The Face of God: The Dispute over the Sacred, the Person, and Meaning in the World of Science

🇵🇱 Polski
The Face of God: The Dispute over the Sacred, the Person, and Meaning in the World of Science

Introduction

This article examines the contemporary debate over the sacred and the dignity of the person in a world dominated by science. Readers will discover why a reductionist vision of humanity threatens the foundations of culture and why, according to Roger Scruton, sanctity is an essential infrastructure for social order. The text exposes profanation as a mechanism for escaping responsibility and points to transcendence as a necessary condition for human freedom.

Dawkins vs. Scruton: Reductionism vs. the Person

Richard Dawkins describes the human being as a "survival machine," representing a view from nowhere—a purely biological perspective where meaning is reduced to chemistry. Roger Scruton counters this with a view from here, in which the human being is a person: a source of reasons, not just an effect of causes. The key concept of this anthropology is the face, which reveals the soul and serves as the threshold of subjectivity. In the "I-Thou" relationship, the face of another person becomes an ethical "prohibition against killing" that cannot be explained by the statistics of stimuli. Its commercialization or masking is an act of identity theft and the foundation of the systemic denial of dignity.

The God of Philosophers and Profanation: The Limits of Transcendence

The metaphysical God of philosophers as a necessary being remains a cold abstraction. Scruton argues that faith requires God as a Person with whom communion and covenant are possible. A similar tension is visible in love: naturalism sees it as an evolutionary mechanism but fails to grasp the structure of the gift. The distinction between eros (desire) and agape (selfless love) shows that the sacred sanctifies human impulses. Profanation is the active uprooting of sanctity to silence the voice of conscience and avoid moral judgment. Meanwhile, transcendence is the foundation of freedom—without it, the question of the meaning of actions loses its raison d'être.

The Sacred in Politics, Art, and Architecture

The sacred manifests itself in the material and social world. Faceless architecture and the digital world, where pornography detaches desire from the person, are forms of profanation that destroy authentic relationships. Politics also needs the sacred; without recognizing the dignity of the person as an inviolable value, democracy degrades into a mere auction of interests. Icons and art do not merely represent but make transcendence present, serving as "windows to eternity." The endurance of a community rests on sacrifice, which transcends the calculation of profit. The ultimate argument for the sacred is death—the moment when biology gives way to the need for ritual and silence.

Summary

In the face of loneliness and guilt, humans instinctively seek transcendence, even if they reject it through reason. A culture that systematically flees from sanctity paradoxically reveals its hunger for the sacred, creating new, often destructive altars of consumption. Sanctity is not an aesthetic luxury but a system for protecting the community against nihilism. Without it, everything becomes a commodity, and freedom merely a collection of official licenses. In a world without altars, can we still hear the echo of the Other's face, reminding us of our infinite responsibility?

📄 Full analysis available in PDF

Frequently Asked Questions

How does Richard Dawkins' approach differ from Roger Scruton's philosophy?
Dawkins employs reductionism, viewing humans as merely a "survival machine" of genes. Scruton argues that humans are persons with an irreducible dignity that cannot be fully described in the language of biology.
Why does the face play a key role in understanding a person?
The face is not merely a physical element of the body, but a threshold where the soul and subjectivity are revealed. Attacking or masking the face, according to the text, is an act of identity theft.
What is the difference between the God of philosophers and the God of faith?
The God of philosophers is a logical principle and a necessary being, but often inaccessible. The God of faith is a Person who enters into a relationship of communion, saying "I" to humanity and inviting us to a covenant.
What is desecration in a social context?
Desecration is the active erasure of the sacred and the objectification of the world. It serves to silence conscience, allowing people and spaces to be used solely as tools for consumption.
Is the sacred necessary for the functioning of the community?
Yes, the sacred constitutes the invisible infrastructure of order. Without sacrosanct zones and shared rituals, society loses its ability to build bonds and resolve conflicts.

Related Questions

Tags: The Face of God sacred Roger Scruton Richard Dawkins reductionism transcendence agape Eros profanation person a view from nowhere dignity metaphysics deus absconditus naturalism