{"id":11090,"date":"2022-01-11T15:41:35","date_gmt":"2022-01-11T04:41:35","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/rationalemagazine.com\/?p=11090"},"modified":"2023-12-17T12:04:44","modified_gmt":"2023-12-17T01:04:44","slug":"does-rationalism-imply-atheism","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/rationalemagazine.com\/index.php\/2022\/01\/11\/does-rationalism-imply-atheism\/","title":{"rendered":"Does rationalism imply atheism?"},"content":{"rendered":"

Is there a necessary connection between being a rationalist and being an atheist? To answer this, we must tease out what we mean by \u2018rationalist\u2019, at least as the term applies to the Rationalist Society of Australia.<\/span><\/p>\n

The word \u2018rationalist\u2019 came into currency as a characterisation of the theories of knowledge held by the so-called Rationalist Philosophers of the 17th century \u2013 notably Ren\u00e9 Descartes (1596-1650), Benedict Spinoza (1632-1677) and Gottfried Leibniz (1646-1716).<\/span><\/p>\n

These thinkers held that the general nature of the world could be established a priori by demonstrative reason. They believed that our central concepts are derived not from experience but from reasoning.<\/span><\/p>\n

In this sense, it is the opposite of empiricism, the theory principally associated with John Locke (1632-1704) and David Hume (1711-1776) which held that all our concepts derive from sensory experience and that knowledge is only verifiable by reference to sensory experience. This is the underlying epistemology of modern science and one might even claim, modern civilisation.<\/span><\/p>\n

Perversely, the late 19th century movement of freethinkers and secularists in England who called themselves \u2018Rationalists\u2019 grew out of the second tradition, rather than the\u00a0<\/span>first. They embraced empiricism. For them, reason and logic were opposed not to empirical evidence but to irrational beliefs, especially about the supernatural, and to the arbitrary authority of the Established Church and other conservative institutions.\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n

When in 1885 members of the movement set up in London what was to become the Rationalist Press Association (RPA) and, eventually, the Rationalist Association, their target was clear. They defined rationalism as \u201cthe attitude of mind which unreservedly accepts the supremacy of reason, and aims at establishing a system of philosophy and ethics independent of all arbitrary assumptions or authority\u201d.<\/span><\/p>\n

The RPA and its publications were highly influential in the formation in Melbourne in 1906 of the group that became the Rationalist Society of Australia.<\/span><\/p>\n

Despite its name, the rationalist movement was more than just a club to promote what used to be called \u201cclear thinking\u201d. It embraced empiricism, materialism and naturalism, which held\u00a0<\/span>that the material world is the only world there is. And it also had roots in another radical movement of the time \u2013 humanism. Indeed, the RPA\/RA journal is called the <\/span>New Humanist<\/span><\/i>. So we might say the three pillars of rationalism, both in Great Britain and here in Australia, are naturalism, humanism and rationality.<\/span><\/p>\n

First, rationalists accept the basic worldview of naturalism, which has been conveniently summarised by American philosopher John Searle:\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n