Dogmatism

Background: Dogmatism is a global challenge in recent years. Terrorist groups such as Taliban, Al Qaeda, Al-shabab, ISIS, Jondollah and so on are some example in recent century. Hence, what is more attended today is the religious dogmatism. It doesn’t mean that there are no other forms of dogmatism. Various kinds of dogmatism in political, racial and ethnical forms are developed in modern societies. Because of forming close mind manner, dogmatism in each form is in opposite of ethics. Therefore, this study tries to consider the ethical and social consequences of dogmatism in societies. Conclusion: With prevalence of dogmatism, ethical foundations are weakened and wellbeing will be replaced with violence and autarchy. In such societies, trust, adjustment and social cooperation will be decreased.

In the preface to his Critique of Pure Reason, Kant characterizes his own critical metaphysics as the main opponent of dogmatism, which inevitably results in the assertion of conflicting dogmas especially about the existence of God, the freedom of the will and the immortality of the soul. Simultaneously, Kant subtly distinguishes his critical philosophy from three other stances opposing dogmatism: the skepticism of Descartes and Hume, the empiricism of John Lock, and the indifferentism of thinkers who, without rejecting metaphysical assertions, refute any attempt to argue for them systematically and rigorously. Refusing indifferentism, Kant somehow admits a commonsensical view similar to that of indifferentism regarding principal issues of metaphysics. Touching very briefly on Kant’s view, the paper examines Nietzschechr('39')s take on especially the issue of the existence of the Christian God. Defending a kind of stance similar to skepticism or even, in some aspects, to indifferentism, Nietzsche’s chief endeavor is to look at the issue from the different perspectives of genealogical and axiological critiques in order to pave the way for an entire overlooking the issue. In this respect, such an endeavor results in a stance contrary to Kant’s commonsensical position, ending up in Nietzsche’s talk of the Death of God and the Death of the True World.