Russell: The Journal of Bertrand Russell Studies

176 Reviews DID RUSSELL HAVE A PERSONAL RELIGION? THOM WEIDLICH Apt. 10,170 East 3rd St. New York, NY 10009, USA THOMWEID@WORLDNET.ATT.NET Louis Greenspan and Stefan Andersson, eds. Russell on Religion: Selections from the Writings ofBertrand Russell London and New York: Routledge, 1999. Pp. vii, 261. Cloth £40.00; pb $12.99. To the general observer, Bertrand Russell's opinions on religion are simple enough: Russell was that outspoken "atheist" who hated religionespecially Christianity-and sputtered against its alleged evils every chance he got. But as one takes a closer look, complications begin to emerge; the firebrand seems to allow some nuances, after all. We have a new opportunity to reevaluate Russell's religious views (and our view of those views), a collection of his writings on the subject entitled Russell on Religion. The book is another installment in Routledge's "Russell on ..." series. And as the first number, Russell on Ethics, edited by Charles Pigden, showed us that the philosopher had thought more about metaethics than was previously imagined, this one shows us that Russell had many interesting and complex things to say about religion. Reviews 177 The editors are well known to those who travel in Russellian circles.'Louis Greenspan is the former director of the Bertrand Russell Editorial Project, as well as professor emeritus at McMaster University's Department of Religious Studies. Stefan Andersson is a frequent researcher at the Bertrand Russell Archives. The twenty-two essays are arranged by broad topics, starting with some "personal statements" and then "religion and ...": "philosophy", "science", "morality", and "history". Greenspan and Andersson supply briefintroductions to the sections that help place each essay. In the book's introduction they provide an overview and seek to show that Russell essentially was religious in his personality (which this reviewer thinks goes too far, but we'll get to that). As for the selected writings themselves, the editors have chosen well. Yes, many of the old gems are here-"The Free Man's Worship" (1903), "Why I Am Not a Christian" (I927)-but so are some rather obscure and rather brilliant texts such as "The Existence and Nature of God" (1939). Some popular essays missing in action-"Can Religion Cure Our Troubles?" (1954), "Do We Survive Death?" (1936), and (the lengthy) What J Believe (1925)-were included in an earlier collection that had a much greater emphasis on Russell's opposition to religion, Why J Am Not a Christian and Other Essays on Religion and Related Subjects (1957), edited by Paul Edwards. It's well known that Russell changed his opinions on many subjects (a trait his foes view as a vice, his friends as a virtue). Taken in their totality, the essays in this new volume show that he changed his views on religion, though it is difficult to get at exactly how this played out because the pieces are not arranged chronologically. But this book is invaluable in revealing the seriousness with which Russell approached the subject and the complexity of his conclusions. Russell could be cautious in his criticisms ofreligion, admitting, for example, that he couldn't prove there was no God. He usually referred to himself as an agnostic. His answers to Look magazine's questions on "What Is an Agnostic?" (1953) are included, and show that he relied on an old view that "An atheist, like a Christian, holds that we can know whether or not there is a God" (p. 41). Many atheists would disagree, holding that they simply reject the arguments for the existence ofa God-and have no need of that hypothesis. Yet, the cau~tic critic is also here and it makes one pine for such a public opponent of religion to come around again; let's face it, Russell is a lot more fun to read when he's bashing religion than when he's saying nice things about it. In their introduction, Greenspan and Andersson try to reconcile Russell's polar-opposite takes on religion. On the one hand, there is his daughter's opin- 178 Reviews ion that "He was by temperament a profoundly religious man"l and his own statement (in "Has Religion Made Useful Contributions to Civilizations...