Paul Kurtz
Critical Thinking and Planetary Ethics
[ Chairman, Center for Inquiry, U.S.A. / Transnational Professor emeritus of philosophy, State University of New York at Buffalo and internationally renowned humanist, Editor-in-Chief of Free Inquiry, delivered his Commencement speech on the occasion of the Convocation ceremony of Periyar Maniammai University, Vallam, Thanjavur on 9th September 2008. The same is given here]
 |
May I congratulate the students assembled here who will graduate today and your parents, relatives, and friends who have come to share this eloquent occasion. You have had a fine education at this University and you have reached a significant milestone. Now you will move on to develop your career, establish your own family, and encounter new challenges in life.
I wish to make two key points this morning. First, is the importance for you to cultivate your capacity for critical thinking—based on your understanding of science and the methods by which it establishes truth claims. Hopefully, this will enable you to make wise choices in the future. And second, is the need for you to appreciate the new Planetary Ethics that is developing worldwide. We share a common planetary abode, which we should preserve and cherish. We need to appreciate the fact that every person on this planet—no matter where he or she lives—should be considered precious, equal in dignity and value.
Scientific Worldview.
The frontiers of science are truly impressive. Yet the general public often is unaware of these advances because scientific research is so highly specialized, that even experts in some fields such as astronomy and physics may be totally unaware of new findings in biology, neuro-science, stem-cell research, genetics, nanotechnology, or pharmacology. We need generalists across disciplines to interpret these findings and their relevance to other fields of research.
E.O. Wilson, the distinguished entomologist and secular humanist at Harvard University, has said that we need to develop public understanding of the common interdisciplinary generalizations and theories that cut across disciplines. Physics and chemistry provide principles about the material basis of reality. On the subatomic level quantum mechanics plays a key role. On the macro level the laws of physics and relativity theory apply to astronomy. Here we view an expanding universe with billions and billions of galaxies receding at increasing velocities. Exciting breakthroughs are made every day, such as the discovery of 250 planets (so far in 2008) and innumerable galaxies outside of our own solar system. Discoveries in the life sciences of DNA and the genetic determinants of behavior are vital, as is Charles Darwin’s theory of natural selection in our understanding of how species, including the human species, evolved. Similarly for scientific explanations of human behavior in psychology, economics, cultural anthropology, sociology, and other social sciences.
High on our agenda is the need to convey to the public some understanding of the cosmos, the biosphere, and human society. This means that a basic synoptic canon of the sciences needs to be written in every generation taking into account the new discoveries on the frontiers of knowledge. Education is, of course, key to this understanding, from the primary and secondary schools, to the university and post-graduate study. But so are the mass media, TV, and the press (articles and books) as well as the Internet and the iPod. No nation can be considered progressive unless its citizens are scientifically literate—this applies to the US, Europe, Asia, Africa, and Australia. Thus each educated person should try to keep abreast of scientific discoveries.
Scientific methods of Inquiry
It is not enough to simply teach people about the scientific outlook; however, we also need to develop an understanding of methods of scientific inquiry, an emphasis on objective methods for testing and validating truth claims. The use of scientific method is the reason why the sciences have succeeded in advancing the frontiers of knowledge in comparison with other approaches—such as the appeal to religion, authority, custom, emotion, intuition. The hypothetical/deductive method of the sciences formulates hypotheses and seeks to confirm them objectively by peer review, drawing on evidence, experimental prediction, theoretical coherence and mathematical validity. The point is that the scientific method is corroborated by communities of inquirers. It is justified by its effectiveness, unlike other methods of acquiring and testing knowledge. An essential component of the process of scientific inquiry is skepticism. We should always be prepared to doubt even the most well-established principles. Unlike other methods, science is fallible and self-corrective. We need an open mind, receptive to new ideas, as long as they can be verified.
The process of scientific inquiry is never absolutely fixed or final. This does not deny that we do develop reliable knowledge—so skepticism is not total, but is selective. The scientific method is not an esoteric method only open to specialized initiates; it is continuous with common sense, the practical ways of solving problems in ordinary life. Hence, the development of critical thinking is essential in a democracy for an informed citizenry. The schools from the earliest should teach the young how to solve problems and how to think. But it is an ongoing life project to live as far as you can by the methods of intelligence.
In my view we need to extend the methods of science to new areas of human conduct wherever possible. The application of science to technology and the practical sciences has had enormous benefit to humankind; the progressive achievements of modern life have come from scientific research and technology. New technologies in agriculture have reduced labor and improved crop yields, providing sufficient food for the wide sectors of the population. Modern methods of sanitation have helped to rid humankind of infectious diseases; modern medicine has reduced pain and suffering, cured diseases by antibiotics and advanced surgery; new diagnostic techniques and the invention of new machines and technological devices have reduced drudgery and increased consumer goods; and have contributed enormously to life—in the home, workplace, and the community as new modes of transportation and communication became widely accessible.
Science has also opened up our understanding of the universe and of human culture; it has elevated the quality of life, and increased longevity. This has contributed to human happiness and leisure. Thus science and technology is the major force that has provided new resources for ameliorating and enhancing life. And this is important if a person is to lead a vibrant, healthy, and productive life.
Critiques of Superstition:
Understanding the methods of science and using critical thinking has another important role. It should enable human beings to avoid superstition, guard against occult causes, paranormal and religious claims, and pseudo-sciences. Human beings are prey to charlatans and false prophets. Skeptical thinking is the best antidote against nonsense.
The falsity of astrology is a good illustration, whether Indian, Western, or Chinese. There is no evidence that the planets control or influence human character or destiny. Scientists are skeptical of the validity of astrological horoscopes or predictions. The same thing is true of religious charlatans who claim magical powers of healing. We need always to ask for evidence—based on clinical diagnosis taken before and after. Although the placebo effect may help some individuals, in no case did we find hard clinical data proving such cures. Critical thinking is thus the best remedy for clearing cobwebs from the mind!
Toward a New Planetary Ethics:
Humankind is confronted by two possible future scenarios today: the first is scientific and humanistic. It adopts an optimistic forward-looking stance regarding the Human Prospect, placing confidence in the ability of human beings to solve their problems. Scientific rationalists emphasize reason, science, and technology as vital to improving the human condition. They recognize that many societies are embroiled in political and economic wars and conflicts, and that ignorance and mistrust often dominate flash points. Meanwhile, environmental problems present awesome challenges as economic growth gallops ahead: global warming, melting glaciers, disappearing rainforests, desertification, and the population explosion evoke dire prognostications of Armageddon. Yet secularists and humanists believe that we can and must solve these problems. If we are to do so, however, it is essential that we advance education for all children on the planet, extend genuine democracy and human rights everywhere, and strive to overcome the ancient religious, ethnic, nationalistic, racial, and ideological divisions of the past.
Secular humanists welcome the disappearance of the colonial empires of Europe, and the rapid emergence of Asia— India, China, Japan, and South Korea—though they recognize that economic and political conflicts for natural resources (oil, gas, and mineral wealth) will most likely intensify. Humanists are critical of the unilateral hegemony of any one nation, and they maintain that a new humanistic global ethics needs to be developed if the future is to be bountiful. We need to work together if we are to contribute to the continued amelioration of human life on the planet.
Pitted against an affirmative humanistic outlook is a second pessimistic scenario rooted in dogmatic religions of the past. Especially troubling is the resurgence of intolerant fundamentalist religions that block human progress and have little confidence in the capacity of human beings to solve their problems or to contribute to a better life. These reactionary religions wish to return to the ancient “sacred books” of bygone ages. Their texts were spawned in pre-modern rural and nomadic cultures that were rooted in fear and superstition and burdened by economies of scarcity. They were contrived in a pre-scientific age before the industrial, democratic, and information revolutions of the modern age, or the emergence of the Enlightenment in the eighteenth century. It is clear that the world needs to assert a New Enlightenment in the twenty-first century that expands reason and science, education and democracy. But this will not happen easily until we recognize our mutual interdependence and make the case for a new global ethics. Especially necessary in this great task is a new commitment to Planetary Ethics as a first premise. This is based on reason, but inspired by empathy. If the humanist scenario is to succeed, we need to embark upon a vigorous campaign devoted to the well-being of humanity as a whole.
Historically, many authors—secular and religious—have praised the “brotherhood of man,” no doubt an anachronistic term today. Nevertheless, stoicism in the Hellenic world recognized the importance of a universal moral principle, as did Christianity and other patriarchical religions. Too often, however, the latter are tied to creeds anchored in faith— Christianity, or Islam. Judaism implicitly presupposed the concept of “the chosen people.” Regrettably, this was limited to only those who were committed to their religious faith; they alone would receive the keys to the Gates of Heaven, the divine Rapture, or Salvation. All others would be condemned to Hell. How discriminatory and destructive this apocalyptic vision has been, for theologians have consigned to perdition those who did not accept the divine Commandments, allegedly revealed to this or that prophet or sect. Too many wars have been waged in the name of divine sanctions—it is time that humankind declares its independence of them all. Similar problems arise for Hinduism and Buddhism, which were conceived in the ancient world.
We need to abandon selective moralities concocted in the infancy of the species. We need to move to a higher plane in which all members of the human family are treated equally as persons, “ends in themselves,”—as Immanuel Kant postulated in his second categorical imperative. The salient point that is evident today is the urgent need to bring a universal ethical code into fruition.
A compelling reason why this is the time to develop a new global ethics is that scientific studies have for the first time empirically demonstrated that homo sapiens has common roots. Beginning in Africa, humans migrated some 60,000 years ago to Europe, Asia, China, Australia, and across the Bering Straits to North and South America. Genetic studies of our common DNA indicate that we are truly members of the same homo sapiens. We share a global songline based on genetic markers that indelibly point to our unitary origin. Thus our species is not divided along fixed racial lines; constant migrations tie us indelibly together. Humans traversed the continents by foot, caravan, camel, donkey, and chariot, and in modern times by ship, airplane, and spacecraft. Invading armies on land and armadas on the high seas, as well as peaceful trade, commerce, immigration and emigration enabled humans to continuously intermingle and intermarry.
Today North and South America, Europe, Asia, Australia, and Africa are open to peaceful transactions, and now, we live in an interdependent world. We breathe the same air, share the same atmosphere, and we need uncontaminated drinking water, food and shelter to survive. Although there are geographical differences, we share the same generic history as a species. Accordingly, each of us, no matter where we live, has a stake in the preservation of our planetary abode. Vividly dramatized by space travel, for the first time we can view our blue-green planet from afar, and realize that the historical-political-socio-economic boundaries that divided humankind for millennia are fictitious. Geologists have demonstrated that the continents are shifting, however slowly, that our Earth is undergoing constant processes of change, and that all species need to adapt if they are to survive. The intricate fossils preserved in the Burgess Shale of Canada for 500 million years show that millions of species are extinct. Will the human species survive? Only if we take the bold steps necessary to achieve progress.
We have developed the scientific method that powerfully enables us to make wise choices. Unfortunately, there exists a great disparity between the continued discoveries of the sciences on the one hand, and the cultural lag of inherited moral doctrines rooted in historical religions on the other. Will we overcome this dualism between science and morality that persists? Only if we develop a new rational humanistic ethics. Scientific technology makes this feasible today because of the invention and proliferation of new communications media. There are no longer isolated pockets of humans living in remote regions of the world; radio, television, the iPod, and especially the Internet bind us instantaneously together. Whether Indian or American, Latin-American or African, Chinese or Russian, French or British, we can come to know and appreciate each other today as never before.
“No deity can save us, we must save ourselves,” states Humanist Manifesto II. We need a realistic appraisal of the human condition and a resolute determination to take responsibility for our own destinies—as far as we can—in our own hands. This is the Prometheus model, the myth of the Titan who challenged the gods and bequeathed fire and the arts and sciences so that primitive humans might leave the caves in which they huddled and enter the world with the courage to change it. Today we have the power to do so. We need as never before to recognize the necessity of developing shared values and working cooperatively to bring about a better world. But if we are to do so, we need a new code of global morality.
If humanity is to solve its problems and to continue to develop and prosper, then it needs to develop a common ethical humanist framework appropriate to the planetary civilization that is emerging.
