Interview
Rupert Read: Religion And Philosophy
About this feature
In this interview from the programme Community Chest, Dominik speaks with philosopher and environmentalist Rupert Read about religion and philosophy. Read discusses his books "Applying Wittgenstein" and "Philosophy for Life", arguing that religion is defined by practice. Key moments include a critique of Richard Dawkins' caricature of religion, a discussion on the ethics of offence in broadcasting, and Read's own practice of Buddhism and Quakerism.
In this interview from the programme Community Chest, Dominik speaks with philosopher, environmentalist, and Green Party councillor Rupert Read. Read discusses his books "Applying Wittgenstein" and "Philosophy for Life", arguing that religion is defined more by practice than by statement. The conversation covers the tension between broadcasting policies on offence and serious religious debate, a critique of Richard Dawkins' caricature of religion, and the idea that faith in science as a universal solution is itself a religious viewpoint. Read, who describes himself as a non-theist and non-atheist practicing Buddhism and Quakerism, suggests a synthesis of the best elements of religion as a hope for humankind against the 'religion' of consumerism. Dominik contributes his perspective as an atheist with a Christian family background.
Topics
- The application of Wittgenstein's philosophy to religion and language
- The tension between broadcasting policies on offence and the nature of religious debate
- Critique of Richard Dawkins' views on religion
- The relationship between science and faith
- The intersection of spirituality, practice, and personal identity
- The intersection of religion, liberalism, and civic society
- Philosophy for Life book
Guests
Listen · selected clips
Selected extracted clipsSelected clip
Rupert Read On Belief And Philosophy
Community Chest · Spoken extract
A discussion of religion, atheism and agnosticism.
Choose a clip and press play.
Passages from the recording
Text from the recording. These passages are not linked to a playable clip.
I think that it's absolutely right that offence must never be given on the grounds of race, colour, or gender. But if you are going to have any serious discussion of religion, you cannot avoid giving offence to some people because different religions and indeed non-religions clash completely with each other.
The problem when science becomes a kind of faith system is that you then get people actually believing nonsensical things, such as people actually say things like, "I have faith in science. Science will always solve humanity's problems." That's a more or less religious point of view, but it's a stupid religious point of view.
But something like that is what I believe. So, some something like a a version, a synthesis, perhaps, of the best of the best religions that we currently have seems to me one of the greatest hopes for for humankind. And and I don't have huge hope for humankind.