale of I1trol discussed letter the 979) : rol Board I ret1.trn IOrted by ,rector Bob :nment- more than 10verrunent 'luxuries. " trent s reported a church y knows ling in 'incial iSS in the i handled by i doing, as Extended Arguments 13. Background: This passage is an excerpt from an article, "Of Two Minds About Abortion," by Andrew Hacker. It appeared originally in Harper's in September, 1979: Itt· The idea persists that equipping an adolescent can only encourage promiscuity. Once armored, she will indulge in indsicriminate sex with an endless array of partners. This fear may be universal, but it runs especially deep among parents of teenage daughters. They prefer to hope their childj.'en ,·will use good sense about sex, whatever that means. What emerges is that for young people, abortion is not a 'last resort' at all. Rather, it is the first intervention of adult society. We are told that it must be available, lest hundreds of thousands of young women be hobbled by early motherhood. Due to our chariness about sex education, we are asked to accept a quick surgical remedy rather than face our own misgivings about providing preventive measures. It is only after an abortion that we feel we can give her the equipment she clearly needed earlier. At this point it should be admitted that abortion has become a major mode of birth control. And it will continue to be one until adults resolve their own dilemmas about teenage sexual experience. Comment: "This example seems to me to be interesting because of the way it combines explanation and argument. The author explains how it is that abortion comes to be a means of birth control for teenage women, and then argues, on the basis of his proffered explanation, that adults should resolves their thinking about teenage sexuality." (Trudy Govier, Trent University) Background: This passage is taken from Richard Taylor's book, Good and Evil (pp. 199-200). Taylor is discussing nature and convention, and he is trying to show that some things which are, in a sense, conventional, do nevertheless have a foundation in the psychology, or aesthetic sensibility, of human beings. Such persons l!.iz •. T~,ylor' s opponents] are apt to suppose that the use of clothing is but an arbitrary convention that might be cast aside without loss. I believe that anyone having that view could be promptly disabused of it, however, by performing a simple experiment in two parts. The first part consists of entering a crowded bath house and really taking the whole thing in, exactly as it presents itself to the eyes, without romantic embellishment. The second part consists of entering a crowded social gathering, in the garden or parlor of some prominent person, for example, and 'imagining the scene of the bath house suddenly repeated there--in other words, everything would be as it is, but unadorned by any clothing. It is impossible to suppose that this would present no signi- ficant change to the mind, equally impossible to suppose that 86 I). the scene now present to the imagination would be an enhancement of the reality before the eyes and finally, I think, quite impossible to suppose that one's co~parison of these two scenes is entirely a produc~f arbitrary convention. Convention it is, but it has its roots deep in aesthetic sensibility. Comment: "This passage is difficult to analyse and involves a kind of thought-experiment as a crucial stage in the argument. Imagining scenes is supposed to play an important role in con- vincing you of the conclusion, and it is hard to capture the force of this in words when you try to set the argument out. I would be inclined to set this argument out as follows: P1: A crowded bath house in not attractice. P2: A socia~ gathering would not be enhanced if people appeared there as they do in a bath house. P3: No one could imagine defrocking everyone at a social gathering without comprehending the significant change this would make. C: Clothing is not an arbitrary convention; it has its roots deep in aesthetic sensibility. This argument is difficult to classify on versions of the deducti ve/inducrti ve distinction which use a "purports to claim·t clause, for it s not clear just how to take the repeated phrase 'impossible to suppose'." (Trudy Govier, Trent. University) Background: This article appeared in the Calgary Herald, December 5, 1979: . "The key to homicides, child abuse and other kinds of violent behavior may be rooted in the most primal instinct-- reproduction," says a McMaster University psychologist. That's the theory of Martin Daly, whose statistical stUdies show, among other things, that more males are murdered in their peak breeding years than at any other time .. of life. Daly calls this the "reproductive strategy"--something akin to the ancient jungle law of survival of the fittest--and he recently laid it out before a zoology seminar at the University of Western Ontario. "PeI1'etrators of homicides show the same general age characterl.stics as their victims," Daly said. "It seems the same bunch who are killing are also being killed." Using data complied from homicides in the United States and elsewhere, Daly noted that a significant percentage involve "squabbles over women." While much of Daly's lecture seemed simply to underscore fundamental anthropological information, he and colleague Margo Wilson have some up with the figures to prove it. Comment: embody a violence taken to "If Daly's study is reported correctly, it would seem to gross causal fallacy. For the correlation between age and could be interpreted in a number of ways, and need not be show reproductive strategy, or, indeed, strategy of any ~ r k 1 m G B ~ S a C C " \t.i \t.i \t.i d b c t " r \t.i m t p " " a U s r p 1 A d " w a a t C, w, ti S1 a S· f~ ment 1;. ., ity) red • akin e 'sity e ,ata Daly ,re 1m to ;e and It be lny kind. For example, unemployment is highest among people in their late teens and early twenties, and economic discontent or hardship might well cause crime and violence in this age group.1I (Trudy Govier, Trent University) , Back~ound: This newspaper article bore the title, "Christopher CoIum us: A Hero to the Flat Earth Society": The president of the 1500 member International Flat Earth Society spends his time trying to prove that the world is "flat as a/penny." Still, one of the society's superheroes is Christopher Columbus. • • • "Contrary to the history book, we claim that Columbus proved the world flat,rt said Johnson, president of lFES. "At the time Columbus made his voyage everyone belived the world was a ball--except for Columbus. He was not one of them. They were afraid they would falloff the edge of the earth because it was round, not flat. Columbus was one of our heroes because he didn't fall off--gravity wasn't invented yet. Gravity was invented by a priest in England. There was no gravity in Columbus' day." Every year around Columbus Day • • • there is a "great controversy" about the earth's shape. "The average person believes the world is round because modern science says so," Johnson said. 57 "But it's just not true. Columbus did not falloff so that proves it." "We publish the Flat Earth Quarterly with the objective to restore the world's sanity," Johnson said. "We consider this the world's most superstitious age. From integration to going to the moon, the world is a vast and complex place. We try to get people to use their minds logically." But what about the space shots? Millions remember living pictures from space showing the earth spinning in the distance. "The whole thing was a science fiction TV movie," Johnson replied. "We aren't accusing the government of anything. The whole thing is a plot by Nazi German scientists. They are the nucleus of the U.S. space program. The movie "Capricorn One" proved that the moon shot did not happen--that it was faked. The idea that the earth is round came from Greek superstition." SurpriSingly, the flat earth concept is usually met with ~ polite interest, rather than rudeness or hysteria. "There is a lurking sanity in the American public's mind, no matter what the American space program claims," Johnson said. "People don't con- demn us." But how is it that one can go "around" the world? "Simple," Johnson said. "Magnetic north is the center of the world and a ring of ice surrounds the land which is floating in a sea of flat_water. It has nothing to do with the earth's being a ball. It's like going around an island. Ships disappear on the horizon, but it's only an optical illusion." Comment: The question raised by this article is whether or not we are to take Johnson's reasoning seriously. On the surface the arguments seem outrageous. But the principle of charity , supplemented by a bit of reseach on the lFES, might suggest ' a different verdict. (Thanks to Robert Hollinger, Iowa state University, for submitting this example, and the one that follows.) S8 17. Background: An excerpt from a news re:r.0rt entitled, "She Didn't Protest Enough, Rape Charges Dismissed': The judge said the woman protested, but not too much, and dismissed rape charges against a fast-talking bachelor who lured a Wellesley College girl to an apartment and seduced her. The judge said that the man may have been a cad, but he was no rapist. "Bachelors and other men on the make, fear not," the judge said. "It is still not illegal to feed a girl a line." He said that the complainant ••• was incredibly trusting, gullible and naive. The woman alleged she met the man at La Guardia Airport last July, accompanied him to a singles' bar and went with him to a West Side apartment because he told her he was a psychologist working on a book about women. She testified that he forced her onto a sofa bed "by the weight of his body," but that he otherwise used no physical force in the alleged rape. .. The judge, who presided at the non-jury trial, said in his decision, "The only restraint on her body was his body weight, which is normal during the sexual act. The question in this case is whether the sexual conquest by-a predatory male of a resisting female constitutes rape or seduction." While allowing that any overt force used would constitute criminal behavior, the judge said, "We recognize that there are situations that do not deserve the extreme penalty and in which the male objective was achieved through charm, guile, protestations of love, promises and even deceit." Somewhat ruefully, the judge added, "This we label seduction, and society may condone it even as we despair. Every man is free to be a gentleman or a cad; but take heed--violence, force or threats are totally out of bounds." However, the man's court victory was not total. The judge ruled that the apartment that served as the scene of the seduction was used without the owner's permission. The judge found the man guilty of criminal trespass. • • • lB. Background: The following passage comes from a column in the Medic1ne Hat News (September, 1975): There is a futile exercise in logic in has been indulging itself lately. It could if followed too closely and too seriously. like this: Boys are tall, girls are short. Mary is a girl. Therefore Mary is short. which city council even been dangerous It goes something The essence of this logic is so full of holes that, as a rule, it can be entirely incorrect. Mary could be 7'4". Council's recent decision over hitch-hiking has· been following this path of logic, and it is quite upsetting to observe some of the conclusions several of the alderman have reached. Hitch-hikers smell bad; bad smells are not good business; therefore hitch-hikers are bad for business. I > Co se a ~h fa t :il :'ous 19 e ss; S9 ~f council decides, like Ald. Sissons has suggested, that "our merchants are more important than hitch..-hikers," and bans hitch-hiking because the youngsters smell bad and are bad for business, then we may really be in trouble. Besides, I wasn't aware that Canada recognizes the racist philosophy that any person or any particular group of persons were "more important" than otherl If we adhere to that logic, then we can assume that the people living in the Flats are less important than the ~eople living in mansion row over by the hospital. They certa~nly don't pay as much in taxes. Following this path, the council would also have to ban from the highway almost anyone who works up a good sweat, be it from playing tennis or digging a ditch. I've eaten in most of the establishments on the highway and. found even the most solid citizens at the community covered with grime and sweat from some hones~ toil. Are they just as offensive as the "dirty hippies" who ply the highways and byways of the nation? Ah! Maybe then, it's more than that. Could it be the people who, as Ald. Helen Gibson said, have gotten caught up in the "hobo fad" aren't as honest and hard working as we would like? Could it be they don't separate themselves with as many hard- earned pesos as those using Chargex cards and traveller's cheques? Is it the root of all evil that we're talking about when it comes to hitch-hikers--that they're not as well off as the average 0 anadian who follows the Puritan ethic of WORKING for a living? I suspect this has something to do with the merchants' objections-- and to invalidate it is difficult, for it is true that more money can be made from someone ordering steak than a cup of coffee. But it is against the principles of the Human Rights Act. To pass a bylaw from the wrong reasons is just as bad as not passing it at all • • • sort of the "end justifying the means" philosophy. Something should definitely be done about the hitch-hiking situation. No one has convinced me that it should be banned altogether. But it should be controlled to the extent where the people aren't standing directly on the highway--endangering themselves and the motorists who pass by. There is nothing morally wrong with hitch-hiking. As a matter of fact, such a mode of travel in these days of threatened gasoline shortages may become quite desirable. The more people sharing a car, the less gas is used. But making the roads safe for the pedestrian, cvclists and motorists should be considered first. No one ever got hurt because they hadn't taken a shower in a couple of days •••. and I haven't noticed any of the highway merchants closing down for lack of business. Comment: This rather loose~y organized collection of thoughts, sent to us by Elmer Thiessen, Medicine Hat College, exemplifies a number of common logical flaws: the author spends much time speculating about the motives of the alderman and merchants rather than addressing himself to their position, and so commits the fallacy of ~ hominem. S10 Ir Background: In 1977~ President Carter approved a proposal to set new federal standards ror the enforcement or the 55 m.p.h. speed limit. Th:at occasioned the rollowing letter rrom A.H. to the Arizona nepublic (December, 1977). Big Brother is watching you when you drive your car. He will be watching a lot more closely in the future if the Carter administration has its way. If Congress accepts the proposal sent by the Carter administration, the states will be saddled wi th "federal compliance standards .. " In other words·t the states will be required to prove that they are actually enforcing the 55 m.p.h. limit. That means more Big Brother harassment: more snooping (the feds call it "monitoring" of motorists) and stiffer penalties for drivers who exceed the speed limit. All this will require reinrorcement of an army or snoopers-- more police, more electric gadgets to trap motorists, more statisticians to analyze the reports, more state and federal paper shuff1ers. As a result, there will be considerably more oppressive government. It's all so absurd. The Carter administration says (how can they prove it?) that more than 15 % or all drivers are routinely breaking the 55 m.p.ho limit. Has Big Brother an eye on every motorist in the land? The administration even claims to know how many drivers in each state are exceeding the limit. The administration asserts that 77% or all drivers in Wyoming exceed the limit. One wonders how the rederal bure.aucrats acquired that statistic. Wyoming is a vast, empty place. There aren't many billboards where snoopers can hide and keep motorists under surveillance. Could it be that the feds took a tiny sample of arrests for speeding anf came up with a categorical statement about all drivers in Wyoming? If so, the statistics aren't worth the paper they are printed on. One also wonders how the Carter administration proposes to persuade motorists to slow down. Will federal surveillance teams be dispatched to the desolate reaches of Nevada, Montana, and West Texas? Or will the federal government assign arrest quotas to highway patrolmen in the 50 states? They tried that last year in an Arkansas town, as a condition for the tQwn receiving some new police equipment. If that's the route the feds intend to take, they can expect massive grassroots protest. The country already has too many federal quota systems, too much dictation from Washington, too many rules and regulations banded down from afar. Compelling states to "prove" that X number of motorists are obeying the 55 m.p.h. limit is an unwarranted federal harassment. Indeed, it's outrageous interference with police matters that are properly the responsibility of states. The Carter administration should be slapped down on this Big Brother proposal. (Thanks to Merrill Provence Hintikka, Florida State University, for submitting this example, and the two that follow.) O. B a- :er L i ites 1e :oe ~rs-- [."s 1y )f ~ to ~eams i )tas Lng md too 1S S1] · ~ B!ckground: The following argument by Glenn T. Seaborg originally appeared in Chemical Education News in the early 1970s: /. Let us say it's a few years hence and all nuclear power plants have been operating safely. But opponents of nuclear power succeed ,in enforcing a national moratorium on nuclear power. All n~clear powers plants are shut down, pending com- plete re.-evaluation in terms of public safety. First this moratorium causes a rush by electric utility companies to obtain more fossil fuels--particularly because oil and gas are in tight supply. Coal prices soar, and the government reacts by setting a price ceiling. Coal supplies dwindle, and power cutbacks are put into effect. Finally, restrictions on burning high-sulphur soal are relaxed somewhat, and air pollution rises. Miners, disgruntled over a wage freeze and laxness of employers regarding safety standards, go out on strike. Coal stockpiles diminish and many power plants are forced to shut down; others, overloaded by power demands, begin to fail. Miners battle with federal troops who have been ordered to take over the mines. A chain of black- and brown-outs creeps across the nation. Lights go out and electric motons grind to a halt. Many airports use emergency power systems to light runways and operate communication systems. Services are reduced, and some airlines cancel all flights as pilots begin to rebel because of hazards in safety. Throughout cities, elevators stall. Subway and commuter trains becomes unreliable. Gasoline becomes unavailable because fillings stations cannot operate without electricity. As the situation worsens, factories and businesses close. In food markets, warehouses, and homes, huge quantities of frozen food spoil. People stand in line for hours to get canned and pow- dered foods. Darkened stores are looted at night. At home, people burn candles and wash in cold water. Hospitals begin to use emergency generators, and deaths are reported in intensive care wards because of equipment failure. III or injured persons have difficulty getting to a doctor or hospital. Medical supplies begin to lag behind growing demand. Children who can get to school wear sweaters and coats in unheated classrooms. At night, there is no television, and people listen to battery powered radios where they hear hope of miners going back to work. But as time goes on, great doubt appears that things will ever be the same again. It's up to you to speculate whether they would be. Background: This argument for population control was presented by Garrett Hardin in Science in 1970: Birth control is not population control. Individual goals, not community needs, motivate individual actions. In every nation women want more children than the community needs. How can we reduce population? Persuasion must be tried first. Tomorrow's mothers must be educated to seek careers other than multiple motherhood. Community nursuries are needed to free women for careers outside the home. Mild coercion may soon 512 be acce~ted--for example, tax rewards for reproductive nonprol1feration. But in the long run, a purely voluntary system selects for,its own failures; noncooperators outbreed cooperators. So what restraints shall we employ? A policeman under every bed? Jail sentences? Compulsory abortion? Infanticide? Memories of Nazi Germany rise and obscure our vision. We need not titillate our minds with such horrors, for I we already have at hand an acceptable technology: sterilization. The taboo on this subject is fast dissolving, thanks to Arthur I' Godfrey and Paul Ehrlich, who have confessed their sterilizations in public. Fear (mostly unjustified) about the safety of the ? "pill" has motivated multitudes to follow in their footsteps. It should be easy to limit a woman's reproduction by sterilizing her at the birth of her nth child. Is this a shocking idea?' If so, try this "thought experiment": let n • 20. Since this is not shocking, let n diminish until population control is achievable. The Woman's Liberation Movement may not like it, but control must be exerted throggh females. Divorce and remarriage play havoc with assigning responsibility to couples or to men. Biology makes wome,n responsible. Many who want no third child would fight resolutely for the freedom to have that which they do not want. But what is free- dom? Hegel said that "Freedom is the recognition of necessity." People need to recognize that population control is needed to protect the quality of life for our children. The "right" to breed implies ownership of children. This concept is no longer tenable. Society pays an ever larger share of the cost of raising children. And on a biological level, the idea of the owner~hip of children has not been defensible for almost a century. Biologically, all that I give "my" children is a set of chromosomes which have been sequestered in the germinal area long before my birth and have lived a life of their own beyond my control. Mutation has altered them. In reproduction, my germ plasm is assembled in a new combination and mixed with another assortment of a similar history. "My" child's germ plasm is not mine; it is really only part of the community's store; I was merely the temporary custodian of it. If parenthood is a right, then population control is impossible. If parenthood is only a privilege, and if parents see themselves as trustees of the germ plasm and guardians of the rights of future generations, then there is hope for mankind. "3. J..'}... Background: Professor 'W. ~. de Pater, from Katholiek'e Un1versite1t Leuven, sends the follow1ng example whinh he found in a uu~Ch newspaper 1n October 1979: Father Dan1el Berrigan, B.J., who 1s well-known for h1s oppos1tion to the V1etnam war, and to all k11l1ng ot people, had heard that h1s fr1end E. Cardenal, also a pr1est (and how M1n1ster at Culture 1n N1caragua) had Jo1ned the res1stance ion. ur tions e • h the ee- ty. It 0 is hare the r en n " e t. ts f kind. 1t 3. 'I: army. Berrigan deplored this, and he wrote to Gardenal that he should not use violence: "No prlnciple (for 1nstance, that of social just1ce) oan justify the death of even one person. Therefore: stop killing." Fr. Cardenal responded: "You are perfectly right: no principle, even that of non-violence, can Justify the death of even one person. Therefore I have to go on killing the kill.ers." In his argument, Gardenal said that in Nicaragua Somoza's people continuosly kill innocent people. No principle Justities Cardenal in letting them do this; he must do what is possible to stop that kl11ing, and the only way to do this is to kill the killers. If he does not do this, he feels respons1ble tor the deaths of the innooent. Prof. de Pater commenta: "It seems to me the fallacy of amphiboly or of equlvoca tion was commltted by Oardenal. Berrigan meant: 'No principle can jus tify that you kill even one person'. Cardenal took 1t to mean: 'No principle can justify that you allow people to be killed'. So the ambiguity is in how 'the death of even one person' is construed." Bac~ground: Th1s example is from a news report (CKCK Regina, May 19, 1979) concerning an incident in which shots were exchanged between Indians and \ihltea on the Pasqua River, near Prince Albert, Saskatchewan. The Whltes had been entering the Ind1an Reservation to fish; the Indlans objected, claiming that the fish were still spawning. A spokesman for the Whites explained that the problem concerned SI~nming; he said: Spawning ls over now. That's why the government intro- duced a closed season from the first Saturday in May to May 19th, to allow the fish to spawn. This year r~s, of course, been a bad year with a late Sprlng but one expects that if the government wlth its flshery biologist and so on had doubts about whether spawnlng was still going on then the~ would have closed the river. They dldn'~ close the river, so spawn1ng is now over. COmment: Is the 1Nhlte spokesman playing on an ambiguity in lithe spawning i8 over", or does he have he have a polnt? Tl~nks to Wl11iam Berriman of the University of Regina for the above and the followlng two examples. Background: Last summer the Reglna city council was consider1ng introducing ca t licenses /lln order to make someone responsible for the actlons of problem cats". Thls occasioned the following letter to the Regina Leader-Post from ~.L. of Reglna on Aug. 7: After reading Thursday's issue of the Leader-Post (Readers' Viewpoints) I wish to thank P.R. and K.D. for express1ng their views on the situation of the control of cats in this c1ty. 513 S14 Why all thls condemnlng of the faml1y pet? Why canlt the clty councl1 come to some agreement, and have enough funds to care for all animals who need help? A person who is alone would benefit by hav1ng a cat or dog to tl11 the lonely hours. A pet, in return for care and attention, glves love and devotlon to the one whose home lt shares. People speak of cats and dogs as dumb animals, which is not true. Our S1amese cat Misty could teach many a person a lesson. He is fun to hav~ around and wlse ln many ways, for he teaches hiDself many trlcks. The one at fault is not the cat (dog) but the so-called humane-race, wh6 ill-treat·a pet and often end up by k.111ing 1t. 'E Others tak.e pets out in the country or on busy highways, and . t leave them frightened and alone, not carlng what happens to n them; and they call themselves human beings. e E I hope the clty council will take an interest in the a plight of the unwanted pet, and give a helping hand to the Humane Society and the C1ty Pound. COmment: We smell red herr1ng and just outright lrrelevance here, as well as straw man and ambigulty. But a ~u.ry: is one not per- m1tted to wander a little in a letter-to-the-editor? Is hard- nosed loglcal crlticlsm pedant1c here? (Eds.) Background,: The Na tlonal Union of Students ls a Canadian university student organizatlon whlch, among other things, lobb1es for student 1nterests. NUS has been lobby1ng aga1nst recent tu1t1on lncreases at Canad1an un1vers1t1es (almost allot wh1ch are ma1nly supported by Prov1ncial grants). The follow1ng letter appeared in the Regina Leader-Post 1n October 1979: The profess1onal wh1ners ot the Nat10nal Un10n ot Students (NUS) tax onels patience. Tu1t1on fees today probably represent a smaller percentage of the total cost of edu~t1on than 20 years ago. I understand that they account for 11 per cent of the cost 1n Saskatchewan. Contrary to NU3 statements, unlvers1ty budgets are not declln1ng nor 1s fund1ng by government. The rate of 1ncrease m1ght not meet the unrea11st1c .xPectat1ons of some students-- notably those 1n 11beral arts. The shaggy, shout1ng, banner waving yahoos who seem dedicated to malt1ng confrontation a way of lite whether w1th un1versity adm1nistration or government would,have m1n1mal representation from facult1es like commerce, englneer1ng, medicine, law or agr1culture. The student should teel some moral obligat1on to contr1- ~. is :e Ld but. a small percentage of the total requ1red for h1s or her educat10n. The m1ddle class taxpayer becomes a b1t weary of ca rry1ng them on h1s back w1th the1r hands 1n both h1s pockets. Canada spends olose to $20 b11110n a year on educat10n. West Germany and Japan spend less than four per cent of the1r GNP on educat10n, whereas the f1gure 1n Canada 1s e1ght per oent. W. have much to learn from these countr1es and l1ttle to teaoh them. Spend1ng by 11beral arts facult1es of all Cal"..ad1an un1ver- s1t1es could be reduced by SO per cent w1th a proport1onate re- duot1on 1n the number of graduates and there would be-no 111 effects. If anyth1ng, the oppos1te result would occur. ,. Background: rNewspaper editorialists and writers of letters to the editor do not, impressions gleaned from the pages of ILN notwithstanding, enjoy a monopoly-ron specious reasoning. ~is excerpt from Robinson's "Reason and Faith," in Burr and Goldinger's Philosophy and contemEorary Issues (Macmillan, 1976), contains a number of-qllestiona Ie points of logic: If theology were part of reasonable inquiry, there would be no objection to an atheist's being a professor of theology. That a man's being an atheist is an absolute bar to his occupying a chair of theology proves that theology is not an open-minded and reasonable inquiry. Someone may object that a professor should be interested in his subject and that an atheist cannot be interested in theology.. But a man who maintains that there is no god must think it a sensible and interesting question to ask whether there is a god; and in fact we find that many atheists are interested in theology. Professor H. D. Lewis tells (Philo- sophy, 1952, p. 347) that an old lady asked him what philosophy is, and, when he had given an answer, she said: '0 I see, theo- logy.' She was nearly right, for theology and philosophy have the same subject-matter. The difference is that in philosophy you are allowed to come out with whichever answer seems to you the more likely. In most universities the title of theology includes a lot of perfectly good science which is not theory of god, and which I do not reject. I mean the scientific study of the history of the Jews and their languages and their religious books. All that can be reasonable study, and usually is so. But it it s hind- rance to the progress of knowledge that we are largely organized for research in such a way that a man cannot be officially paid to engage in these branches of research unless he officially maintains that there is a god. It is as if a man could not be a professor of Greek unless he believed in Zeus and Apollo. Sl Rel~gious persons often consider gambling to be a bad thing. It certainly causes a great deal of misery. But much of the badness of gambling consists in its refusal to face the proba- bilities and be guided by them; and in the matter of refusing to face the probabilities religious is a worse Offended than gambling, and,does more harm to the habits of reason. Religious belief is, in fact, a form a gambling, as Pascal saw. It does more harm to S16 reason than ordinarily gambling does, however, because it is more in earnest. . 1t has been said that the physicist has just as closed a mind auout cause as the Christian has·about god. The physicist assumes through thick and thin that eVerything happens according to causal laws. He presupposes cause, just as the Christian presupposes God. But the physicist does not assume that there is a reign of law; he hopes that there is. He looks for laws; but, whenever a possible law occurs to him, he conscientiously tries to dis- prove it by all reasonable tests. He asserts at any time only such laws as seem at thgt time to have passed all reasonable tests, and he remains always prepared to hear of new evidence throwing doubts on those laws. This is far from the Christian attitude about god. The Christian does not merely hope that there is a god. and maintain only such gods as the best tests have shown to be more probable than improbable. (Thanks to Elmer Thiessen for submitting this example.) ~7. Nancy Reagan: fYhich hiS- tory books has she been readilXli Reli~ion and Dolitics Detro~ Free Press, Mly 22, 1980 I AM CONCERNED about the religion. My history books tell me comments-of Mrs. Reagan and Rev. our Founding Fathers and the first Falwell at the Christian rally in seven presidents. of the United Indiana. concerning Christian can'- States were Deists '- which is defi- lIidates for public office. n;~ly notChristian. , This. Is a "COUntry built pn the The Rev. Falwell says thls,coun- concept of separation of church and 'try is not Jewish and not Moslem - itate; If a person chooses to join a but only Christian~ Obviously, it feliglon that does not advocate lib- falls into place that if the United eral causes. then it is that Indiyid- States government overturns the ual's private preference. The indi-' 1963 Supreme Court ruling of vidual's freedom to pUQue certain forced Bible reading and prayer in ideas is respected. So it does not public schools, that only Christian seem right for a religious group to. prayers will be .allowed. It also fol- dictat~ its preference to the country lows that if we are a Christian that has allowed religions the free- nation and nothing but, then I wO.n- dom to flourish and develop. der what we should do with tfte The intermingling of church and Jews. Moslems, non-Christians and. state Is a scary concept. The Spanish atheists? Inquisition is one example of this There was once a man who had ,sort of Idea. the "final Solution" to this "prob- JANE NUGENT lem." While Nancy Reagan and her Warren husband, candidate for president of NANCt REAGAN says our country is a. Christian countr.y, founded on Cilristiari principles. I wonder what history books she ·has beenreadJDg. My history books ten me that the ~nited States is a '"Ountry for all.religions - and no this great nati6n, dangerously dis- tort history, and while our FQUnd- ing Fathers are twirling in their graves hi sadness a'nd spock, we better take a lesson fr)m history - or else we are C;')ompd to repeat it. . BARBARA SCHWARTZ 'Oak Park < U') .... w z :=> -, ~ <{ o en a: :=> I t- en en w a: Q. w w a: ~ t- O a: t- w o , ,.