Chris Hedges interviews Alain de Botton on his book, "Religion for Atheists."

[Jim__]

The video runs for about 1 hour. This interview is from cspan2's After Words.

I certainly got a different impression of de Botton's book from watching this interview than I had from reading the reviews. My take on the interview is that de Botton is arguing that certain institutional prods are necessary for the individual to develop his full potential; and there are no existing institutions to do this in secular society. De Botton is speaking about certain questions that individuals naturally ask: how should I live a good life? Does life have meaning? At one point, Hedges, who is a theist, argues that the church is a corrupting influence over the individuals natural propensity for religion. The discussion covers multiple topics and my take may be based more on my interests than on the actual thrust of the conversation.

I think it's an interesting conversation.

[rug]

1. Bookmarked.

It's definitely more enlightening to see the give-and-take in an interview than from a review only.

[cbayer]

2. Better watch out. He's already been charged, tried and convicted as

not a true scotsman here.

[skepticscott]

3. Indeed? And by who?

Perhaps you can back that up with a few links...

[Warren Stupidity]

4. He posts this whenever anyone disagrees with de botton's fawning over relgious institutions.

Generally he waits for the criticism.

Here: the history of religious institutions and their role in society, taken as a whole, is not really something I think we ought to emulate. De Botton cherry pick's (admittedly) what he sees as the good, and wants atheist institutions that replicate that stuff. I think he is woefully misguided. Other criticisms from inside the atheist community are a bit harsher. Nobody that I know or have read has made any claim that de Botton is therefore not a true atheist. It seems to the poster that atheists must be like theists and view any disagreement regarding theory and practice as heresy in need of harsh measures. Plus of course gratuitous rofl.

[cbayer]

5. Oh, NO! Not the gap of the Hitchens argument?!?!

[skepticscott]

6. In other words, your claim is just flinging more poo

and you have nothing to back it up with.

What a shock.

[trotsky]

10. I would like you to link to any post where it was claimed de Botton isn't an atheist.

You should really read up on what the NTS fallacy is.

[FarCenter]

7. While education should place greater emphasis on building character, we don't need religion for that

The discussion of secular institutions to compensate for a lack of religion focuses too much on higher education.

The lack in US society is in the building of good character in our elementary schools. They should place greater emphasis on discipline and on instruction in ethics and morals in order to build self discipline and good character. Unfortunately they place too much emphasis on developing personality and individual creativity too soon. There is no more reason for a 3rd grader to try to figure out moral rules themselves than for the 3rd grader to figure out how to multipy numbers themselves. Unfortunately, we have curricula that attempt to have children "discover" multiplication using a variety of arcane techniques, rather than simply explaining a practical, standard way to do it. Similarly, we have students encouraged to "think for themselves" rather than receiving adequate instruction in self-discipline, morals and ethics.

It may be that teachers are afraid to teach these things because they are viewed as being the province of religion. However, there is no reason not to extract a core secular curriculum from the subset of precepts shared by the worlds major religions and non-religious texts, such as The Meditations of Marcus Aurelius or the writings of Confucious.

[Jim__]

9. Your point about elementary education is valid; I think it's different from de Botton's point.

I can't say very much about the state of elementary education today as I'm not a teacher and I don't have any children in school. Some of the reading I've done on elementary education indicates that it suffers from the faults that you point out. The aspect of school that does meet what de Botton is talking about is that it is a daily practice.

If the ideas that are being presented to children in elementary school are not "good" ideas, then there is not much benefit to inculcating those ideas through daily repetition and practice. But my take from what he's saying is that the basic methods used to teach children, the methods of daily reinforcement, are necessary to enable children to fully absorb what's being presented.

My understanding of his argument is that in modern secular society there are no institutions to help adults inculcate new ideas that they find meaningful. When an adult encounters an idea that they find inspirational, they are on their own in trying to further develop that idea.

[digonswine]

8. I watched half of this vid--

de Botton can talk for days and say nothing. He seems to have no point other than that we need an institution to truly understand anything, and we are inept and incomplete if we try to grasp something using just our own understanding.
I implore all those reading this--DO NOT waste your time on this. I was hoping for something and got nothing.
I apologize if something interesting was said in the second half of the interview. I do NOW know, though, that my own interpretation of this interview is incomplete, since it has not been sent through the very valuable filter of some "institution"-so I am sure that my understanding is incomplete at best.

[trotsky]

11. Thanks for sparing me the boredom.

Can't say that I'm surprised given de Botton's history.

[Jim__]

12. He is not talking about understanding, he is talking about practice.

His point is that without reinforcement, even the best ideas fall victim to the mundanity of daily life. Religion, developed over the aeons, has evolved effective methods that help to keep these ideas present and to put them into practice. When people cast aside the ideas of religion, they ought to retain these methods.

A couple of the ways that he develops his point is to use corporate methods as an example of institutional reinforcement and to discuss the short-lived effect of powerful ideas that are not reinforced. His example of corporate methods is advertising and its enveloping presence in the modern world - an effective form of reinforcement. His example of the short-lived effects of powerful ideas is a night at the theater that gives us a new vision of life, a new vision that has faded by lunchtime the next day.

[Warren Stupidity]

13. Nuns

we need atheist nuns to beat our kid's knuckles bloody. That way our atheist kids can be idjits too.

[Jim__]

14. If that is where your imagination leads you, that is a reflection of the limitations of your ...

imagination, not of what de Botton is talking about.

[Warren Stupidity]

15. de Botton admittedly cherry picks religious institutions

for what he perceives as their good bits. I'm not so sure that this is a realistic approach. Bloody knuckle nuns might be an essential ingredient of the edumacation by endless repetition that he admires so much. My dad got an excellent Jesuit education, but it was preceded by the abysmal nuns. I sincerely doubt you get one without the other.