Dowe on Miracles

December 5, 2008 12:31 PM | No Comments


                Dowe devotes a section of his book to the idea of miracles. Miracles are an aspect of religion that really pushes science, due to the fact that when kept separate, the existence of miracles still challenges principles of science. Dowe assesses an argument from an empirical approach that aims to debunk miracles as a basis for believing in God. He also looks to an apologist who seems to find the overlap of where science can be used in favor of religion.

                David Hume is the philosopher Dowe looks to for the argument against rational belief in God. Hume offers the concept of proportioning belief to evidence. Laws of nature are seen as evidence to which result in a full proof. This can only happen when all the evidence is in agreement. When all evidence is not in agreement Hume refers to it as probability. Dowe does not concur with the argument for evidence and is inclined to agree with John Mackie. Mackie through deduction asserts that with the way Hume has defined proof and probability, laws can be asserted which do not turn out to be laws. Dowe suggests further that strong evidence for laws of nature which depend on uniform experience hinge on the extent and representative nature of the experiences (85). Hume also looks at the place of testimony as evidence. Hume's first argument is aptly summarized, "no human testimony can have such force as to prove a miracle" (96).

Hume's second argument (which he never really addressed) deals with the thinking in which the overlap of religion and science occurs. Dowe follows the argument out where Hume did not and plays it to the end. Dowe maintains that when faced with the occurrence of a miracle, Hume would infer to the idea of natural explanation which awaits discovery, over and above inferring to God (97). George Schlesinger provides defense using a scientific method called inference to the best explanation. The inference idea subscribes that which the evidence confirms above the other and to the least complex of two hypotheses. Dowe aligns with Schlesinger's proposition of inference to the best explanation. This seems to be a strong argument for religion.

Dowe's argument for Schlesinger's defensive appears to be well founded. The most compelling aspect of the argument is what Dowe states at the end of the chapter. Dowe insists adamantly that scientists use inference to the best explanation. Reading further in Dowe's book, it is easy to understand what he meant. The chapter on evolution shows that Darwin was really using the same inference to the best explanation with his observations. One of the best ways to find harmony between ideas is to take the method used to produce contrary support and show how it works in favor as well. This ability demonstrates the capacity in which overlap is able to take place. One method of looking at one issue with two answers does not seem logical. The ability to prove one side right over another is no longer available as a consequence. Dowe's point here is not to prove one side correct or incorrect. Dowe argues the harmonious interaction that is possible between religion and science. The interaction is seemingly forced on the issue of miracles. Suggesting that miracles happen creates a crossover into the scientific realm. Meeting the conflict with a thinking that relates to science creates a very sturdy position on which to stand.

The argument Dowe proposes also has implicit weakness. Hume intended to prove there exists no rational belief for the existence of God. While Dowe rises to the argument with the help of Schlesinger, Dowe does not meet Hume head on. The idea of inferring to the best explanation is used by both parties in the argument, but to seemingly different ends. Hume strives to show that there is no rationale for the belief in God through the apportioning of belief to evidence and inferring to the best explanation. The central idea to Hume's thinking is proof. Dowe is not on the path to find proof that God does exist, which places him in an entirely different world. Dowe's point of intersection decays once this is taken into account. The premise of Dowe's argument is harmony of interaction but the interaction is not on the same plane. Dowe looks to best explanation concerning miracles while Hume looks proof of miracles. Dowe does not place emphasis on Hume's being correct which is what Hume stresses most. This was Dowe's main idea, but for the sake of arguing on miracles the argument falls short. Hume has the advantage of setting the stage for the encounter.

Dowe's chapter on miracles is a very thought provoking and confusing chapter. The strength of the argument Dowe proposes seems to have a weakness that dwells within. The issue is not necessarily with the argument that he presents, but at the point that he finds the intersection of the areas of which he is referring, science and religion. Dowe's line of thought may be correct, but the point from which he starts does not coincide which where he ends up. Can the harmony still exist if the point of intersection shifts? 

Jefferson and the Enlightenment

November 17, 2008 9:07 AM | No Comments

The time of the Enlightenment was a time of great thinkers and reason. Great thinkers of this time were making grand suggestions and pushing to move past the traditions that hindered progress. Great thinkers made bold statements, and among those thinkers was Thomas Jefferson. Jefferson authored a powerful document that changed the history of thirteen little colonies into what is now known as the United States of America. The intent of that document, The Declaration of Independence, is clear in the opening line of this document and is a tribute to the thinking of the Enlightenment. Jefferson states," When in the course of Human events, it becomes necessary... to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another."  How the previous sentence and the document itself are a product of the Enlightenment movement will be examined though out this essay.
                In the 6th edition of A Short History of Western Civilization, the essence of the Enlightenment is captured in one sentence, "Enlightenment thinkers argued for reform and change" (469). Jefferson used a key word to open the Declaration of Independence that left no room for doubt: dissolve. Dissolve is a very direct word. There was to be no connection left behind concerning the ties with the British. The main drive in the Enlightenment, as stated earlier, was a desire for progress and a break with the tradition of the time. Jefferson spared no ink while listing the grievances the colonies held against the King of England. The actions of the King were a hindrance, being that the laws were unreasonable and his procedures were not in the best interest of the people. To cite only a few of the many grievances: the King refused to agree to laws that would have established a judicial system and denied what would later be declared a right, which is that of a trial by jury. Reason alone tells one that such actions are of no benefit but to a select few. The use of such reason was another crucial component of the Enlightenment.

                Breaking with tradition was a way to allow progress, but also a means to usher in the use of reason.  Tradition accepts the status quo and does not provide answers when new questions arise that are outside the traditional mold of thought. Harrison, Sullivan, and Sherman advise that reason employs the senses and assesses truth by what can be interpreted from those senses. When it is observed that the current system of government is no longer protecting its citizens but is a destructive force, reason denies tradition. When tradition is denied and reason begins to rely of the senses to establish truth, nature becomes the guiding light. Harrison, Sullivan, and Sherman state as such," Nature is ordered, functions reasonably, and constitutes a standard for judgment." Jefferson turns to nature as he lays the foundation for the Declaration of Independence.

                Deism became popular in the time of the Enlightenment, as the drive to break with tradition flowed into the church. According to the Dictionary of Christianity in America, Deism believed "God revealed himself in nature and through reason." Jefferson talks about laws of nature and self-evident truths, and both ideas fall in line with a Deistic way of thinking. He states that all men are created equal and endowed by their creator with rights: life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. These rights prevail when one uses reason to interpret nature. Life begins in nature and is a process of nature. Without nature life does not exist. God created all life and it roams free. Why should that same liberty not be bestowed on humankind? This may not have been the thinking used when the Declaration of Independence was written. It is an attempt to understand how the thinking may have been used. Reason is the Deist's companion and mentor.  Jefferson appears to have used Deism as guide when founding the principles upon which the United States would be built.

                Three major concepts, reason, nature, and change and progress, were used when the Declaration of Independence was authored, and were embodied in the Enlightenment. These concepts are not to be exclusive of other influences or ideas that may have been considered. In his writing, Thomas Jefferson illustrates clear examples of all three concepts. Progress and change can be seen in many places. The idea of declaring independence, in itself, seeks a change from tradition and a want to move forward. Dissatisfaction with the status quo developed the need for progress away from a system that had failed the colonies. Reason was utilized in assessing the situation of oppression that had fallen upon the people and developed the need for change. The list of grievances against the King demonstrates the reason used in making the decision to become an independent nation. Nature was the foundation of the document Jefferson penned. Deism relied on nature to reveal the self-evident truths, the rights God bestowed upon his creation, which he desires for his creation to enjoy. The government Jefferson describes, and the Declaration of Independence as a whole is a product of the Enlightenment and the way of thinking that came out in that time. 

October 27, 2008 8:57 PM | No Comments
Often times the phrase, 'the world as we know it is coming to an end' is spoken in a sarcastic or light-hearted manor. When one steps back and looks at what is being said, the implications of an innocent phrase for invoking thought are realized. The way a person knows the world is limited to what they are exposed to and how are taught, frequently by example, to analyze the world. Many people hear of the Israeli-Palestinian war and may think it foolish to be fighting over such a small area of land, because one group believes it is their right to live there. The question to ask is how the Israelites view the world they live in and how do they define themselves historically. What they know to be true has a great influence on what is going on in the present time. When a person limits themselves to a particular way of knowing, or what they were exposed to by circumstance alone, they will be looking at the sunset through a pinhole and miss the landscape that its compliment. The ways of knowing open the mind to better understand the world.

The ways of knowing, as they are laid out in the course, are: Aesthetics - the academic way of knowing, emotions - sadness, anger or love, science - the empirical or testable way of knowing, reason - employing math and the facilities of the mind, and revelation - knowledge from and outside source given to mankind. When evaluation each way of knowing there are basic or primary truths that must be establish before any discussion can take place. The fact of existence must be present. If human kind does not exist then there are not truths. The principle of non-contradiction and the ability of the mind to know truth are also essential. Contradiction makes truth a difficult idea to establish, and without an ability to know truth, there exist no reason to attempt to know truth.

There are tests that are used in identifying truth along with the three criteria stated earlier. Authority considers the source from which the truth came, such as a king. Coherence corresponds with reality. Consensus gentium is a group belief or majority rule. Consistency holds to a basis in reality. Rocks do not walk and socks do not talk on their own. Correspondence relies on evidence and custom relies on the traditions of a culture. These are some examples of the tests that are used to examine truth.

Looking at how the five areas interact with each other and the different ways that can take place, one specific way stands out. The idea of interpenetrating magisteria defines how this writer looks at the world. The aesthetic way of knowing is important, if only by designation of the state, but this in itself is a truth. It comes out of the test of consensus gentium. It has been decided by the whole that having an education is important, it is therefore important to have an education. To know purely by the aesthetic way of knowing makes one learned, but application of the knowledge to something more is limited. Linked with emotion academics become a passion and a way of betterment. By denying these five areas interaction, the risk of narrowing the mind is great. Giving greater preference to one of the five over the others opens the mind to a degree. The area of preference is drawing from the other area but in a limited fashion. Different ways of knowing are still taking preference. By looking at each way as a core which tapers off, one is able to know truth in each area but use those truths to explore other truths in a deeper manor. Art is an expression closely linked to the aesthetic way of knowing. Limiting art to the aesthetic diminishes the potential that exists. Art can portrait reason or revelation. The truths that exist in reason or revelation may remain hidden until they are expressed in a way that exists outside of them.

It is also dangerous to interpenetrate ways of knowing but still by far, from this author' experience, the best way of interrelating. One area that many are familiar with is revelation and science. The battle for greatness, one over the other is constant. This is one major reason for not overlapping ways of knowing. On the other hand, leaving them separate destroys any chance of the two complimenting one another. Emotion and reason are two other ways of knowing that do not always exist in harmony, save interpenetration. Reason is the voice of wisdom to emotion in many situations. One cannot exist as a superior to the other because situations arise where one is needed more than the other. 

In revelation a key assumption is the authority of the bible. Without the inerrant word of God, revelation or using religion as a way of knowing does not stand. The assumption of revelation is a valid one when taken in context. This could be seen as a weakness if one is using another way of knowing to analyze, or overlapping ways.  The strength of revelation is that it has such a base of support. God speaks through his prophets, the inerrant word that is at the heart of revelation. The assumption, which Thomas Aquinas would say is inappropriate to say of God, is that God is real and that what he says is truth. The weakness that exists is that once God is taken away, revelation has no base. Science says there is no evidence and reason says there is no logical reason to believe any of the things that are written, all because of lacking evidence. The context of revelation is faith. In the realm of faith revelation's assumptions make sense (to appeal to reason).

In Aesthetics some assumptions are that knowledge reigns supreme and knowledge is power. The assumptions are valid but in a cultural context.  The strength of these assumptions is that in a society that is driven by success and personal gain they are both true. The person with the knowledge and power to use it has the world on a string. The weakness once again is context. Look at a culture where the most successful people are the ones that survive. The amount of stuff that one knows is not to be comparable to the skills needed to survive. Academic knowledge is not empowering if someone cannot catch a fish or kill a deer. A CEO provides for a family with an income by which the knowledge provides the job. One is not better than the other and the weakness of the assumption that knowledge is supreme is exposed. 

Emotion might look at the painting and be drawn to the child in the center. The artist appears to have made great effort to draw attention here as he has placed the child in the center and left the background with a darker feel while the child is very bright in contrast. The setting is out doors which would give and open and freeing feeling. This might be associated with happiness and not being bound by walls or other boundaries. Looking at the child's face one gets the sense of wonder and what the child is looking toward. That wonder could lead to a feeling of innocence which is embodied by the child. The nude nature of the child along with the setting of the open plains would further this interpretation. At the same time, the large shrub limits the open view that exists and creates a dark-feeling presence. This could allude to some kind of danger that threatens the innocence of the child. This in turn could create a feeling of pity that the innocence of the child could be taken away. The presence of the older female figure places a barrier between the child and the dark presence. Emotion could see the message of the painting as keeping the innocence of a child while the threat of destroying it always exists.

 

Revelation would see the message in a far different light. The Child is still the focus. The light which contrasts the dark is a biblical metaphor for good and evil. The fruit in the hand of the older adult figure might be interpreted as the fruit from the fall of mankind. The captivation of the child is highlighted by the bright light in the picture and this light could merely be the sun or perhaps a biblical reference to purity. White is cited in different ways one being sins washed clean and becoming whiter than snow. The fruits presence might draw the fall into the focus when using revelation as a way of knowing. The white innocence might suggest the forgiveness of sin while the darkness or evil always is near. The adult figure also may act as a barrier similarly to emotion.

The Christian religion has been a great influence on perspective. The reformation and Martin Luther's 95 Theses are of the greatest influence. The morals that have come out of the Christian tradition create a framework for a person to light a right life. This framework has been taken to heart and guides the thought and actions of the individual that is in adherence. Without the guidance that faith has provided life would be very different. Christianity's influence is critical in perspective, especially concerning the critical issues that face the world today. This is a very western view which was amplified in the time of the reformation. Martin's accusations of the church at the time, sparked reform that still has influence today.
Independence is an American right, drawn into the constitution to ensure that it continues to exist. Growing up under that influence holds great shaping power. The desire to grow up and move out is greatly stressed and this too has its origin in the reformation. The founding colonies wished to escape religious persecution which has its roots in the reformation. The breaking away from the Catholic church added fuel to future action. This escape could be likened to a teen's desire to escape the authority of a parent which has been felt by this author. Independence and the stress that it sees in America is almost inevitable. The inevitability of certain situations, as they appear in opinion, also affect the perspectives of the writer in a severe fashion.
  The feminist movement has been another great influence, but in a way that may not be traditionally thought. The movement could be most closely linked to the age of reason and enlightenment. Females are indeed endowed with the right to be equal, but at the same time the roles of male and female are falling apart. This has influenced many choices, including that of a spouse. God created Eve as a helpmeet to Adam and that traditional perspective fell apart in the feminist movement. Women started to take the spot at the head of the family as the 'bread winner'. The collapse of traditional roles pushes this writer to a more traditional perspective on a daily basis.

All three examples draw on the cores of more than one way of knowing. At the center of two is revelation. Religious bias is a factor to be considered when reading this essay. But in light of the bias, other ways of knowing are not denied, but indeed embraced. Reason and emotion are very present. The third example takes to heart both reason and emotion while penetrating into revelation. All five ways of knowing should be considered as supreme within their respective area, but as an equal in its ability to contribute to the others. 

Using more than one way of knowing, and keeping each in mind while considering the other, is the best way of looking at the world. Each way has a different approach and can provide unique perspectives that are not possible in other ways of knowing. Assumptions asserted in each way of knowing bring with them both advantages and pitfalls which are to be considered. When looking at ways of knowing, understanding the context of which an individual lives, brings greater opportunity to understand perspectives that are held. The context a person grows up in is most often limiting, creating a tunnel vision effect that limits the ability of the mind. The ways of knowing when used together, not superior to each other, help an individual to better assess the world around them.
d refZ tagXWas influence today.
Independence is an American right, drawn into the constitution to ensure that it continues to exist. Growing up under that influence holds great shaping power. The desire to grow up and move out is greatly stressed and this too has its origin in the reformation. The founding colonies wished to escape religious persecution which has its roots in the reformation. The breaking away from the Catholic church added fuel to future action. This escape could be likened to a teen's desire to escape the authority of a parent which has been felt by this author. Independence and the stress that it sees in America is almost inevitable. The inevitability of certain situations, as they appear in opinion, also affect the perspectives of the writer in a severe fashion.
  The feminist movement has been another great influence, but in a way that may not be traditionally thought. The movement could be most closely linked to the age of reason and enlightenment. Females are indeed endowed with the right to be equal, but at the same time the roles of male and female are falling apart. This has influenced many choices, including that of a spouse. God created Eve as a helpmeet to Adam and that traditional perspective fell apart in the feminist movement. Women started to take the spot at the head of the family as the 'bread winner'. The collapse of traditional roles pushes this writer to a more traditional perspective on a daily basis. All three examples draw on the cores of more than one way of knowing. At the center of two is revelation. Religious bias is a factor to be considered when reading this essay. But in light of the bias, other ways of knowing are not denied, but indeed embraced. Reason and emotion are very present. The third example takes to heart both reason and emotion while penetrating into revelation. All five ways of knowing should be considered as supreme within their respective area, but as an equal in its ability to contribute to the others. 

Thomas Aquinus

October 15, 2008 6:54 PM | No Comments

                Thomas Aquinas does not attempt to hide the fact that the first principle of truth, the principle of non-contradiction, and the first condition, the ability of the mind to know the truth, are an integral part of his thinking. This is very apparent in his seventh chapter of Summa Contras Gentiles. He addresses the issue of truth as it deals with reason and the Christian Faith.  Opening the section, the foundation of his argument is laid out in his first sentence stating that because Christian faith surpasses the ability of human reason, things that are instilled naturally in human reason cannot be opposed to this truth.  Right away, the principle of non-contradiction is brought out and used to amplify the truth he is discussing. Thomas demonstrates the first principle and the first condition throughout the rest of the section. The first principle is followed by the use of the first condition in the next few sentences.

Thomas states, "For it is clear that those things that are implanted in reason by nature, are most true ...that it is impossible to think them false." He goes on to declare that it is not right to say faith is false because it is confirmed by God. The mind is able to know truth through those things that are naturally instilled in human reason, because it cannot contradict the truth of Christian faith which is confirmed by God. Thomas says at the end of the paragraph that by looking at the definitions of the two, it is not possible for the truth of faith to contradict the principles which the mind knows naturally. The idea of Christian faith may not always be readily understandable to the human mind by means of reason, but understanding is achievable because the principles instilled in natural reason cannot contradict those of faith.

"God is the author of our nature" Aquinas proclaims in the middle of the second paragraph. It is very appropriate for such a statement to follow a somewhat difficult paragraph. Since God is the author of nature, the principles of natural reason are also apart of the divine Wisdom from which they came. Thomas states soon after, "whatever is contrary to these principles, is contrary to the divine Wisdom; wherefore it cannot be from God."  The logic follows that natural knowledge and faith do not contradict one another, the first principle, because both come from God. Divine revelation is the source of faith, and divine creation gives natural knowledge which is the spring of human reason. The first condition also finds a means here. Aquinas speaks of the disciple's mind which receives the knowledge of its teacher. This is not the case if the teacher is insincere or teaches falsely, which would not be of God. The fact that the human mind can recognize a contradiction spoken by a teacher, knowing that it is not a truth shows the minds ability to know truth. Aquinas's use here clearly demonstrates the first principle.

Following the manifestation of the first condition and first principle is more support which firmly establishes the evidence presented. Those things which are contradictory, Aquinas says, are a stumbling block for human intellect. If God had instilled knowledge that was conflicting, the truth would be unattainable. "This cannot be ascribed to God" Aquinas affirms, leaving no doubt to the certainty of the truth that is being voiced. He also addresses the idea of contrary opinions. It was established that the teachings that are contrary to God, which would not be of God, are not held where divine Wisdom is present. The same follows of opinions that are in the same subject but contrasting. Knowledge is of God and God would not instill any opinion that is contrary to natural knowledge. The evidence originally presented makes case enough to hold fast the principle and condition that Aquinas uses to support the inability of reason and faith to contradict one another. What he follows with only makes the reader more confident in what he has to say.

Thomas Aquinas makes a great effort to support the idea that faith and reason do not have to be dissonant; as the world would readily see them. He shows, by way of the mind's ability to know truth and the principle of non-contradiction that reason and faith really work well together because they both originate from the same source: God. There exists no contradiction due to the commonality of the source and the mind is able to understand the truth by way of faith which is confirmed by God and not in opposition of reason which is from God. 

A Brave and Startling Truth

September 29, 2008 7:56 PM | No Comments

          After reading Maya Angelou's poem, I quickly recall the intense discussion that took place on Wright's book Simply Christian. Wright addressed the issues concerning different ideas of heaven, of which he shared and enlighteningly new way to look at heaven. I believe that the brave and startling truth referred to in the poem is the intersection between heaven and earth, that life after life after death that Wright wrote about.  There are key phrases used by Angelou that leads me to this belief.

Wright spoke of echoes of voices that served as sign posts to something greater than us. The beauty of the earth and how we long for it, a yearning for justice, a desire for spirituality, and the overall need for relationship are all sign posts Wright discussed. Angelou writes in the fourth line of the poem, "To a destination where all signs tell us, it is possible and imperative that we learn, a brave and startling truth." This more than any sentence encouraged my belief of what the startling truth entails. Farther on she emphasizes the beauty of the earth and what is to come, which will be far greater than what we can comprehend in the present, "Not the sacred peak of Mount Fuji stretching to the Rising Sun. Neither the Father Amazon nor Mother Mississippi, who, without favor Nurture all creatures in the depths and on the shores. These are not the only wonders of the world, when we come to it."

We discussed in class that the intersection between heaven and earth and the renewing that it will undergo when Christ returns. It is argued that it is not important to preserve the earth since God will make all things new when life after life after death begins. We are called to be good steward of the gifts we are given and the beauty of the earth with which we have been so blessed. Angelou's poem has a single line in it, which to me, gets to the heart of good stewardship in anticipation of the second coming. "...abide cankerous words which challenge our very existence. Yet out of those same mouths come songs of such exquisite sweetness, that the heart falters in its labors..." We are sinners and saints all at once. We strive to do that which would please God, caring for the earth, yet we are unable to do so and our hearts falter.

The correlation to Wright and Angelou is an enlightening one. I believe that this correlation would not have been so evident had I not been equipped to examine the arts like we have been doing. Angelou may not have been portraying Wrights insight of what heaven will be like, but for me, she embodied what I read in Wright. The message of hope and that brave and startling truth is clear when using to two writers to look at one another.

A Post-Modern Writing

September 29, 2008 7:54 PM | No Comments

The suggestion that something has no logical purpose causes a person to pause and rethink what was just said. Rethinking the issue only causes more confusion which leads to frustration. The mind is flooded with so many thoughts and ideas that it is really difficult to pick words out which justly represent what needs to be said. Provided the statement, "This sentence serves no logical purpose", there are many problems that exist when it is examined. Although there are problems that exist, it very efficiently demonstrates the ideology of its source. Postmodernism could almost be defined by such a statement. Postmodernist would not tie themselves to any word or sentence that is definable because being defined would imply a truth. Absolute truth has no place in the post modern realm. Postmodernism aims at deconstructing present ideas and thought (one might call them norms) by introducing the idea that there are no truths. Truth becomes a subjective proposition and takes away any ground for conversation about truth away. The postmodern idea that a sentence could have no logical meaning is flawed, and through these flaws the sentence is suitable as an illustration for the topic.
                At the heart of postmodernity is a sense of irony. Writing a sentence with no purpose and then stating it, is self-defeating. An author puts a pen to paper with intent of some kind. The end result of whatever is written will achieve some kind of purpose, whether it was the intended purpose or not. The sentence in question serves a logical purpose simply by existing. It provokes thought about the idea of having no purpose. An essay is being written about the lack of purpose which the sentence is supposed to possess. The irony of making a statement of having no purpose is that purpose is indeed achieved once it is read. An individual now knows that the sentence was written to have no logical purpose. The irony of such a statement not only confounds the mind but is a true testament to postmodern thought.

                It has been established that truth and postmodernism do not have anything in common. The statement of something lacking logical purpose aligns with postmodern thought but clashes with postmodern ideology by creating a truth when it is stated. Truth is established by the way the sentence is worded. To say that "this sentence has no logical purpose" would in fact create a truth if it were correct.  If the statement can be proven to be incorrect, the particular truth of correctness is not established, but the truth that it is not correct has been. Rejecting modern thoughts and attempting to break the mold could be accomplished by such a statement "this sentence serves no logical purpose", but breaking one mold opens the way to another mold. The sentence is a trap to the postmodern thinker.

                The modern way of thinking has a well-established hierarchy whether it is in government, the general work force, or day to day interactions. The overarching idea of a hierarchy is that of authority. Authority establishes boundaries and limits to help keep order. Postmodernism discards any kind of hierarchy which sets each individual on an equal plane. Authority no longer exists when each individual has no greater say or importance than another. A problem arises when this idea of no authority and the sentence "this sentence serves no logical purpose" are considered together. Authority is implied in the statement when it is read. It is not open to suggestion but rather a statement of no purpose. This is authority, which keeps with the tradition of modern thinking, but demonstrates the postmodern push to reject that which makes sense by attempting to make non-sense statements that destroy truth.

                 Postmodernism takes that which is modern and adopts the opposing view. To make a statement without any purpose would be a postmodern way to reject modern ideas. "This sentence serves no logical purpose" embodies ideas of postmodernism but demonstrates some of them by going against postmodern thought. The irony expressed in such a statement is without equal. Postmodernism seeks to avoid definition, but finds no way to do so with such a sardonic statement.  Truth is denied as an absolute but is established when making a statement of irony like the one being considered. The greater theme, establishing that there are no absolute truths, does just as it would not want to by establishing a truth. Authority, like absolute truth, is done away with by postmodern but in a similar fashion fails at the hands of the principles it would uphold. As postmodernism becomes more of a norm by slowly undermining modernism, or the present norm, could something that goes against postmodern thought be postmodern? It would seem that since postmodernism embodies everything and nothing all at once, this could be an eventual happening. 

Music Story

September 18, 2008 9:05 AM | No Comments

A young man wakes from his peaceful slumber, the sun light teases his eyes awake. The troubles of yesterday are gone. He looks to find his fair maiden, but she is nowhere to be found. This is not uncommon for her to be up as she works in the garden while the dew is still on the ground. This morning had a slightly different feel to it for which the young man cannot quite nail down. He goes to the window to find his love expecting to see her but alas she is not in the garden. His heart only flutters slightly for there are many other places she could be.

Dressing, he comes down from his chambers with a mission in mind; he only wishes to see his love. He searches the interior of the house, expecting not to find her but maybe some clue as to her whereabouts. Entering the living room, he notices that something is not right; everything is in its place. The living room, being the most lived in space, it is never clean. As he investigates further, he discovers a slight drop of something on the floor. As he bends down closer to see what it is, he realizes it is merely a drop of water from the plant nearby. His beloved had been up early tending to the other chores inside the house.

He heads outside to see what he might find.  To his surprise the shed is open and there are blood drips which lead from the shed and away from the house. The man is enraged. Someone has certainly injured his love and taken her away. He is certain that this has been done by those who wish to destroy his happiness and joy.  He jumps on his steed and darts off into the nearby forest where the blood trickles lead.

The man's head is filled with speculation and hatred. Fear for the safety of his bride and revenge mix into a whirlwind of emotions. He rides on faster and faster as the trail begins to fade off and he comes to a fork in the road. A rash decision must be made as he takes the right fork at unsafe speeds. He knows that this is the road which leads to despair and that down this road is where his destiny awaits him.  

Staring at the Sun

September 12, 2008 4:52 PM | No Comments
It is interesting that Wright would use such a phrase as "staring at the sun" to describe doing theology. At the very surface one could easily conclude from the phrase that theology should be avoided at all cost; it's bad for you.  From further analysis it is clear that Wright by no means had this as an intended outcome, but rather to inspire thought while one compares staring at the sun to theology. This section of the book does, however, reveal that the metaphor is both a successful aid and an albatross to his idea. What follows is one insight into how these coexist in Wright's book.
                The contemporary world is caught up in its own reasoning skills. An idea that isn't very straight forward must require the intervention from the great minds of the day. Religious ideas should not be subjected to such scrutiny. By their very nature they surpass human reason. Humans wish not to accept that fact and push the issue to its limit. Authors such as Richard Dawkins would like to suggest that religion is irrational, a delusion created by humans to fill the gaps where an explanation is lacking. For those people who might latch on to Dawkins' type of thinking, or even the most basic thereof, Wright brings in metaphoric language an appeal to that want for reason.  Ideas that are hard to grasp become much easier when brought to a level that is understandable. Staring at the sun is a metaphor that all can relate to, and if not, they can easily look in the sky and gain understanding quickly.
               The metaphor in question is helpful in a number of ways. There are two examples that come to mind that help bring understanding to ideas that are particularly difficult to grasp in Christian theology.  Wright states, "That's what many theological traditions have explored as the very heart of God's own being, the love which continually passes between Father, Son, and Spirit." (139). The belief in the Trinity ranks among the most difficult to comprehend. For Christians, the existence of the Trinity is like that of looking at the sun.  The sun is there. Looking at it is painful so people refrain from doing it, but that does not take away from its existence. The same applies to the Trinity. Although it remains unseen, the affects are seen in the lives of many all over the world. God's hand is at work, even if He remains unseen.  "Can we trust the Gospels?" (95). Wright raises this question, and the metaphor, very similar to the pervious example, can be applied. God works through the Gospels, speaking to his people each time His word is read. Looking directly at the source not much can be seen, similar to looking at the sun. Avoiding direct contact, the sun still shines and keeps the earth warm. The Gospel inspires good works with the proclamation of salvation from Christ's death on the cross. These good deeds shine like the warmth of the sun. Wright's metaphor shows how easy trusting the Gospels really is, like looking outside each day.
               Even though Wright's metaphor is useful, there are still some problems that lie within. He talks about the many exiles and homecomings of God's people into the Promised Land and being delivered from the hands of the wicked.  "It wasn't (to put it mildly) as straightforward as it might have been... There, too, things went both well and badly, as other local tribes ruled over them and other liberators rose up to set them free."(77). Here, Wright's metaphor takes on a slightly different tone. Staring at the sun can have a somewhat dazing affect on a person, and it would seem here so might theology. Wright points out in the quotation above what some might see as absurd. People from outside Christianity could see the theology as coming from staring at the sun too long. Deliverance from this world of sin is promised in the second coming of Christ: It was short lived before, what makes now any different? This metaphor in different contexts can be a wonderful insight to Christianity or a massive pitfall. Subjectivity makes this section of the book a double-edged sword (metaphorically speaking).  Many after reading about theology may be afraid to open their eyes, much less look toward the sun.  Another quote that points to the problem follows: "To grasp this is to see why the Spirit is given in the first place, and indeed who the Spirit is."(125). Understanding one difficult concept seems to require the understanding of another difficult concept.  If the metaphor itself does not cause issues for some readers, the ideas themselves will accomplish the task.
               This writer would not be so inclined to look more deeply at the Christian theology. Without having grown up in the church seeing God truly at work, it would be difficult to contemplate Wright's book. The title of the book implies one thing, but the material is not that simple.  Metaphors are great for bringing understanding, once a basic knowledge of theology and doctrine has been established.

Poehler Lecture

April 15, 2008 11:41 PM | No Comments

I was captured right away when the announcement was made that Dr. Wentzel was at one time involved at my old high school in more that one way. Connections like that, even when they are 40 some years difference, are very strong. The LCMS world gets smaller and smaller everyday.

The liberal arts mission captured my attention in light of the projects that we just completed. Self-examination and the search for truth were outlined as the main objective which fit very well with my project. One bullet point was the idea to 'free one of misconceptions'. This was the whole basis of my project. He spoke of fostering the joy in the learning process. By the project being so personal I took joy in the process of change and discovery; be that is was difficult at times.

The theme of change and direct confrontation were very apparent. I have been more challenged in my college career than I could have imagined. By that challenging of looking at other views and having to defend my own, the change is not a shift of ideas but rather a solidification thereof. I am a more confident and established person from the challenges that this year has brought and I suspect more change in the years to come.

WEEK 14

March 16, 2008 10:00 PM | No Comments

This was essentially the last week of my project. I wrote up my chapter seven and made it out to one last powwow. This week was really busy with school and work period so I did not get the chance to meet with my supervisor. Ill meet her on Monday and get things wrapped up. I have an interview that will not happen until after the project is officially done but I want to do it just for my personal sack. I feel this will be the capstone to a very successful project. I discussed my chance in attitude and how great it has been last week and I cannot emphasis it enough. I still have trouble, even this weekend proved to be a challenge. The way I handle things is dramatically different and that is what the overall goal was. The hard work and many hours put into the project paid off far more than I could have imagined. I hope that I can impact the world on even the smallest level through this project and my own actions from this point forth.

Archives