Recently in Personal Category

What's the Point?

           The sentence "This sentence serves no logical purpose" may be viewed from many different perspectives, understood in many different ways to mean many different things. Due however to set parameters, the author will be addressing this sentence from one specific point of view, postmodernism, and based on his understanding of this movement in the history of ideas, will discuss how this sentence illustrates postmodernism.

           In order to orient the reader with some of the subject material of this essay and to begin deconstructing this sentence the author will present a few definitions, beginning with modernism. According to the encyclopedia Britain and the Americas: Culture, Politics, and History "The term 'modernism' encompasses a diversity of artistic and cultural movements that erupted across Europe, found focus in London, and launched the careers of a number of expatriate US artists and writers during the period from 1890 to 1930". Some of more commonly known characteristics of the modernism include, the desire to establish order from chaos, to build a frame in which all things fit, to gain knowledge through reasoning, and to know truth through scientific knowledge. Having defined modernism in this way the author will refer back to this definition later when discussing the sentence. Defining post modernism poses a greater challenge, because "'There is no unified postmodern theory, or even a coherent set of positions'"(qtd. in Best and Keller 2). Postmodernism would not encourage creating an absolute definition, and some would even say there "may be just as many postmodernisms as there are postmodernists" (qtd. in Featherstone 207).  While some of the trademarks of modernism are establishing order, creating systems in which things fit and using a scientific approach to discover truths, postmodernism stands in stark contrast. Commonly accepted trademarks of postmodernism include, but are not limited to, skepticism of things established i.e. truths and authorities, focus on the marginalized, and being a response to advanced consumer capitalism. As is its nature, postmodernism can mean many things and be applied to many disciplines, not all of its meanings though are applicable in the present situation. Those which are, postmodernist skepticism and postmodernism's connection to consumer culture, will be discussed further. Another well known aspect of postmodernism is deconstruction, a term coined by Jacques Derrida, which the author will view in more depth while discussing how the sentence "This sentence serves no logical purpose" illustrates postmodernism.

           Deconstruction, often associated with post-modernism, is a noodle in the bowl of soup that is post-modernism which the author would like to take out and examine in relation to the sentence being examined. Deconstruction, in short, says that no truth or meaning is stable, it is instead always changing, and according to The Columbia Encyclopedia, "meaning includes what is left out of the text or ignored or silenced by it". In relation to the sentence around which this essay is formed, it is difficult for one to determine what or if anything is being left out and how that would affect the meaning of it. With the word "purpose" for example, a definition of which can be "the reason for which something exists or is done, made, used, etc." (dictionary.com) one could easily say the "purpose" of the sentence is to explain that it has no purpose, proving the sentence to be untrue but confirming the truth of the postmodernist philosophy of deconstruction. If then, there is information that was left out of the sentence the author could conclude that the purpose would be made clear with that information included. This conclusion, this statement of purpose of the sentence, could prove entirely unsatisfactory to someone who is an ingrained part the consumerist society that seems to fit right in with postmodernism.

Looking at this sentence as someone who adheres to the parameters of a consumerist society, one may say that the sentence is true, because it does not serve a purpose, in that the reader of the sentence gains nothing from it.  With this take on the sentence, based on Blake's theory, the sentence illustrates postmodernism by offering nothing useful to the consumer in the same way that postmodernism "has nothing positive to offer educational theory" (Cole, Hill, Rikowski, 195). If the author were to look at this sentence as one who adheres to modernism, and stands opposed to postmodernism, the illustration there of would be even clearer.

           As a modernist, one would likely use reason to define the sentence as a paradox. The paradox being, that simply by existing the sentence serves some purpose. As the reader can see, postmodernism opposes all that modernism is, and offers an alternative

           Based on the author's understanding of postmodernism, the focused upon sentence illustrates postmodernism through how it connects to deconstruction, advanced consumer capitalism, and loosely how it opposes modernism.   

While reading through Becker's "What is evidence?" and Woodward's "On Believing What One Reads" I was presented with two fairly different views of history. On the one hand Becker defines history, in its most basic form, as memories of things said and done. He then goes on to illustrate how everyone is technically a historian (or at least goes through the same processes for analyzing history) and thoroughly breaks down what history is how all humans interact with it on a continual basis. On the other hand Woodward focuses primarily on how information found in history is used and abused, how things are twisted to fit agendas, and how history is always changing. Woodward also, towards the end of his article, makes known the "misgivings" he has toward Becker's relativist view of history and discusses the dangers he sees as being associated with it. Because of the differing views the two authors have on history in general and particularly in their articles, they seemed to emphasize different challenges, though it they still face the same challenges.

Despite their differences of opinion in regard to History, Both Becker and Woodward addressed the issue of misconstrued evidence.  The difference comes in with, Becker proposing that misconstruing of information is done unintentionally and results from having faulty information to begin with or memory failure. Whereas Woodward seems to present his information in such a way so as to lead the reader to believe that it is done intentionally to further an agenda. Both

Probably the biggest obstacle Woodward discussed in regard to using evidence to reconstruct the past was how people intentionally misrepresent the evidence to meet their own ends. This, of course, takes place on a daily basis on both large and small scale. In a school yard fight, both sides are going to want to present the information detailing what happened in the fight in such a way as to put themselves in a good light. Also, depending on the audience the way the information is presented and what information is shared changes. When talking to a teacher one boy may claim the other boy started the fight, while the other boy tries to justify his action by accusing the one boy of antagonizing him, both leaving out the fact that it was a fight for pride and neither side would back down until the fight was stopped or one was the clear victor. However, when the boys tell their friends about this past event they will undoubtedly try and make themselves appear as the victor, the "tough guy", neither admitting that they may have just been scarred so as to earn more respect from their friends. On the larger scale, this often takes place in politics. Woodward provides examples of numerous political parties, from Democrats and Republicans to the Progressives and the American Communist Party that claim famous American leaders as one of their own. Another of Woodward's examples is relations between France and the United states. When it suited America's need, they seemed to disregard France's past as being a much more absolute Monarchy than Britain and viewed them only as a powerful ally and used their aid to defeat the British. Yet, some years down the road when what was "good" for America changed, they viewed France as an enemy, conveniently forgetting that fact that France played a key role in British defeat. Becker though, in a sense, lets people in general off the hook, because he proposes that when someone provides false information it is a result of faulty memory or misinformation as opposed to an intentional act intended to help further one's agenda.

A challenge Becker addresses in his article more so than Woodward in his article, is the challenge of sifting through all the stored up information and finding what's relevant. Becker illustrates it by describing all the evidence, all the experiences Mr. Everyman has in his mind and how he subconsciously sifts through it all at some times and deliberately at other times to create a picture of the past. A point Becker makes, that Woodward would most certainly disagree with this that, it is not so important that the picture be accurate as long as it is helpful to Mr. Everyman.

Although different people view and define history in different ways, just as Becker and Woodward, we are all faced with similar challenges when trying to reconstruct the past. They do however, because of these differing views, address these challenges differently and focus on certain ones more than others, as I hope to have displayed in this essay. But, regardless of how one does or does not view history, this fact remains, history will continue growing whether we perceive it correctly or not and every day we are making history affording ourselves and others new opportunities to learn and grow.

Horace Bushnell was born in 1802 and lived until the ripe old age of 74. Bushnell "spent most of his adult life as a pastor of the North Congregational Church in Hartford, Connecticut. He held to the believe that children could "grow steadily in Christian love and did not have to sink deep into sin before a dramatic  conversation experience" (353). "Bushnell saw God's spirit at work in every aspect of both nature and history" (353), and in this reading he lays out his views and explains how "we are to know our callings" (353).  In response to the question "How do I simply live as a Christian?", Bushnell would probably respond with something along the lines of "find where God is calling you, and stay there". And in response to the question "Is my life's work a 'calling' or a 'job' " Bushnell would likely respond by saying it is much more than simply a job, but it is a divinely determined calling.    

Bushnell's argument that everything in creation from a grain of sand, to a star in the sky to man, has a specific purpose and if that purpose is not fulfilled the "nicely balanced" (p.355) system would be thrown off completely, even "One grain, more or less, of sand would disturb, or even fatally disorder the whole scheme of heavenly motions" (p.355). I have trouble completely agreeing with his argument. I mean, it just seems like it would be incredibly difficult to keep everything in its absolutely proper place, unless of course, God predetermines everything that happens (which I from what I read, does not some like something that would be too far out for Bushnell to believe). I agree, that everything, more or less, has an intended purpose, and that when we humans mess with that, there are usually some ill-effects, but I very much doubt that cutting some trees (not to belittle deforestation) is going to through off the whole universe but...I could be wrong. If Bushnell's argument was completely true, it would be a very serious burden.  I suppose I can only speak for myself, but I think there would be a lot of worrying about making sure everything stayed in its proper place, and it would probably come to a point when I decided to either sit somewhere and never leave, or just go about life and not worry about throwing of the balance of the whole universe.

Basically, to try and some up his practical advice for finding one's calling I would say, go to God, look at the strengths you have, seek guidance from those close to you, and again go to God. I would say his advice is somewhat helpful. He seems to view things in a fairly pre-determinist way, saying that everything is absolute, and once one is called to a certain vocation they cannot veer from said vocation. The work I have been doing with my project this year has been work that people who know me well would probably say I am well suited for. It is in the realm of a ministry in which I am interested, and feel that God may be leading me to.    

Richard Baxter lived was a puritan living from 1615 - 1691. Baxter did not believe that the church needed bishops, this belief placed him among the "nonconformists", who were against the established Church of England. He supported the parliamentary forces who fought against the King of England, he later became dissatisfied the parliamentary government. His dissatisfaction caused him to support the return of Charles II as king in 1660. Baxter continued to oppose bishops in the church, thus causing himself to be persecuted by the church and he later supported replacing King James II. In response to the question "To what particular work is God calling me?"based on this excerpt Baxter would most likely have responded saying that God is calling you to wherever the gifts given you by Him are best being used, which would be measured in part by how hard you are working. In regard to the question "How can I serve God through family life?" one the ways Baxter would have responded would be for parents to raise their children well and encourage them to find a calling (which Baxter defines in his writing as a "stated, ordinary course of labor") where their gifts and abilities can best be used and not go into a calling for which they are not adequately equipped.

The whole excerpt was guidelines for how one is to find their calling. I have to say that I was a little troubled by the emphasis Baxter seemed to place on being "obligated" to do things for God. This emphasis was most clearly conveyed for me when Baxter said "Religion is our obligation (emphasis mine) to obey God. God binds us to do all the good we can for others." This bothered me because based on how I understand our relationship with God, we do good works not out of obligation or requirement but simply as a response to what he has done for us. I digress; the guidelines Baxter provides for choosing one's vocation primarily consist of knowing your God given abilities and using them where you might best serve God, those around you, and yourself. One of the ways Baxter proposes one fulfills those requirements is through action. According to Baxter "It is for action God maintains us and our abilities" and he says if we are not taking action but we are instead indulging in slothful behavior, our bodies "will quickly fall into mortal diseases", we will more easily fall into temptation, and "Idleness makes men fools and dullards..." I found one of Baxter's specific examples of the ill-effects of idleness particularly interesting "For want of bodily exercise and labor interposed, abundance of students and sedentary persons fill themselves with disease, and hasten their death, and causelessly blame their hard studies for that which was caused by their bodily sloth..."  In his sixth direction, Baxter specifically addresses the importance of one's calling serving the public good "that calling which is most conduceth to the public good is to be preferred"  and even goes so far as to list the "callings most useful to the public good" some of which were pastors, schoolmasters, physicians, etc. Baxter also alluded to the importance of choosing a calling that best uses one's God given abilities. Finally, following his discussion of finding a calling that best serves the public, Baxter provides a guideline for finding a calling that also best serves oneself. Although it is "next to public good, the soul's advantage must guide your choice." He says if it comes down to choosing between a lawyer and a schoolmaster, one should forgo the financial benefits of being a lawyer for the social and mental benefits of being a schoolmaster.

 All of our projects, are greatly influenced by looking at how we can best serve the public good through fulfilling our calling, the specific example in my project is the summer program I am developing for Kool Klub. In order to develop an effect and beneficial summer program I am having to learn what the needs of community are and take those needs into consideration and use them as may basis for how the summer program will organized. 

Dr. Meyer served Concordia University, St. Paul (Concordia College at the time of her arrival and until 1997) beginning in 1967 and continued to serve for the next 30 years or so. She served the university with the utmost dedication, including holding the positions of Director of Instruction, Dean of Faculty, Vice President for Academic Affairs, and Executive Vice President, "holding several of these positions simultaneously." Dr. Meyer holds two doctorates, one from University of California, Santa Barbara and the other from University of Minnesota and was also educated at Oklahoma State University. She is not only highly educated and capable, but was "Regarded by her students and colleagues with admiration, profound respect, and affection..."

 The main focus of Dr. Meyer's presentation was the integration of faith and learning, and this main theme covered other main points she made throughout the presentation. One of her main points was that Concordia has seen significant change over the past four decades. The changes ranged from logistical things such as the addition of new buildings to spiritual matters based on the decrease of the students getting into Church work. Even with these changes and many, many more the university is still being called to integrate faith and learning. Another main point of her presentation was all the changes to come. In discussing the future, she focused a lot on technology and how it is affecting the way education is done, with online classes for example. She also incorporated the mission statement, emphasizing the importance of staying true to it, and continuing to integrate faith and learning.

Being that the title of her presentation was "Change: Integrating faith and learning" it is easy to see how many connections could be made with the Honors Program in Faith and Learning. One of the points she made was the influence technology has on educating now-a-days. She touched on how many of the technologies today serve not only to connect people, but also to disconnect them. She spoke about online classes and how not having that real, face to face interaction makes a significant difference. In the first semester of Honors this year we addressed a similar issue while reading through "Religion and Cyberspace," though as the title suggests, it was focused mainly on religion as opposed to education.  Some of the points we made during our study of the book, however, are related. One of the topics we addressed was the differences between and difficulties of participating in a virtual worship service versus traditional (and by traditional I mean in-person interaction).  One of the conclusions we came to was that nothing could replace that human, face to face interaction; without it, we can and often do become disconnected from one another, losing that sense of community that should be found amongst Christians. Dr. Meyer also spoke about cultural pressure to go a certain way, and do certain things. This struck me because we have also spent a lot of time discussing vocations and gaining a deeper understanding of what it really means. Certainly we all have different callings, but our callings are where God wants us to be, not where the world thinks we should be going, and I just appreciated when she reminded the audience that accumulation of wealth IS NOT the primary goal, something difficult for people to remember and believe in general, and in particular college students finding themselves steeped in debt. One of the most important connections I made between Dr. Meyer's presentation and the Honors program was Dr. Meyer's main point of integrating faith and learning. Integrating faith and learning is one of the most important parts of the Honors program, it is what makes it what it is. Through her presentation she spoke as if faith and learning are two different things, when we should be viewing them in their true light, as one in the same. This point, I think was made most clearly by Dr. Bunkowske when he stood up and said almost those very words (he is where I really got the idea), and that our faith should be shining through the work we do and the education we have.

De La Cruz was born into hardship and continued to face it throughout her life. She was "born into the most uncompromising of circumstances, the illegitimate daughter of a Spanish soldier in a small town in colonial Mexico." Continuing through her life she continued to face hardships that were seemingly beyond her control. These hardships were primarily due to the conflict that arose between the culture she lived in and her deep passion to learn. She entered a convent because of the socioeconomic status of her family she was without a dowry, therefore without any prospects for marriage. While in the convent she wrote poems plays and essays, which caught the attention and consequently the disapproval of the Archbishop of Mexico. This disapproval led De La Cruz to defend her sense of calling in a letter she sent to her friend the Bishop of Puebla, in 1691. She wrote the letter as if writing to fellow nun, because again the culture restricted her, it was not appropriate for her to write of letter of this type to a man. She was eventually forced into public repentance, silenced and died "a few years later of the plague, contracted when nursing her sick sisters in the convent." Throughout our studies of callings we have concluded that a couple of the fundamental questions for Christians after the reformation (1500-1800) were "To what particular work is God calling me?" and "How can I serve God through family life?". The answer to the first question in De La Cruz's life seems fairly apparent, God was calling her to learn, and through that calling He led here in directions she probably would not have otherwise gone and did many things through her. The second question however, does not seem to pertain as much to De La Cruz's story. She, as was afore mentioned, entered a convent at a young age (I assume she was fairly young, because she was still at marrying age but since she had no dowry she had little choice otherwise) so she did not develop a "typical" family life after she left home. However, if one were consider this as her "family life", the close knit community within the convent, she served God by showing her love and care for her sisters, through serving them, and often putting them before her love of learning.

In following Christ we are presented with many obstacles from the enemy, and De La Cruz was no different. In one section of her letter, she addresses an obstacle we can all relate to, that obstacle being our own selves or more precisely, I think, our old sinful nature. Early on in her letter De La Cruz mentions how not only others but she herself attempted to cause her to "abandon this natural impulse which God has implanted in me", she admits having even prayed to God "to extinguish the light of my mind..."and though she may have been misguided in her prayer, De La Cruz still recognized the importance of behaving in God pleasing ways asking him to leave enough of the "light of her mind" to do so. All these attempts though, were unsuccessful of course, as are all our attempts to fight God or take control, "neither the reprimands or others...nor my own considerations - have succeeded in making me abandon this natural impulse which God has implanted in me." Another obstacle she faced in fulfilling her vocation was simply having to teach herself. She was limited to "a mute book as teacher, an unfeeling inkwell as fellow student..." and instead of instruction and exercises she was faced with completing her daily tasks instead. Later De La Cruz again mentions the obstacles presented by other people in her life. One example she gave that caught my attention in particular was people that have the right intentions but still cause you to stumble "Those must harmful and painful to me are not the persons who have pursued me with open hatred and ill will, but those who, while loving my and wishing me well, have mortified ant tortured me much more than the others...". This was of particular interest to me because it is so easy to see those who apparently impede your pursuit of the your vocation as "out to get you" or just being mean, instead of seeing their good intentions and working with them from there, something I personally have struggled with. The beauty of all these obstacles is that none of them were successful at completely derailing De La Cruz, God just kept guiding her and keeping her going, just like does in our lives, something I am experiencing right now especially in my project.

One of the biggest obstacles I am facing at my project is learning how to get the children's respect. It has been difficult for me to know how far I can or can't go with disciplining the children, even though my on site project supervisor has made it pretty clear, I guess I should just be a little more purposeful with my efforts not just make excuses, be my own obstacle. Another obstacle I am facing, again coming from within myself, is my time management. A lot of the work I am doing for Pastor Raddatz I am doing is outside work, stuff I have to do on my own time, when I'm not at the church. This has proven to be difficult for me because of, one, so many other things going on with classes and everything, two, my often poor time management skills, and three, stressing myself out so much with all that I have to do, that I don't do anything. So in recognizing these obstacles I suppose it would be beneficial for me to do something about them, or realize that there things I can't do anything about and except that and leave it in God's hands, which seems to be what is ultimately what we are supposed to do.

Please feel free to leave comments, whether it be thoughts, agreements/disagreements, questions whatever, and I'm sure my fellow honors students would appreciate them too!