The Times article is framed in an alleged controversy over whether or not Antony Flew’s recently published book, There Is A God, truthfully represents Flew’s views, and is heavily loaded with implications that Flew is senile and that the alleged senility is allegedly being exploited by the theistic philosophy community. The case for this point of view rests upon a series of judgmental conclusions and excerpts taken from Flew in conversation, and presented out of context. Testimonies by Flew, and others involved in the publication of the book, are discounted with accusations of fraud.
Flew’s publisher, Steve Laube published the following statement, credited to Flew, on Amazon.com:
"My name is on the book and it represents exactly my opinions. I would not have a book issued in my name that I do not 100 percent agree with. I needed someone to do the actual writing because I'm 84 and that was Roy Varghese's role. The idea that someone manipulated me because I'm old is exactly wrong. I may be old but it is hard to manipulate me. This is my book and it represents my thinking."
Blogger, Richard Carrier mentions the above testimony in his blog titled Antony Flew Considers God...Sort Of, and then discredit’s the testimony as he accuses Laube of fraud.
The NY Times article ignited a buzz in the blogosphere, where the innuendos, insinuations, and conclusory opinions, were readily transformed, by the atheistic community, to the status of unquestionable truth with atheist calling to have legal claims brought against the alleged “real authors” of Flew’s book. In blogs and articles, placed at the top of a google-generated search, there is little discussion of the content of Flew’s book to be found, or even the interview between Flew and Habermas, which is easily accessible on the Internet. The discussion of the book is overshadowed as the Times article, attacking the character of the publishers, successfully commandeers center stage.
The NY Times article gives considerable space to Richard Carrier, and Carrier expands upon his views in his Blog, conspicuously titled, Antony Flew's Bogus Book. As reported in the New York Times article, The Turning of an Atheist, Carrier carried on a dialogue with Flew. Carrier confesses that he wasn’t familiar with the work of Flew until the much-publicized controversy over Flew’s “conversion”, at which point, Carrier was asked by an unidentified secular group to engage an interview with Flew. Richard Carrier’s blog openly accuses other person’s with being the actual authors of the book. Carrier announces that
“The book's actual author turns out to be an evangelical preacher named Bob Hostetler (who has also written several books with Josh McDowell), with considerable assistance from this book's co-author, evangelical promoter and businessman Roy Abraham Varghese”.
Carrier offers no justification for this claim, but to Flew’s choir, justification is not necessary as Flew’s allegation is taken as established fact and followed up by calls from his choir to have legal charges initiated against the accused.
Clicking on the link to Bob Hosteller’s site, as provided by Carrier, informs us only that Hosteller was involved in Flew’s book as a free-lance editor, which is hardly an uncommon practice and does not provide a reasonable basis for Carrier’s allegations.
Clicking on the Link to Roy Abraham Varghese informs us that Varghese has written his own books about the compatibility of theistic beliefs and scientific knowledge and insights. Once again, there is nothing there to support Carrier’s allegations, which even Carrier downgrades from a statement of fact to a personal suspicion in the following paragraph.
Carrier refers to Flew’s new book as a “hack Christian track”, without giving any reference to any statement by Flew that Flew accepts Christianity as his personal religion. Contrarily, in the articles leading up to the book, Flew has always described himself as accepting an “Aristotelian God".
In Antony Flew Considers God...Sort Of
Richard Carrier writes,
"Once upon a time, a rumor hit the Internet that Flew had converted to Christianity. The myth appeared in 2001 and popped up again in 2003".
However in the introduction to Atheist Becomes Theist-Exclusive Interview with Former Atheist Antony Flew, is this statement:”
"in January 2004, Flew informed Habermas that he had indeed become a theist. While still rejecting the concept of special revelation, whether Christian, Jewish or Islamic, nonetheless he had concluded that theism was true. In Flew’s words, he simply “had to go where the evidence leads."
(The Habermas interview goes on to illuminate the evidence considered by Flew).
If, in his new book, There Is a God: How the World's Most Notorious Atheist Changed His Mind, Flew has testified, that he accepts Christianity as his personal religion, this would be news and it would be appropriate for Carrier to provide a quote from the book in which Flew testifies regarding such an affiliation, but substantiation for Carrier’s claim is nowhere to be found, either in Carrier’s blog or in other sources referenced in Carrier’s blog.
On Carrier’s blog, It appears tha I am blocked from further posting after expressing the opinion that Carrier’s accusations consists of conclusory statements, only, and that the interview between Habermas and Flew sets a much needed higher standard of debate between theists and atheists.
I recently commented on the Ross Douthat Blog found at theAtlantic.com, a site that appears to have a greater tolerance for the expression of diverse opinions. The first comment on the blog suggests that the readers might also be interested to read the Interview between Gary Habermas and Antony Flew from Philosophia Christi, as well as Habermas' review essay of There is a God:
The second blog comment begins with the statement
“I cannot attest to the veracity of what’s written in There is a God: However, as an attorney familiar with the standard of "undue influence" its important for all of us not to miss the greater point that our intellectual will (built on wisdom, experience, and study) not be besmirched simply because we are older.”- And deserves further reading.
In the third comment there is a reference to an unidentified article in the New York Times by Stanely Fish. The comment did not provide a link to the article, which I am making available here:Suffering, Evil and the Existence of God. The comment claims that
the article gave no indication of the unusual circumstances surrounding its creation. It turns out that the article by Fish is published in the New York Times, on the same date as the more talked about article by Oppenheimer (and includes the following statement about the Oppenheimer article in parenthesis at the end of Fish’s discussion)
(In an article published Sunday — November 4 — in the New York Times Magazine, Mark Oppenheimer more than suggests that Flew, now in his 80’s, did not write the book that bears his name, but allowed Roy Varghese (listed as co-author) to compile it from the philosopher’s previous writings and some extended conversations. Whatever the truth is about the authorship of the book, the relation of its argument and trajectory to the argument and trajectory of Ehrman’s book stands.)
I counted 26 bloggers on the New York Times Blogrunner page for The Turning of an Atheist.
There is 1 entry on Blogrunner for Suffering, Evil and the Existence of God.
However Suffering, Evil and the Existence of God has to date 351 comments. The Turning of an Atheist has no place for comments and so there is no basis for commentary comparison. However Richard Carrier's Blog, Antony Flew's Bogus Book has only 101 comments and Ross Douthat's Blog has 19 comments. Can we believe the New York Times blogging statistics that accounts for only one blog about an article that has generated such an abundance of reader comments? Since I am now publishing a blog that comments on Stanley Fish's article, we shall see if one becomes two - or we shall wonder about the selective methods of the New York Times data statistics.
The importance of Antony Flew is that he stands as a model for a civilized and thinking person's debate about theism vs atheism, rather than the usual tactic commonly found in debates concerning the existence of God, which is of course, attacking the speaker, rather than responding to the thought, of which The Turning of an Atheist is yet another example
No comments:
Post a Comment