Islam
1.     There is one and only one God.
2.     Jesus was a prophet of God.    Muhammad was the greatest prophet, and hence a greater
prophet than Jesus.  So Muhammad was a greater revealer of religious truth than Jesus.
3.    There will be a time of judgment and resurrection at which those who followed God and Muhammad will go to Paradise, those who did not will go to hell.
4.    The most desirable goal of human life on Earth is that the soul should attain eternal life in Paradise.
5.    If you are killed fighting in a true holy war (necessary in the circumstances to preserve or promote the spread of Islam), then your soul will go to Paradise.









Christianity
1.    There is one and only one God, but three persons in the Holy Trinity.
2.    Jesus was God incarnate and is literally identical with God.
3.    There will be a time of judgment and resurrection and those that believed in Jesus will go to Paradise and those who did not will go to hell.
4.    Jesus was not a mere prophet and was greater as a revealer of religious truth than any prophet.
5.    The most desirable ultimate goal of human life on Earth is that the soul should attain eternal life in Paradise.

Hinduism (some versions)
1.    There are many gods.
2.    Gods have been incarnated at different periods under the guises of animals or human beings
3.    The most desirable ultimate goal of human life on Earth is the absence of rebirth [or: union with the Absolute].

Buddhism (some versions)
1.    There is something that is “unborn, unoriginated,  unmade, and uncompounded.”
2.    The most desirable ultimate goal of human life on Earth is the attainment of enlightenment [or: the avoidance of suffering].
3.    Buddha was the greatest revealer of religious truth.
4.    There are no individual souls or persons, the self or ego is an illusion.

Hickian Metaphorical Minimalism
1.  There are one or more entities
 other than Nature as a whole.

  2. The most desirable ultimate goal
of human life on Earth is to stand in a “right relation” to that or those entities.

3.     None of the prophets or religious
leaders revealed any literal truths.  Some of their pronouncements are “metaphorically true”
.




OBJECTIONS TO HICKIAN METAPHORICAL MINIMALISM

Observation:  Many of the basic tenets of the main world religions are intended by the propounders to be literally true, at least in part:  (a) “It is wrong to eat pork”, (b) “It is wrong to eat beef”, (c) “Doing or believing X, Y, and Z will lead to something desirable: eternal life”, (d) “Doing or believing A, B, and C will lead to something desirable: enlightenment, or release from the cycle of reincarnation.”  Some of these do not suggest any metaphorical meaning, e.g. (a) and (b), and hence are just false according to Hickian Metaphorical Minimalism.  What metaphorical meaning can be assigned to “Jesus = God”?  Others, e.g. (c) and (d), may be partly metaphorical but they entail different non-metaphorical prescriptions about behavior and ritual.   






Problem 1:  How are we to decide which tenets of a given religion are metaphorically true and which are neither literally nor metaphorically true? Confining our attention to the historically dominant major religions will not solve this problem.

Problem 2:  How are we to act if we wish to believe the truth and to accrue any benefits that may go with it (release from reincarnation, eternal life, enlightenment).  According to Hickian Metaphorical Minimalism, since the specific conflicting claims about permissible and required behavior are all literally false.  Apparently then, according to HMM, we can act any way we like on these matters.  But if one of the religions is non-metaphorically true with respect to the desirable way of life, then we will fail to obtain the benefits claimed by the religion.






Problem 3:  HMM has considerable negative content: “All of the major religions are false.”  But it has very little positive content:  “Some of the doctrines of the major religions metaphorically convey things that are true.”   However, it is clearly incompatible with the intended meanings of many of the basic doctrines of the major religions.

Conclusion:  HMM sounds very tolerant and nice, but it is just another religion and is subject to the same perils as other religions or of naturalism.  In fact, it is no more tolerant than any other religion (or anti-religion, e.g. naturalism):  “All of the others are false, this one, vague as it is and having very little real content, is true.  And the others suggest things that are true, but we can’t say what those things are.”

Return to homepage