ABSTRACT
Why is this book for the philosophical friends of religion? Why is it directed at them? Why not address the enemies and despisers of religion? After all, in philosophical circles, aren’t they the vast majority? Twenty-seven years have gone by since Norman Malcolm wrote, ‘In our Western academic philosophy, religious belief is commonly regarded as unreasonable and is viewed with condescension or even contempt’ (Malcolm 1977, p.204). Why was religion so despised? Malcolm replies, ‘It is said that religion is a refuge for those who, because of weakness of intellect or character are unable to confront the stern realities of the world’ (Malcolm 1977, p.204). Some may say that times have changed, that there has been a revival in the fortunes of philosophy of religion. Nevertheless, the only reason to modify Malcolm’s reaction now is that, for most philosophers, condescension and contempt have given way to indifference. This situation is reflected, more generally, in Britain, in the fact that less than 5 per cent of the population attend a place of worship. In dire circumstances such as these, the last thing the philosophical friends of religion want is to be lectured at. To do so, it may well be thought, shows all the insensitivity of preachers who rail against the perils of unfaithfulness to the faithful few who turn up to listen to them! My aim is certainly not to lecture at anyone, and I hope I can avoid doing so. Nevertheless, it would be sheer evasion not to admit that my book is for religion’s philosophical friends. So the question remains: why this audience?
