When to Be What? Why Science-inspired Naturalism Need Not Imply Religious Naturalism

In The Aristos John Fowles imagined the human situation as that of a diverse group of people on a raft, apparently between a wreck in the past and a shore where they will land. But there was no wreck, there is no shore. The conference on which this thematic set of papers draws, was about a similar multitude of perspectives. Some identify as religious naturalists, others as naturalists without religion, while others respect science but identify with a historic tradition. In this contribution, I defend the intellectual and moral value of science-inspired naturalism. But I also offer a variety of reasons why naturalism may not be all. In philosophical anthropology and in life, whether religious or non-religious, dualistic and pluralist perspectives are appropriate, while one may be agnostic on ultimate questions.