A few nights ago, I chatted with one of my nephews about religion.  Long an atheist, he has now come to decide that society needs religion.  Religion, he adds, in a materialistic sense, devoid of any supernatural appendage.  In his mind, religion provides a social fabric, a basis upon which a society can construct a viable sense of itself.

    To accomplish this, he observed, religion posits some type of higher ideal, an ideal that guides and frames social deliberation and exchange.  Like (my words) revelation.

    

    My point is that, despite the efforts of so-called "antifoundationalists" to prove that we do not need any guiding ideal to function rationally, we need a higher vision to make sense of our lives.  I of course argue that this vision is embodied in the words of divine revelation; my nephew, and many others, will contend otherwise.  Either way, we agree that we need a greater compass on our lives.
    

    So whose revelation is right?  All of them?  None of them?  If we strip religion of its supernatural dimensions, we are left with a revelation of ourselves and our ideals, ideals which we and ourselves, and only we and ourselves, assess and judge.  And how do we ultimately know?  It seems that revelation and greater vision are most meaningful if they reflect the vision of a reality out of which this present one comes.