A Plausible God: Secular Reflections on Liberal Jewish Theology

A Plausible God: Secular Reflections on Liberal Jewish Theology, by Mitchell Silver. New York: Fordham University Press, 2006. 200 pp. $22.00. Mitchell Silver (no relation) introduces his book with two personal facts. As a child he had concluded that belief in was a sign of intellectual immaturity; and, as an adult he has affiliated primarily with Jewish institutions that explicitly bill themselves as secular. The impetus for his writing the book was his recognition that many of his family, friends, and associates had found a place for in their lives. He quickly realized that they did not believe in the epistemically unacceptable old God of his childhood but rather embraced a God which is supposedly compatible with a naturalistic worldview. Silver identifies several Jewish versions of the God in the work of Mordecai Kaplan, Arthur Green, and Michael Lerner. One sees as the organic totality of everything that exists. Another sees as constituted by those things in the natural world which ground a potential for goodness. Silver asks whether a modern, rational person should be a new-God-theist or an atheist. Although he refuses to join those faithful to the new God, he is content that others (p. xviii). Silver's pluralism is premised on two things. As someone who values human freedom he recognizes the of others freely choosing other religious 'Truths' (p. 119). He also recognizes that belief in the new can be on an epistemological par with atheism (p. 107). They are also on an ethical par. Silver considers and rejects the claim that beUef in a new is superior to atheism. The charge is that because of atheism's natural connection with humanism it is disposed to falsely see human beings as the sole source of value and meaning (p. 94). Silver also rejects ethical considerations to prefer atheism over belief in the new God. This includes the Marxist charge that beUef in is alienating and the Nietzschean charge that belief in is rooted in an unhealthy slave psychology. Silver counters that belief in the new can be strongly connected to a non-alienating sense of human freedom and that it can foster aWhitmanesque celebration of self and life (p. 106). Without epistemological or ethical considerations to serve as a guide, Silver argues that the choice between atheism and belief in a new is one of religious taste (p. 107). Among other things, Silver characterizes the believers in the new as having a taste for the unknown and a taste for extreme emotions (p. 111). New-God adherents also have an aesthetically pleasing to tell in which the possibility of connecting with the all or some ideal of human potential is guaranteed. The atheist can tell a very similar homecoming story which guarantees the possibility of connecting to a flourishing supportive, all-inclusive human community. FinaUy, Silver claims that atheism has a major aesthetic advantage since it is not committed to focusing on positive things such as the capacity for growth in human empathy - it can equally tell tales focusing on the extent of human caUousness (p. 117). Silver's book is clear and interesting. It is certainly worth reading for anyone interested in the place of in a modern, naturalistic worldview. It is also worth wrestUng with the views he puts forward, and, in my case, differing from them. …