Kissinger Eulogizes William F. Buckley and Comments on Knowledge and Faith
Anthony Ramirez of The New York Times published an article on April 5 describing the funeral service at St. Patrick’s Cathedral in New York for William F. Buckley, who died on February 27th at age 82. One of the most influential American political conservatives of his generation, Buckley is widely respected for his powerful intellect. The founder of The National Review, he is recognized for the central role he played in shaping the blend of anti-communism and libertarian economics that became the core american political ideology of President Ronald Reagan.
Speaking at the funeral service, former Secretary of State Henry Kissinger made emotional comments about how Buckley had come to reconcile the gap between objective knowledge and religious faith:
‘Over a decade ago,” he [Kissinger] said, clearing his throat, ”Bill and I discussed the relationship of knowledge to faith. I surmised it required a special act of divine grace to make the leap from the intellectual to the spiritual. In a note, Bill demurred. No special epiphany was involved, he argued. There could be a spiritual and intellectual drift until, one day, the eyes opened and happiness followed ever after. Bill noted that he had seen that culmination in friends. He did not claim it for himself.”
I was struck by these comments, both because of the speaker and the context. Secretary Kissinger, himself a man of powerful intellect and a German Jew whose parents fled the Holocaust, has clearly considered deep questions of God and religion and was touched by the loss of a long-time friend. It is interesting to me that he focuses on the notion that, for individuals who are intellectuals and very data driven, perhaps an epiphany or revelation of some kind is necessary to bridge the gap between faith in the existence of God and knowledge of objective reality.
As I think of this perennial debate, the oft-repeated motto of the New New Atheists comes to mind– “I don’t need to believe in God to have a moral conscience.” The atheists, in my view, totally miss the irony of their own assertion. That little voice in your head that tells you the difference between right and wrong is evidence of a little bit of God that’s inside every one of us. No epiphany required. 
Related posts:
- Einstein on Orthodoxy, Judaism, and Faith
- Dialogue on Irshad Manji and Project Ijtihad in ‘On Faith’
- Blaise Pascal On Man’s Ability to do Evil in the Name of Faith
- Faceoff: the New New Atheists vs. Maimonides
- Fighting the Anti-Israel Academic Boycott With an Inter-Faith Conference on Alzheimer’s Disease
3 Responses to “Kissinger Eulogizes William F. Buckley and Comments on Knowledge and Faith”
Leave a Reply
Connect with Pascal
About Pascal
I am a venture capitalist focused on investing in Security, Cleantech, and Digital Media. I have a strong interest in public policy issues and advocate public-private collaboration to protect our nation's critical infrastructure.
-
Or subscribe via email:
April 13th, 2008 at 1:00 pm
You probably knew this was coming.
As an atheist (not sure I’m a New New Atheist — haven’t heard of that classification before), I would disagree that the “moral compass” proves the existence of a god or is even evidence of the spiritual.
For me, the “moral compass” is just proof that you’re human. We even classify people who lack this moral compass as having a psychological disorder (they’re classified as psychopaths or sociopaths) we don’t classify them as a “spawn of satan” (I’m speaking in strict scientific terms, here).
And, FWIW, I would also say that the term “moral compass” doesn’t make sense. Just as there isn’t “common sense” there isn’t 1 idea of morality that all people accept. In fact, I would even venture to say that 1 person’s idea of morality changes constantly.
April 13th, 2008 at 1:51 pm
Thanks for your comment. It makes no sense to get into a cosmological argument as to human existence since I don’t expect to change your mind. As a pluralist, I’m also comfortable feeling that you are entitled to your own point of view and that it doesn’t have to be mine. I do agree that the word “compass” is not on point and have changed it to “conscience”.
I would point you to blog posts in this blog about the New New Atheists– Sam Harris, Christopher Hitchens, and Richard Dawkins. If you are interested in reading further on the topic of God and moral philosophy, I have also posted and referenced books on the work of the 12th century religious philosopher and man of science Moses Maimonides.
You can always make a rational social utility argument that it makes sense to do the ‘right’ thing because it is in the best interests of our society to do so and that psychopaths are non-functioning members of our society. I don’t see that this has anything to do with religion or faith in the existence of God, however. But I can’t explain everything through objective fact, and even scientists have to rely on faith to understand string theory in physics.
April 13th, 2008 at 2:38 pm
I’ll definitely take a look at those posts on the New New Atheists. Thank you for pointing me to them. I’ve often felt that one thing atheists miss (as compared to our fellow religious/spiritual church-goers) is that weekly communal gathering and ritual that does so much to feed the human spirit.
Agreed about your pluralistic view — it’s one I hold myself — and enjoy these debates for the debate rather than any attempt to change someone’s mind. I hope I wasn’t coming across that way. In fact, I see debate as opportunity to expand my mind and my knowledge.
To your point that the existence of psychopaths or sociopaths neither proves nor disproves the existence of god, I definitely agree. I was attempting (and doing a poor job of it) to show that the existence (or lack thereof) of a moral compass also does not prove or disprove the existence of god. That, rather, morality is a human issue and, in the context of god, a religious issue (which is — imo — also a human domain).
Ultimately, I think you’re original point about faith in god holds truth: you need a revelation or epiphany to trigger faith, but what it triggers faith in is unique to each person and the circumstances around the epiphany.
I can say I’ve had at least two of these epiphanies: the first led to my faith in the existence of God and the second led me to my faith in the nonexistence of God.
One last point here, and I want to infer a little from what you say in your last sentence: “But I can’t explain everything through objective fact, and even scientists have to rely on faith to understand string theory in physics.”
You seem to imply that faith is not the sole realm of religion. Faith, at its core, is just a belief in the unknown. This could lead to the belief in God, or to a belief in the power of the scientific method (not that these two are mutually exclusive).
I don’t know if that was your intended point or not, but it’s something that’s often irked me about atheists and believers. Being an atheist requires just as much faith as being a believer — science has yet to prove a negative!
(Sorry for the rant.)
Hope you’re having a good Sunday.