HUME, KANT, AND FEUERBACH: WHY THE ANTHROPOMORPHIC CRITIQUE REVEALS A FALSE DILEMMA BETWEEN NATURALISTIC ATHEISM AND ANTI-NATURALISTIC THEISM. Issue 54 (2020)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Byron, Christopher; Lopes, Jesse
• Is Part Of: Think. Volume 19:Issue 54(2020)
• Page Start: 55
• Page End: 67
• Publication Date: 2020
• Subjects: Philosophy -- Periodicals; 105
• DOI: 10.1017/S1477175619000307
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 1477-1756

Abstract

Abstract : In current debates concerning atheism, two positions are considered possible: naturalistic atheism or anti-naturalistic theism. Anti-naturalistic theism is motivated by the failure of naturalism to explain the fundamental nature of reality. We, however, endorse anti-naturalistic atheism by reviving the 'anthropomorphic critique', arguing that theism misattributes human traits to the deity. Anti-naturalistic atheism is better suited to refute theists, since it undercuts their appeal to science's inadequacies. We trace the anthropomorphic critique from Hume's Dialogues, through Kant's epistemology, and conclude with its reception in Feuerbach. The anthropomorphic critique is an epistemological – not metaphysical – thesis, hence, it is agnostic about the fundamental nature of reality. Yet it convincingly shows that theism is not a tenable position. In essence, we aim to decouple atheism from naturalism, on the basis of a salient critique in the history of modern philosophy, in order to ameliorate current debates between atheists and theists.