Brian Weyers

Brian Weyers

Directed Writing 6

                Galileo, Darwin, and Hawking by Phil Dowe is an amazing book.  It is filled with powerful examples of how religion and science interact agree with one another in many cases.  He takes the reader through the main ideas of science that really contradict what religion tends to say and digs deep into them to show what they really say.  After he has done that he goes on to explain the opposite belief and then connects the two with stunning bonds that seem so simple yet vastly intercalate at the same time.  This author will take the more difficult idea of God and chance and explore as to what Dowe was thinking.  After that is made clear the strengths and weaknesses of how he connects the two will be examined.    

Dowe takes on the extremely difficult idea of God and chance.  The rational worldview is that of most theologians.   It states that God is in control of the universe.  This is called providence.  There are three basic ways in which providence works.  The first is that God is the necessary cause of every event and aspect.  This means that without God no event would ever happen.  The second claim is God is the sufficient cause of everything.  This idea implies that if B needs A to happen then if A occurs B will as well.  It is sufficient because there might be other ways that ensure B happening.  The third way is that God is the complete reason for every event.  Boiled down this statement tells us that God has a specific reason for every event that happens.  The chance worldview, the opposite of the rational worldview, is what is most commonly accepted by the scientific community.  This idea is basically that they world people live in is in chaos all the time.  When it is developing moment by moment, some of those moments are completely up to chance.  In even more simpler terms the world does not know where it is going next.  He goes on further to explain each of these coming to a very important conclusion.  If chance exists then God does not and if God exists than chance does not.  With further reading we find the Dowe goes on to explain how Bell's theorem proves God.  The first premise of this is that everything has a sufficient cause.  The next is that there some events which do not have a sufficient physical cause, therefore something else, God, must have caused them.  He finishes by saying that if there is no chance then God is proved and if there is chance then God controls the meaningful parts as proved by Bell's theorem. 

                In Dowe's argument there are many strengths and weaknesses.  The weaknesses are few but very crucial.  Many concepts and ideas expressed by Dowe are speculative and dependent.  They are quite broad and cover a large grey area instead of being black and white.  Some sections of his argument are left up to "chance", if you will, and can go either way.  He does not have a complete 100% way to prove his argument for the simple fact that he cannot prove that God exists.  If that detail was settled then the rest of the debate would be over and could be settled straight away.  In contrast to that there are many strengths to this argument that Dowe offers.  The first is that he uses logic that can be understood by your everyday person.  He takes complicated principles in science and applies them to everyday knowledge and thus creates a book where the incredible intellectual can understand as well as your average everyday human being.  Dowe also takes scientific knowledge and uses it to prove a very theological argument which is a like the final touchdown in the Super Bowl.  He takes a study that is generally thought to be the rational and logical way of thinking, and used it to prove another study that is thought to be based on faith and fairy tales.  Overall it is this author's opinion that Dowe has given a very solid and genuine argument.  It can be put up as a place where Theology and Science do in fact coincide and work together.  Dowe is able to take two studies and mold them together where it seemed impossible to do so. 

                In conclusion the works of Dowe are explored through looking at what he says and then taking it deeper and indentifying the strengths and weaknesses of it.  The idea of chance and God has been debated and disputed throughout history and probably will continue in that same manner.  There is no definite way to prove how God interacts with the idea of chance because there is no possible way to prove God exists in our world right now.  That is the key concept needed in order to finish Dowe's argument.  However without that he does an excellent Job to illustrate his points and make them understandable.  That is the what makes Dowe so intelligent.  He takes very complicated theorems  and principles and makes them understandable and relatable.  Dowe is a genius in our own time and is bale to share that vast knowledge with the rest of the world.                                    

Directed Writing 5

The Enlightenment was an Era of a thinking in which the old ways thought of to be true were challenged.  The traditions and beliefs of the past were not superior by definition but had to be reasoned out and examined.  The Declaration of Independence is a piece of work that is strewn with Enlightenment thoughts.  In this work there are traces of the concepts of Reason, Nature, Progress and Change, and Deism.   

Reason is the main concept behind the Age of Reason or Enlightenment.  The idea of reason is very prevalent in the Declaration of Independence.  The whole point of the Declaration of Independence was to show that the Colonies wished to break away from the British Empire, and the reasons for this course of action.  Looking the Reason of this is extremely interesting how much this document was influenced by the Enlightenment.  The opening words in the Declaration of the Independence is that of how when a Nation's Government begins to look beyond the people it is there to serve, and only interested in its own gain. That is the time when the citizens use their reason and realize that they need to break away and fix the problem emerging. 

                The idea of Nature in the Enlightenment era was that it was a standard of Judgment since Nature functions reasonably.  That is why the people of the Enlightenment period saw a shift toward nature as the way to true Enlightenment.  Thomas Jefferson uses the concept of Nature being a perfect existence before humans to say that this is a shift to a better idea than that of being under a King.  Nature dictates that people govern themselves in a fair and just way.  With a King true justice can never be attained for there is only one who decides everything.  Also it can never be fair in any way since only one voice is heard and listened to. "...the separate and equal Station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God entitle them..." (Declaration of Independence). 

                The third concept of the Enlightenment is a pair that goes hand in hand.  They are Change and progress.  The belief was that in this time most changes were made to decided upon because they would progress the society that the change was occurring to.  There was no longer this belief that tradition was correct merely because it was the way things had been.  The people of this era began to look at what they were taught and examine it for validity and not accept it blindly because it was tradition or the way things have always been.  This is personified in the Declaration of Independence by the simple fact that they are changing the form of government they currently have and progressing to a new and better way. 

                       The last category of the age of Enlightenment that is also seen in the Declaratoin of independence is that of Deism.  Deism is a religion in which it is believed that everyone has the capability to know the universe's creator through their own reason.  Thomas Jefferson clearly states in the Declaration of Independence that everyone is given non-refundable rights as humans and creations of the God of Nature.  Now since he defined God as the God of nature we can see how they thought of God.  Since they believed nature to be an unchangeable standard to judge all else they look at the creator of this the same way.  God is someone who understandable by reason and a standard for living life.  In that way they discern that he has given them reason to judge what is fair and just for his creations on earth.  They no longer believe in idea that the Dictator is chosen by God.  For if God had chosen them, they would not treat their fellow brothers and sisters with such malice that is seen in most Dictators with absolute power.

                  When the Declaration of Independence is looked at in detail the concepts that drove the Enlightenment movement are very present.  The basic ideas of Reason, the way in which Nature works, the process of Change and Progress, and the belief of Deism are all there inside.  Thomas Jefferson, and many other Founding Fathers, were devote believers in the Enlightenment and its principles.  In that particular time these concepts were the thinking and made perfect sense to the people of this time.  The ideas particularly made sense to a group of people who were breaking off from a Monarchy that was arguably the most powerful at the time.  The Enlightenment brought on many new ideas and concepts and possibly the very country that is now the Superpower of the Modern World.     

Works Cited

Declaration of Independence, 1st Cong. (Thomas Jefferson 1776).

Knopf, Alfred A. A Short History of Western Civilizaton. 6th ed. New York, NY, 1985. Moore, Rebecca. Vocies of Christianity. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill, 2006. 1-477.

Directed Writing 4

Thomas Aquinas lived from 1225 to 1274.  He was an Italian Priest in the Dominican order.  Also he was a philosopher and theologian in his time.  While he lived he wrote many works that have been very influential to the study of religion and its meaning.  One such work is Summa Contra Gentiles.  This is the work that this author will be focusing exclusively.  Even more specific with this work the main focus will be chapter seven of this particular work.  In this work he talks about reason as related to Divine wisdom.  When looking at this particular chapter it is interesting to note the conclusions that he comes to.  They are very basic and build upon one another.  This being the case the individual can take the First Principle "There can be no contradiction in truth" and First Condition "the ability of the mind to understand truth" and apply them as to how he uses them in his work.  It is quite evident and straightforward as to how he does that.  With that being said a person can go in depth and learn as to what Aquinas is trying to say.

When looking at the First Principle "There can be no contradiction in truth" and applying it Thomas Aquinas' work it is very evident throughout.  Aquinas points out that ideas and concepts that are instilled naturally in human reason cannot be false.  They are ideas and concepts that we cannot prove wrong because they can never be untrue.  He then goes on to talk about Faith and the truth of that.  Aquinas states that since Faith is confirmed by God it cannot be untrue.  Also if God created all then he most definitely created human reason and nature along with the Faith in Him and confirmations of that said Faith.  In that case it is logical to assume, since God did indeed create both Faith and reason that they should coincide together and not contradict.  He goes on to say that the naturally known principles are instilled in humans.  Looking at that there is then the case of divine wisdom which God also created.  Since He is the author of both of these, then they must coincide and not contradict each other.  In that way the reason that humans have been instilled with, by God, must coincide with Faith, that God had confirmed through divine Wisdom, in that God has created them both.  God being an all powerful and the creator of all that is does not contradict himself in anything that he does and therefore is no contradiction in natural reason and Faith.  So by taking the First Principle mentioned before and applying it to Aquinas' work humans can find that Faith and reason are indeed in harmony with each other. 

                Tackling the First Condition "the ability of the mind to understand truth" is a bit trickier.  Aquinas does tell us that parts of divine wisdom do surpass human knowledge but that is not because it is not true or contradicts reason.  God only gave humans reason that could understand certain principles of God and his being.  Taking those aside Aquinas tells us that most ideas and concepts in Faith are understandable because God instilled them in people and created reason.  Along with that be created in humans the ability to understand reason as long as certain parts of divine wisdom.  There are parts of the divine wisdom of God that people cannot understand and that is because they are not meant to understand these.  The faith that humans hold in God would not be faith if there were not certain principles that escaped human knowledge.  With that being said human beings are able to understand that which coincides with the reason that God instilled in them.  That reason only goes so far into understanding God for who he is and what he does.  In that way humans can understand what God chooses for them to understand and the rest of it is left for him to know and them to find out when they are reunited with him.

                After taking the First Condition "the ability of the mind to understand the truth" and the first principle "there can be no contradiction in truth" we find that Thomas Aquinas sufficiently proves that human reason and divine wisdom do in fact coexist in harmony.  This was shown by many ways and concepts that are easily accepted and said to be true.  Truth is a funny thing sometimes.  It seems to be the simplest and most basic principle until a person digs deeper into it looking for its true meaning.  There is this harmony between Faith and Reason, people just need to dig deeper on certain ideas and leave others up the God to teach them later.  That is when the understanding can continue and flourish.           

                Brian Weyers

Directed Writing Three

The poem A Brave and Startling Truth by Maya Angelou was dedicated to the 50^th anniversary of the United Nations.  The U.N. is a symbol of peace and order in our world today.  However there is something else lingering in this poem.  Something that is just under the service waiting and begging to be discovered.  It is a truth that will shine is this world.  Together let you and I discover this wondrous truth that she has described.

I need not look far to find it this truth.  Through her words and hints I can find this truth and come to understand it.  She is talking about when we finally come to realize that we were created beings and there is a loving God watching out for us.  We are the "miraculous" and we are the "possible" of this world as she says in her poem.  Mankind is capable of such violence and destruction.  War is becoming more and more sophisticated and dangerous for everyone.  Each year brings with it more death and destruction as science extends our knowledge.  The truth that Maya Angelou is trying to tell us through her poem is very simple.  We all have a common creator.  After we realize that the need for fighting drops away.  If we are all a family together than why fight with your brothers and sisters?

                Yes I do agree with her.  This world is slowly becoming filled with more and more turmoil.  Wars are bigger and more destructive than ever before, but those same hands that pull the trigger to kill the other person also can lay a comforting hand on those in need.  Where does this startling contrast come from?  Well I believe that all humans are inherently good inside.  Our life experiences have shaped who we are today.  The only thing standing in our way of understanding the truth Angelou speaks of is prejudice.  We do not like someone because we feel that one of us is better and in the right therefore we must show them the error of their ways because we can.  There is something bigger than all of us out there.  That is the truth that Maya is driving home.  We have a common ancestry, which is turn makes us a family. 

                Maya Angelou drives home a very hard point.  It isn't about a religion or a worldly way of thinking.  It is the truth that we were all created by a divine creator and he loves us very much.  We should show that love to the others around us, for that is only right.  Since we are indeed a family we need to come together as one.  If we judge ourselves but what we have accomplished or discovered, then just think of what we could do if we were united globally.  Not through loose peace treaties and a dictator, but together in harmony and real peace that would stand the test of time.  

Brian Weyers

Directed Writing Two

                                The world is beginning to talk about a new way of thinking.  There is a new way of approaching problems and situations.  This new way seems to be frightening and confusing to those who do not, and even some that do understand it.  The biggest question right now is what is it?  The answer is Postmodernism.  It is what some people claim will be the age humans are guided into for the next era.  The purpose of this paper to is to explain Postmodernism in a way that will be very understandable.  For that, this writer will start with a workable definition of Postmodernism.  Then he shall illustrate the idea of Postmodernism with the sentence "This sentence serves no logical purpose".  Hopefully with these two parts the idea of Postmodernism will become clear.

                To begin there needs to be a working definition of Postmodernism in order to illustrate it.  "Any of a number of trends or movements in the arts and literature developing in the 1970s in reaction to or rejection of the dogma, principles, or practices of established modernism, esp. a movement in architecture and the decorative arts running counter to the practice and influence of the International Style and encouraging the use of elements from historical vernacular styles and often playful illusion, decoration, and complexity" (dictionary.refrence.com).  In this definition Postmodernism is, simply put, the period that comes after Modernity.  The rejecting of old established ideas is the main point in that definition.  However this is not the only belief of Postmodernism, for if it was this would be no different than any other change of era.  "Rejecting objective truth is the cornerstone of postmodernism. In essence, postmodern ideology declares an end to all ideology and all claims to truth" (www.apologeticsindex.org).  That is what Postmodernism is at the core.  The idea that there is no objective or absolute truths anymore.  Everything is how the individual wants to see and how to believe it.  Postmodernism is in essence a nation of "social constructs" (people) who all believe truth to be whatever they want it to be.  The entire nation would be built on subjective truths and local narratives.  So in summary Postmodernism is the belief that there are not absolute or objective truths.  What there are instead are opinions and truths for each person.  No more metanarratives, only local narratives.  Now, on to clear these ideologies up even more by giving an example and illustrating it in action.

                The previous paragraph may have the brain spinning as it did for this writer.  However with this example there is hope that all that will be cleared up.  Taking the sentence "This sentence serves no logical purpose" this writer hopes to illustrate the ideology of Postmodernism.  There are two basic ways to look at this sentence through Postmodernism.  One way in which a person can look at is to trust what it says.  The sentence clearly says that it serves no purpose so why care about it?  This person will just skip over this sentence to occupy their time with bigger and better activities.  However, on the other side is more of the Postmodernistic look.  The sentence is stating an absolute truth.  There do not exist in a Postmodern society.  A person of this society will take a closer look and realize this.  The sentence does indeed have a purpose.  This simple phrase is telling the individual that it serves no purpose.  Therefore by looking at the sentence the person has concluded that the phrase actually does serve a purpose and is a lie.  This makes sense in their mind for the simple fact that they do not believe objective or absolute truths.  Examining this truth further proves to this person that Postmodernism is in fact right and sound in its philosophies.  Coming back to compare both of these radically different courses of action we find the relative ending points in fact the same.  Both choices believe the sentence is true except that the second option goes one step further in understanding the phrase.  That is what Postmodernism is trying to say in a way.  Postmodern thinkers will say that they simply interrupt an idea in their own way.  What they don't usually say is that objective and absolute truth goes out the window. 

                In summary by defining the term Postmodernism and going a bit deeper into the idea then the illustration makes sense and helps to understand this strange concept that seems so foreign to us.  Postmodernism is this year's pink.  This is the direction many of our fellow human beings are pushing for.  They are waiting for the ballots to be cast.  It is a subjective decision to decide if it is good or bad.  So which is it?  

Works Cited

"postmodernism." Dictionary.com Unabridged (v 1.1). Random House, Inc. 25 Sep. 2008. <Dictionary.com http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/postmodernism>.

        Leffel, Jim. "Postmodernism." Apologetics Index. 2008. Good News blog. 25 Sept. 2008 <http://www.apologeticsindex.org/>.

The man looked around the room with great suspicion.  All eyes were now on him as he stood before the council of elders.  There was no speaking for none was required as of yet.  The looks and glances told more than any word could ever do.  His eyes met the Grand Judicator's in a locking contest that seemed to stop time completely.  This was his friend of so many years.  A childhood playmate since a very young age, and here he was, the one who is to decide his fate.  He prayed he would be merciful but he knew the law, and to break it was punishable by death or banishment.  His heart gave a sudden jump.  He would rather die an honorable death then be banished from the only family he had ever known.   

The silver bell rang.  It was now time for stories and lies to be told.  Quickly the council stood up, all except the Grand Judicator, as was tradition.  They then recited the Oath of the Law to remind all that what he had done was against that and to put the fear back into the people.  After the reciting had been finished they sat back done and began to question him.

"What is your name son?" the first asked.

"Alexander Selver" he replied.

"What crime have you committed?" the next one asked.

"I have committed the act of treason as seen by the Council." 

"Do you believe you have actually committed this crime?" another asked.  This was the moment of truth.  This would basically decide if he would be face the consequences or be let back into the heritage.  The tension could be cut with a knife as it built up.  All of a sudden their came an explosion from the top of the hall, and I shook everyone in the room and brought them to their knees.  Confusion and panic spread everywhere.  Screams and shouts came from every voice.  Suddenly Alexander was pulled by the shoulder and being brought away from the action.  The Royal Guard began to organize and they began to form up.  Alexander watched this as he was being pulled away by someone he had never seen before. 

He began to run on his own, following this man.  It was his only chance to survive.  He had to keep going or this would be the end of him.  There was no other way to go.  He could not go back for now they would surely kill him.  All he could do was run and follow hoping the path he was on would lead him somewhere that he could tell the truth of what he saw.  Somewhere that he could be himself and let out the knowledge that he had gained.  Somewhere he could finally revel this dark secret that he had been keeping for too long now.

Directed Writing One

Brian Weyers

                N.T. Wright wrote the book Simply Christian to reflect what C.S. Lewis did in Mere Christianity, but for the post modern society.  In his book he divides it into three different sections.  Those being Echoes of a Voice, Staring into the Sun, and Reflecting the Image.  Although every section is intensely intriguing, we will only be concentrating on the section Staring into the Sun.  More specifically how is this metaphor correct and incorrect in the study of Christian Theology as well as if it influences this writer into going deeper into the Theology of Christianity. 

                To begin with let us look at the metaphor "Staring at the Sun".  For if we do not understand this concept first the rest of this explanation and opinion might as well be written in another language that you would not understand.  Let us look at that phrase, "Staring at the Sun".  We all know that this particular activity is harmful and dangerous.  It can harm our vision and leave permanent scarring.  Ever since a young age we have been told this by our parents.  Along with that Medicine and Science has told us this and shown us studies, research, and examples of it.  Alright, we now understand that this activity is bad for us.  Did it ever stop us?  Did you ever stare up at the sun just to show your mom that it really doesn't melt your eyes?  I know that this writer did.  We do that because we are told not to and that it is bad for us, but our bodies are not meant for that.  We have developed ways of gazing at the sun in complete safety but we still lose what it actually looks like because we cannot look right into it.  Well this metaphor personifies that idea in Theology.  "The difficulty is that speaking of God in anything like the Christian sense is like staring into the sun".  (Wright, 56).  We look at all the stories, the hidden meanings and are overwhelmed and exhausted.  This metaphor is used to show us that we are not meant to, nor capable of, understanding all of the Bible, its stories, and morals.  In our ignorance we have been "Starring at the Sun" and questioning why we are blind.  On the other hand however, as we are encouraged to never stare at the sun, we are encouraged to look at Theology.  The one point we must remember is that we will not understand everything because we are not meant to.  There are some questions that only God can answer and he has reserved that for him to share with us.  That is his honor God saves for himself.  We have to come to realize that no matter what we do that there are some principals that are beyond our comprehension and they remain that way as long as we are on this earth.  "I do not believe that they, or any other paths, lead the unaided human mind all the way from reflective atheism to Christian faith." (Wright, 55).

                    It is this writer's opinion that Wright's work does in fact influence to take a closer look at Theology and what it is all really about.  The simple fact that he states that everything he is saying can be found in the Bible is intriguing to say the least.  There are passages that are little known and more than likely not understood to the fullest extent.  He raises many points that bring with them skepticism and confusion.  There is so much left unsaid and not known.  This creates, in this writer at least, a curiosity to discover those questions and facts that are left unsaid.  Like the metaphor implies, we cannot fully grasp what Christian Theology has to offer, but we are all born with that drive towards knowledge and enlightenment so therefore we continue to read, pray, and discuss questions and passages that elude us.  We take comfort in the fact that others share in our confusion and that drive to understand and able to teach others what we have learned.  Wright has touched a spring in all of us that is waiting to be uncorked and able to flow freely.  We don't ask the question we want to.  We don't discuss the hard topics, we tend to just let them slide and forget they ever existed.  That spring is closed by society and our feelings of looking foolish or embarrassing ourselves.  Wright hits this spring and slightly jars the cover.  We need to do the rest and open this up and look into the principals that we do not understand.

                In conclusion the metaphor "Staring into the Sun" is a very accurate description of Christian Theology, to a point of course.  It is this writer's opinion that there more numerous positive ways in which the metaphor fits than negative.  Also there seems to be many reasons why Wright's work would encourage the further study of Christian Theology and its inner workings.  Wright has written a book that will not be soon forgotten.  It should be put on the shelf next to C.S. Lewis Mere Christianity.  The information in that book truly enriches the mind and causes deep though on tough issues.  However it also leaves many questions unanswered and awaiting the research of intrigued individuals.  That is the great masterpiece that has very closely explained this mystery known as Christianity to the post modern society that is beginning to develop all around us.

Works Cited

            Wright, N. T. Simply Christian. New York, NY: Harper One, 2006. 1-240.

 So I am counting down the seconds until class starts.  I love Welcome Week and all that but it does get old after awhile.  I need to start class and get a routine done so i don't go nuts.  Anyone else feel the same way os am i only one?  Thank Goodness for the Honors cousre tomorrow.  See you all there

Well there is no better way to get started then by diving in.  My name is Brian Weyers and i've lived in Hudson Wisconsin all my life.  I've traveled all over the U.S. through many Boy Scout Trips, including one to the Bahamas.  I attained my Eagle Rank and am currently a Assisstant Scoutmaster for my Troop.  I enjoy hanging out with friends, reading, sword fighting, being in the great outdoors, and playing computer.  I am kinda the type of person who is quiet and goes with the flow.  But when there comes a time for someone to step up and be a leader, i'm your guy.  My future plans for my life are a bit fuzzy.  I'm not quite sure where God is calling me yet.  Right now I am thinking a youth minister or diector or a teacher. public or private.  But God may have a competley different idea for me.  Who knows.  Well that is me in a nutshell.  I can't wait ot meet all of you.  See you in August.