The Bonobo and the Atheist

The Bonobo and the Atheist: in Search of Humanism Among the Primates 
© 2013 Frans de Waal
313 pages

 Frans de Waal has written extensively on moral instincts within the great apes, in books like Good natured and Primates and Philosophers. In The Bonobo and the Atheist, he reviews his experience with chimpanzees and bonobos over several decades with an eye for what they might teach us about human morality. His express purpose is to find hope for building a moral human society outside the bounds of authoritarian, belief-dependent religion, but he’s more interested in examining the basis of natural morality than in condemning religion. Taking a cue from Alain de Botton’s Religion for Atheists, he acknowledges that religion and human culture have thus far been inextricably bound. His studies of chimp and bonobo behavior, and studies of human behavior, indicate to him that there is more to morality than simple genetic-biased altruism;  we are bound to our communities, kin or no, through deep social instincts, and it is these that are the basis of our morality.

Throughout the book, de Waal explores moral impulses revealed in the behavior of chimpanzees and bonobos. Although chimpanzees have a reputation for violence,  even they discipline one another for failing to practice self-restraint: a challenger for an alpha position can't bite with impunity, nor can adults bully the young who have not yet learned appropriate behavior; violators of these norms and others, like stealing or cheating, are punished with a round of shrieking and beating.  Their morality isn't limited to instinct; it is also informed by their intelligence. As mentioned, youngsters are 'taught' appropriate behavior, indirectly;  chimp youths can chase females in estrus, but as they start to become 'teenagers', they're regarded as potential challengers by the reigning males and taught their place, even if they're not yet  capable of reproduction.  Other cases demonstrate that chimpanzees can take stock of what they've done and remember it later; a chimpanzee who bit a trainer's finger off was later visibly ashamed, isolating itself and covering its eyes; when the human saw him again, the chimp recognized him and attempted to examine the hand.

These behaviors may be safely assumed to be evolutionary boons to a social species, helping mitigate physical damage caused by struggles for power, or preventing competition within the group from destroying it. Moral instincts and acculturation allow a tribe to work better together, and the same holds true for humans. Once our morality would have been guided by the same measures: our every indiscretion would be noticed by the people we lived among, and remembered; we could be directly accountable for our behavior. Once human populations became too large for these tribe-level measures to handle, however, religion became useful, and for that reason not a single human culture today is without it.  Even in the modern era, increasingly secular, we are forging a new path in the form of a civic culture that attempts to foster healthy behavior without the necessity of believing in elaborate creeds.  It is de Waal's hope that the humanist approach, of practicing a moral culture for the sake of human needs, informed by human experience,  will prove workable, though presently its most vocal proponents are men who have limited their advocacy to merely attacking religion, which is fruitless and makes as much sense as 'sleeping furiously'.  Still, he is hopeful that natural morality will prevail eventually; it does have the advantage of being instinctual. Humanity has as much hope of purging itself of its conscience as it does of  becoming asexual.

Although most of de Waal's own experience comes from observing bonobos in an artificial environment, a spacious exhibit in Arnhem Zoo that prevents some pertinent aspects of behavior from manifesting themselves, he couples it with the studies of other populations in the wild.  The Bonobo and the Atheist, like its title, is an interesting discussion that combines primate behavior and the evolution of religion. What is missing, I think, is any mention of Natural Law, which  would have given his mention of civic culture considerable heft. Humans have been attempting to discern moral convention from nature since Aristotle, both inside religion and out of it. A comparison between declared belief in the Rights of Man according to constitutions and charters and the inferred rights in religious texts ("Thou shalt not kill" inferring a right to life, for instance) would have been most interesting. Both in de Waal's view would be expressions of humanity's inherent moral instincts, but civic belief has the quality of being open to change when necessary; a humanistic moral culture would not be limited by dogma. Simply creating a healthy moral culture won't make religious domination a thing of the past -- it has other virtues, other contributions that must also be made good for -- but it would be a start in creating a world more concerned with the needs of people than power, priests, and convention, and less dependent on something as volatile as beautifully dangerous religion.

de Waal's observations and insight prove again remarkable.

Related:

• The Righteous Mind, Jonathan Haidt  (whom he quotes from)
• Religion for Atheists, Alain de Botton (mentioned)
• Chimpanzee Politics, The Age of Empathy, Primates and Philosophers, Our Inner Ape, etc. Frans de Waal 

The Best of Robert Ingersoll

The Best of Robert Ingersoll
© 1993 Roger Greely
175 pages



This week, I was able to read through a collection of quotations by Robert G. Ingersoll under the title of "best of". The quotations are introduced by a biographical essay of Ingersoll, then organized by alphabetical topic and take up most of the book, with a few short speeches -- one for his brother's funeral and others honoring recently deceased poets, scholars, and other men whom Ingersoll admired -- near the end. The book's appendices are written by the editor of the book and concern the history of his birthplace museum and various things said about him by contemporaries after his death. The book is shorter than I expected, and did not contain the text of larger lectures as I anticipated before seeing the page count. The quotations included, however, are some of his best -- and even included some I have never encountered before. The image of Ingersoll that comes forth through these selections is one of a passionate and intelligent man, every bit the "preacher of humanity". His quotations regarding religion are particularly strong, displaying why I like Ingersoll so much: he doesn't just roar at orthodoxy, he celebrates humanity and exhorts his listeners to think for themselves and live more deeply in love. He is the quintessential Humanist.

The book is an obvious recommendation to Robert G. Ingersoll fans, but should have strong appeal to skeptics, atheists, rationalists, skeptics, the liberal religious, science supporters, and especially humanists.

Humanist Anthology

Humanist Anthology
© 1995 ed. Margaret Knight and revised editor James Herrick
220 pages

Know then thyself, presume not God to scan;
The proper study of Mankind is Man.
Plac'd on this isthmus of a middle state,
A being darkly wise, and rudely great:
With too much knowledge for the Sceptic side,
With too much weakness for the Stoic's pride,
He hangs between; in doubt to act, or rest,
In doubt to deem himself a God, or Beast;
In doubt his Mind or Body to prefer,
Born but to die, and reas'ning but to err;
Alike in ignorance, his reason such,
Whether he thinks too little, or too much:
Chaos of Thought and Passion, all confus'd;
Still by himself abus'd, or disabus'd;
Created half to rise, and half to fall;
Great lord of all things, yet a prey to all;
Sole judge of Truth, in endless Error hurl'd:
The glory, jest, and riddle of the world! - Alexander Pope

In a creative mood a few months back, I began assembling a personal anthology of sorts -- collecting philosophical articles, essays, quotations, and poetry that I have found to be inspirational, highly informative, or otherwise helpful in my philosophical-spiritual journey. Thus, I was quickly interested by this book's title, as it seemed similar to what I was doing with my own reading. Humanist Anthology collects religious, scientific, philosophical, political, and literary essays and quotations with a humanistic theme ranging in time from what Karen Armstrong called "the age of transformation" to the end of the 20th century. Authors included exhibit a good deal of diversity: there are obvious choices like Voltaire and Robert Ingersoll, not-so-obvious choices in Seneca and deists, and at least one questionable choice in Herbert Spencer. (I will be cautious in criticizing this: I associate Spencer with the inequality-justifying ideology of Social Darwinism that soils Darwin's name, but Spencer's own views might not have reflected the view of the robber barons and neo-conservatives who espouse it under a different name.)

Themes and some contributing authors to them include:

• the necessity of free Reason as a means of finding the truth and guiding our lives. (Voltaire, Thomas Paine)
• the feasibility and indeed superiority of ethical systems based on reason and empathy instead of "revealed" and supernaturally-based premises. (the Stoics, Jeremy Bentham, Charles Darwin, G.E. Moore)
• criticism of organized religion, particularly Christianity given that the majority of authors included were western thinkers (Mark Twain, Bertrand Russell)
• criticism of the idea of a benevolent god (Robert Ingersoll, Mark Twain)
• criticism of pro-deity arguments (T.H. Huxley, Robert Ingersoll)
• the role of wonder (Albert Einstein, Bertrand Russell)
• the importance of idealism (Sir Julian Huxley, M.N. Roy)

There's a fair bit of balance here. Contributions are sometimes short, sometimes long: a scoffing paragraph by Twain on religion may follow a passionate plea by Ingersoll for the liberty of thought, again followed by a more serious and involved essay on the substance of ethical living and how one may define "good". Although there are many famous names here, there are also more anonymous ones whose words reveal fascinating lives -- like a French abbot (Jean Meslier) who for years had been a closet skeptic, who used his death to apologize to his flock. The book itself is not self-congratulatory: it doesn't just offer a humanist more eloquent expressions of his or own beliefs. The works here often made me reflect on my own views, and I felt reproached more than once -- mostly by Seneca. The inclusion of humanistic politics was particularly interesting. I think highly of the book, for it is such a marvelously Humanist work -- collecting not only the views of religious skeptics and curmudgeons but of passionate idealists like Ingersoll. Today's humanism could do with more passion.

I would recommend the book to any reader with a high-school reading level, including to religious moderates. Alas, I fear you will be unable to find the book, for it is out of print and used copies on Amazon are being offered for perhaps too high a price. I will be working with the book over the weekend and hope to produce a list of authors included and the works cited for the benefit of those interested who cannot find the book. The results will be posted on my philosophy and humanities blog.

Oh, unhappy human kind
In those grim gods, your own creation,
What anguish for yourselves you find,
For babes born what tribulation!
Not palms in prostrate prayer outspread,
Not all the blood on alters shed
Is piety, but that calm mind,
Whose fruit is tranquil contemplation. - Lucretius, translated by J.S.L. Gilmour and R.E. Lantham

Our Chosen Faith

Our Chosen Faith: An Introduction to Unitarian Universalism
© 1989 John A. Buehrens and the now late F. Forrester Church
195 pages

I've long been aware of the Unitarian Universalist church, ever since I read of a character in California Diaries mentioned having her mother's funeral held at a UU fellowhip. The UU church is closest to the ideal in my mind, and I dabble in the UU community online as best I can. I thought it would be interesting to read a book on Unitarian Universalism and found this one. This book is a straightforward introduction to the UU tradition: after very briefly explaining its history, the two authors each write essays about the themes present in its listed principles and sources -- The book is a bit dated in that it was written prior to the inclusion of "earth-centered traditions". The chapter on humanist teachings that warn against idolatries of the mind and spirit focused more on humanism's rationalism and less on its spirit, so to speak -- the celebration of human culture.

It was a fair read, but it seems to me there must be better introductions for those curious about Unitarian Universalism, even online.

The Philosophy of Humanism

The Philosophy of Humanism
© 1990 Corliss Lamont
326 pages

This is very straightforward book on the obvious subject, giving a history, description, and promotion of contemporary humanism. Author Corliss Lamont once headed the American Humanist Association, although he is perhaps better know for his political activities. After a short introduction, Lamont gives a history of the Humanist tradition, tapping both religious and scientific personalities as well as poets, politicians, and poetry -- for humanism is a grand tradition.

Subsequent chapters delve into humanist values and common beliefs -- he focuses on the importance of affirming life and using the scientific method as our guide whenever possible, and devotes a chapter to metaphysics. The chapter on the affirmation of life was interesting. Not only did he express a need for naturalistic mysticism -- the importance of losing one's self in the feeling of the sublime -- but he writes on ethics and politics. Lamont's socialistic political views do not seem to motivate the text: he writes that while Marxism and democratic socialism are themselves friendly to humanism, humanists need not be socialists.

Lamont's humanism is a kindler, gentler humanism, reminding more of Erich Fromm and Isaac Asimov than of the voices in the "New Atheism". Perhaps Greg Epstein's so-called "New Humanism" is merely a return to Lamont and Fromm's. While Lamont criticizes religious elements and maintains that humans must and should ground their lives in the natural world, he doesn't seem bitter or angry at it -- only at the abuses. He's also more open to emotional life than modern humanists are. Lamont is more passionate about what Humanism is and what it does than the failures of its rivals.

The book is quite readable, although the chapter on metaphysics may give some reades pause: it tends toward academic. My own copy of the book came with the first and second humanist manifestos, which were replaced in 2003 by the third. This is reccommend reading for humanists and those interested in a life of meaning and joy outside of religious belief.

Related Reading:

• Erich Fromm's The Sane Society