Songs of a Semi-Free Man

Reason Rally

2012-02-20T05:08:00.000-08:00

There are increasing indications that atheism is becoming more than just a bare denial of the existence of God. Alain de Botton, the noted writer and atheist, recently claimed that atheists needed their own temples. On March 24, 2012, in Washington, D.C., the Reason Rally, billed as the largest ever gathering of secularists is scheduled to take place. Whatever atheism or secularism is, it is more than a personal denial of the existence of God; there appears to be a need to meet together with other atheists to corporately affirm their lack of belief.

Reason is at a premium in our "on-demand" society today.

We live in a society where sound bites are the normal discourse... The sound-bite culture has infiltrated our belief systems also. We want to have a one-sentence reduction of all facts and beliefs that is easy to assimilate without too much mental strain on our part... We have gone down the same track regarding philosophical and religious beliefs. We do not want to have to read and agonize over obscure and difficult texts; we do not want to have to reconcile difficult and conflicting concepts; we want a smattering of beliefs written on the side of our disposable coffee cups. We can gently and quickly evaluate the belief presented in twenty words or less or the side of the mostly-recyclable container in sixty seconds or less, without breaking out of our early morning fog. If we like it, we may think about it for a couple of minutes or so until the next enticing sound bite comes our way––whether it be on television, radio, or the internet.

The result of the acceptance of the sound bite is the poverty of effort directed towards understanding ideas we encounter. On the surface, many ideas seem appealing and plausible, but may not hold up to a rigorous examination of their underlying assumptions. Rarely are ideas subject to an examination of their foundations. Why It Doesn't Matter What You Believe If It's Not True P.74-75.

I don't think many will disagree with me that we need more reasoned debate in our society today, and so I welcome any event that encourages people to come together to reason. In this spirit, I assume that secularists and atheists will be open to all ideas presented to them so long as such ideas are presented in a reasoned and polite manner. As a Christian, it is also my duty to listen to reasoned arguments with humility and grace. With this in mind, here is a link to some Christian perspectives on the Reason Rally, from Christians who plan to attend the event in D.C. to present their ideas in a calm, loving and open manner.

Renovation

2012-01-20T08:41:00.000-08:00

In the death of winter after the leaves fall

The cold wind scrapes at the bare walls

Dust, debris, of things that used to be something

And will be something else

When the wind becomes a pleasant balm in the heat

When we sit and talk

Of the death that set the path for the new

That to rebuild, we had to tear down.

A Standard Of Measure

2012-01-12T05:52:00.000-08:00

There is one thing of which one can say neither that it is one metre long, nor that it is not one metre long, and that is the standard metre in Paris. - Ludwig Wittgenstein (1)

When scientists decided to come up with the metric system, they needed a standard of measure. A metre stick stored in Paris, made of platinum, was chosen as the standard against which all metres were to be measured. Platinum was chosen because it would not vary or decay. However, today the platinum metre has been superseded by laser light for the same reason. (2)

A standard of measure needs an objective source that can be accessed so as to verify the accuracy of a particular measure. That source must be constant and unchanging. Obviously, if the standard metre were constantly changing measurements would be unreliable. If measurements could not be relied on, they could not be used in science, commerce, or everyday life and the metre as a standard of measure would be abandoned.

The metre stick in Paris, therefore, holds a special place in the measurement system. It is the standard by which all other metres are put against to see if they measure up. Ludwig Wittgenstein, the celebrated twentieth century Austrian philosopher, wrote that the metre stick in Paris was neither one metre long, nor not one metre long.

What does this mean? Wittgenstein is often enigmatic, but he seems to be saying that the standard metre in Paris is not a metre long because it can’t be measured against itself to see if it is one metre long. To see if it is one metre long, we would need another standard metre to measure the Paris standard metre against. Then we would need another standard metre to measure that metre against, and so on into infinity. So, it makes sense to have a starting point, a standard metre that is sui generis, that it to say, it can’t be measured against anything else.

The concept of an objective standard of measure applies to other areas as well. If we are to know how to quantify something we need a standard measure to make a determination. For example, to make a decision whether an action is right or wrong we need a standard of right and wrong to measure our decision against. If we have no such standard how can we make a decision?

What are our moral standards measured against? I believe that our moral standards must have an objective basis. That is to say, they cannot be based on society or our personal tastes. Otherwise everything will be right and wrong at the same time. If moral standards are relative, we cannot condemn even the most stomach-churning of acts as morally wrong. Nor can we praise selfless acts as morally right. Click here to read more about the problems with moral relativism.

I think that by drawing another analogy from the standard metre we can see that an eternal, unchanging God as the wellspring of moral judgment makes a lot of sense. It is imperative that the standard metre be constant and immune from change over time. From our experience and human history we observe that certain actions have always been considered wrong, such as murder. If a moral standard were to vary over time so that at time X murder was wrong, but at time Y murder was not wrong, we would reject it.

Euthyphro Dilemma

The metre stick analogy also helps us untangle Plato’s Euthyphro dilemma. This ancient philosophical problem questions whether something is good because God commands it, so anything can be good if commanded by God, or whether God is good because His actions conform to a standard of good that exists independent of God. If something is good because God commands it, moral standards are arbitrary because God could command anything to be morally right depending on His whim. Alternatively, if good exists independent of God, then God is not all-powerful.

When we realize that just as we need a sui generis standard metre as an objective measure of length, we need a sui generis objective standard of right and wrong, the dilemma disappears. Just as the standard metre cannot be measured against another standard metre, an objective moral standard is not measured against a further standard to determine its worth. It stands alone. Therefore, if God is the sui generis source of objective moral values, He is good. Good is not something outside of God, nor something He arbitrarily commands. It is His very nature; just as the metre stick in Paris is not one metre long because it is measured against another metre stick. Neither can anything be good just because God commands it. Something is good because it measures up to God’s nature as the objective source of moral truths.

1. Ludwig Wittgenstein, Philosophical Investigations. Wiley-Blackwell, 2009. 29e. Investigation No. 50.

2. The metre was originally defined as one ten-millionth of the distance from the equator to the North Pole (at sea level). A metre is now defined as the distance travelled by light in vacuum in 1 ⁄ 299,792,458 of a second. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metre.

New Year's Resolution

2011-12-27T10:45:00.000-08:00

It’s that time of year again. The time to throw out the old and bring in the new. To mix hope and alcohol, to produce firm resolve. The time we allow ourselves to look honestly in the mirror and admit our faults because tomorrow will be different - the start of something new. On New Year’s Eve we reflect on the past twelve months we feel the twinge of regret that we could do things better.

New Years’ Resolutions point to the fact we believe we can change the course of our lives. Be it lose weight, get a new job, be a better husband, wife, son, daughter, father, mother, brother, sister. We believe we have the capacity to change things in other lives. If we are merely aimlessly drifting through life, it makes no sense to try to change our course. In other words, the course of our life is not determined beyond our ability to change things.

We implicitly believe our lives have meaning and purpose. Therefore, it is important to take time to make sure we are making the best possible use of our time, of our lives. So before midnight on New Year’s Eve we decide to do better so we can be in a better position to fulfill our purpose.

Either we are blessed or cursed with the quest for meaning. If there is a purpose to be strived for, lives spent chasing this quest are noble. If there is no ultimate purpose or reason to the life we find ourselves living, the search for meaning is at best quixotic.

This New Year’s Eve I want to wish you all a happy new year and one in which you can reflect on this quest for meaning.

My Word Is My Bond

2011-12-11T18:53:00.001-08:00

The basis of all human transactions is trust. Trust that others will keep their word and do what they said they will do. Let me rephrase: in a well-functioning society the basis of human transaction is trust that other people will keep their word.

In a society where some use power or force to get what they want, or others deceit, there will be considerable costs to us as individuals, and to society as a whole.

You pay the plumber to fix the sink trusting the leak will be fixed; you take a job trusting you will be paid; you sign a business contract trusting your partners will hold up their sides of the bargain; you get married trusting your spouse will be faithful.

There are ways to mitigate the costs of the inability to trust others. If we are working for someone else we can ask to be paid up front (although others may be reluctant to pay up front afraid there will be no incentive to finish the project). We can bring those who fail to live up to their promises to an independent body for dispute resolution. Couples can enter into pre-nuptial agreements. But, of course, these mitigations cost time and money.

It is extremely difficult to enter into any relationship where parties do not feel bound by their word. This is true whether we are talking about romantic or business relationships. At first, everyone makes wonderful promises and aspires to great things. But if everyone decides to do what best suits him or herself when things don’t go as planned, the venture will not be long for this world.

For example, if two parties think they have come to a business agreement only to arrive at the next meeting to find that the terms they thought were set in stone are being renegotiated, the deal will not get done. The same is true for romantic relationships.

The Social Contract

Thinkers have argued we adopted this culture of trust for our collective wellbeing. For example, Jean-Jacques Rousseau referred to it as a social contract, and Thomas Hobbes argued that we surrender our freedom to act to a sovereign to avoid chaos. The general idea is that it makes sense to keep your word so that others will keep their word to you also. Indeed, it does make sense. Of course, if you can break your promises and hold others to their obligations you will be in even better shape. But, as we all realize if everyone were to do this, no one would get what they want.

Therefore, if fewer people keep their word causing fewer people to trust others, society will inevitably break down. In such a case we would witness a failure of personal and familial relationships, business relationships and the failure of authority.

Today, we see high levels of family breakdown, we live in increasing economic instability, and trust in government is at all-time lows. I believe that many of the current problems can be traced to a lack of trust, which has resulted from the failure to keep our promises.

Business contracts are now viewed as economic transactions. When something does not go as planned, the business person does not consider whether it is right or wrong to abide by the terms of the contract, rather he or she weighs up the costs of a breach against the costs of continued compliance. Similarly, in many marriage ceremonies what is really being promised is not “till death do us part” but “till things get too hard”. In many people’s mind the phrase “principled politician” has become an oxymoron. Further, one of the reasons cited for the failure of the recent congressional supercommittee charged with reducing the U.S. deficit was a lack of trust.

But if it makes sense for us to adhere to the social contract, why are we experiencing such a breakdown in trust? Why are we shooting ourselves in the foot?

First, we are so obsessed with looking out for number one that we fail to see how our actions affect others, and how such an attitude affects society as a whole when universally adopted. We want to game the system to get ahead of others.

Second, throughout history there was something else underlying the idea that we should keep our word. Holding everything together was the belief that there were absolute moral truths that were not based on society; moral truths that transcended the physical world and found their wellspring in a morally perfect God. These truths were held to be true for all people at all time in all places. We kept our word because it was the right thing to do, regardless of economic cost.

Since the Enlightenment, we have become enamored with physical or materialistic explanations for everything. It was no longer acceptable to state that we should keep our word because of a transcendent moral code. However, humanity could not be permitted to do whatever it wanted. As Hobbes recognized, life in such a society would be “nasty, brutish and short.” (1) So materialist rationalizations explaining why we should keep to our word were required. One such rationalization was the idea of the social contract.

But, as stated above, the problem with the social contract is that we want everyone else to adhere to the social contract, but we want some wiggle room to do as we see fit on occasion to our advantage. Indeed, if there is nothing objectively wrong with breaking your word, why blame them?

The social contract appears to be breaking. So this theory does not explain why we think it important to keep our word. The attempt to explain why trust is so vital in materialistic terms has therefore failed.

Without a return to the concept that your word is your bond because it is the objectively morally right thing to do, we are headed for chaos.

We cannot be trusted to keep our word; even when we know that doing so is in our best interests. So, perhaps we should reexamine our jettisoning of transcendent moral truth.

1. Hobbes, Thomas. Leviathan. London: Penguin Books, 1985. 186.

Room - A Christmas Reflection

2011-12-03T17:22:00.001-08:00

There was no room

Four beds - the modern need for privacy

Young mother birthing for all to see

Sprinklers tend perfect lawn

Cow waste on the ground

Two-car garage, two and a half baths

Nowhere to lay the baby down

Finished basement - wet bar

We expand and shrink all scope for the greater

The bigger we build - the more empty space.

Twenty Years Ago Today

2011-11-13T18:28:00.001-08:00

As I think back on twenty years

I feel the absence of a measure

To weigh me up, to balance me out

So I probably got away with some things

There came a time I needed to shave

I bought a cheap razor that I didn't know how to use

There was an electric shaver in his left-behind debris

So that's the way I went

His passing was not terrible because of missed opportunities

The tragedy was that someone who had done so much could do no more

But there is the measure
Time flows like a river, he never let it pass him by.

P.J. McAndrew June 2, 1947 - November 14, 1991.

Bankers Into Plowshares?

2011-11-08T20:10:00.000-08:00

Listening to the radio the other day I was struck as a reporter described a sign held by an activist at an Occupy Frankfurt rally. Translated from German the sign read “[turn] bankers into plowshares”. The activist was referencing the phrase “swords into plowshares”, the image of swords, as weapons of war, being turned into plowshares, agricultural instruments. This phrase looks forward to a time when we will have no conceivable use for weapons of war. When there is permanent disarmament, and we till the earth in peace.

The activist was trying, I think, to get across the idea that without bankers society would be better – fairer and more just and peaceful. I’ll leave it up to the reader to decide their personal position on bankers and the world financial crisis, that’s not what interests me here. What caught my ear was the use of language.

This phrase comes from the Biblical prophet Isaiah, describing the world after God’s kingdom is established on earth and all things are made right. Here is the phrase in context:

Come, let us go up to the mountain of the LORD, to the temple of the God of Jacob. He will teach us his ways, so that we may walk in his paths.” The law will go out from Zion, the word of the LORD from Jerusalem. He will judge between the nations and will settle disputes for many peoples. They will beat their swords into plowshares and their spears into pruning hooks. Nation will not take up sword against nation, nor will they train for war anymore. (1)

I previously wrote a piece on man’s constant urge for a better world for peace and justice, and the inability to achieve it, which you can read here. I don’t want to repeat myself, but the current wave of protests against the financial systems of the world and reference to the swords into plowshares intrigued me.

The fact is that most people want a better world, but disagree on how to achieve it. It is easy to imagine a dialogue between the author of the sign and a banker. The activist tells the banker the world would be a better place if the focus were not solely on profit. The banker replies that without access to capital, wealth would be concentrated in fewer hands, and that systems that promised absolute equality have historically ended in absolute tyranny.

Both banker and activist could most likely learn from each other, but neither is likely to change the mind of the other. As many see the world lurching throughout history from one extreme to the other, we long for a middle way, for balance. The problem is no one can find this balance. Indeed, many who claim to bring balance turn out merely to hold the same old positions.

After the Second World War, an attempt was made to bring balance to Europe by establishing a supra-national authority, run by Europe’s best and brightest, that would override national and ethnic enmities that had bloodied the continent for millennia. First, France and Germany ceded control over coal and steel production to the European Coal and Steel Community. In the following decades, closer and closer union was pursued, and Brussels was populated by brilliant minds seeking the best for Europe – peace and prosperity.

But, as things stand, national differences threaten to tear the EU asunder. National interests it seems cannot be trumped by bureaucrats in Brussels, however visionary and well-intentioned. Europe is still very much a group of sovereign nation states unwilling to surrender authority to a supranational body.

So, it appears that the European project has failed to produce balance. Moreover, any human authority that tries to settle disputes between nations is likely to be accused of bias by one or more parties to the dispute, and may even become the target of wrath. So, even if we were to find a very wise and virtuous person, who held humanity’s best interests at heart, no one would follow him or her.

We need someone with unquestioned authority to settle the disputes of humanity. This is the picture we find in Isaiah Chapter Two. Only a supremely wise, just, and unbiased being could convince disputing nations to beat their swords into plowshares. No more wild experimentation. No sincere appeals that it will be different this time. No more claims to have learned the lessons of history, when at the darkest times it becomes painfully clear that the lesson that we always forget is that history repeats itself.

Humanity clings desperately to the hope that one day swords will be beaten into plowshares. However, it seems, that the biblically-inspired hope of perpetual peace and justice cannot be established without the biblical-described source of such peace – God’s kingdom of justice established on earth as it is in heaven.

(1) Isaiah 2:3-5 (New International Version).

Halloween and the Fascination With Fear

2011-10-24T18:28:00.000-07:00

If I had a dollar for every time I heard someone say – “Halloween is my favorite holiday”, I would perhaps not be rich, but my student loan balances would be significantly lower. It seems to me, and this is in no way scientific, that for many people Halloween is their favorite time of year; even though most people don’t get a day off work as they do at Christmas.

True, there is candy or sweets to be collected, and children love to dress up, but most of the people I hear express their love for Halloween are adults not children. It is about more than just dressing up and eating too much bad food. Why do people like to dress up in as ghosts, goblins, and zombies?

The fascination with fear drives this celebration. But Halloween is not about normal, everyday fears. We are not reveling in the fear of car accidents, cancer, or terrorism. It is a different kind of fear. The writer C.S. Lewis explained that this type of fear is more of a kind of dread or awe of something unknown:

“Suppose you were told there was a tiger in the next room: you would know you were in danger and would probably feel fear. But if you were told “There is a ghost in the next room”, and believed it, you would feel, indeed, what is often called fear, but of a different kind. It would not be based on the knowledge of danger, for no one is primarily afraid of what a ghost might do to him, but of the mere fact that it is a ghost. It is “uncanny” rather than dangerous, and the special kind of fear it excites may be called Dread.” (1)

It is the fear or dread of the uncanny that lies behind Halloween, just as it does behind the horror movie industry. Most people do not believe in the existence of otherworldly ghoulish creatures they dress up as. But we are scared by horror movies. In our apparently, rational, scientific culture, we are still terrified by such creatures. Why? C.S. Lewis again:

“When man passes from physical fear to dread and awe, he makes a sheer jump, and apprehends something which could never be given, as danger is, by the physical facts and logical deductions from them… Either [dread] is a mere twist in the human mind, corresponding to nothing objective and serving no biological function, yet showing no tendency to disappear from the mind at its fullest development in poet, philosopher, or saint: or else it is a direct experience of the really supernatural, to which the name Revelation might properly be given.” (2)

We fear creatures that, when questioned, we declare non-existent. Is this an inkling that there is more to life than the everyday physical world that we find ourselves in? Why as our culture increasingly attempts to explain all phenomena in scientific terms, does this odd sense of dread linger?

I believe that this sense of dread points to the fact there is indeed more to reality than meets our physical senses. I believe there is a supernatural realm. Many of you may not agree with my last assertion, but I think there is a sense of the spiritual or supernatural that our rational, scientific culture suppresses. However, it still lingers underneath, allowed out on certain occasions, such as Halloween, when it floods out.

(1) C.S. Lewis, The Problem of Pain (London: Harper One, 2001), 5-6.

(2) Ibid, 9-10.

Click on the links below for other perspectives on Halloween from some friends of mine. Enjoy, but note that the views expressed are those of the respective authors and not Songs of a Semi-Free Man.

What is Halloween? - Cold and Lonely Truth Blog

Halloween and our Fascination with the Spiritual - Reasons For God

As a Christian, Should I Celebrate Halloween - Faithful Thinkers

Halloween - the Great Omission?

Modern Pharisee

2011-10-08T10:19:00.000-07:00

It is an insult to the conservative that he or she cannot fix themselves and an insult to the liberal that he or she cannot fix humanity. This is why many conservatives reject Jesus in every sphere except religious ceremony and why liberals reject an interventionalist God in all spheres.

The conservative – I pulled myself up by my bootstraps model- believes he or she is responsible for his or her ultimate destiny and achievements. I did it my way, so why can’t everyone else? This can be used to justify a reluctance to help others, as that is not my responsibility but theirs. This ignores the fact that factors such as the family (or lack thereof) we are born into, the place in which we are born, and (even though it is not politically correct to say so these days) the varying levels of skill or talent with which each of us are born, can greatly influence our “progress” in the world.

Conversely, the liberal worldview presents itself as altruistic and concerned with fairness and the well being of others. The liberal fondly cherishes the notion that as a group we can redeem humanity from the various ills and squalors in which it is embroiled. It aims to create equality through redistributing resources. Those better off should contribute to those less fortunate. It’s hard to argue against this proposition. However, in my experience, most people think there are others more fortunate than them who should foot the bill. I’ve never met anyone who likes to pay taxes – liberal or conservative. So, the idea is not for me to sacrifice my resources to help those at the bottom, but to take the resources of others to do so. Again, I am not responsible for the plight of those less fortunate. It can make you feel good without paying a personal cost.

Certainly, there are conservatives and liberals who give generously to others, but still there is an essential truth those both of these ideologies can be used as convenient excuses not to help others while maintaining the illusion that were are still at base good people who do the right thing.

Paul states in his letter to the Romans that humankind was not interested in the true God and finding out what God was truly like but instead attempted to mold God in ways that suited them. (1) Today, we are still creating our own version of God. For many Christians belief in God is not primary. Our beliefs about politics and money are more deeply felt and from them we construct our idea of God. This is true whether you call yourself a liberal or a conservative.

The liberal likes to see Jesus as the social liberator speaking truth to power shaking up the earthly status quo. But this is the same Jesus that told His followers to give to Caesar what belonged to Caesar. (2)

The conservative who values self-reliance and austerity would likely look on in horror as Jesus let a woman use a bottle of perfume that cost a year’s wages to wash his feet. (3)

Modern Pharisees

If we use Christianity to support the political system that we favor, how are we different from the Pharisees that Jesus found so despicable?

We spend so much time and energy judging non-Christians because they don’t obey God’s word. But isn’t that what non-Christians do? Paul wrote:

What business is it of mine to judge those outside the church? Are you not to judge those inside? God will judge those outside. (4)

Even more damaging to God’s central goal, the salvation of as many people as possible, is the attempt by Christians to force our beliefs on to nonbelievers using the force of the government be it using legislative or judicial means. God’s message to humankind is not to be shoved down the throats of others.

We live in times when many horrible things are done and many of these things are not recognized as the crimes that they are. But, that was also true in the time of Peter and Paul. They did what God had commanded them. They preached the gospel. They did not try to obtain political power so they could make everyone a Christian. Why do we do this today?

Christianity is about the obedience of the heart. Outwardly forcing someone to observe what we believe to be Christian standards. Do we want to make a perfect Christian paradise where everyone, whether they have made the decision to be a Christian or not, acts the way we want them to? But Christ commanded us to change people around us by our presence or witness in the world, not to mold the world to suit ourselves. (5)

Have we grown tired of trying to reach those around us? Do we, as Christians, want to escape from the world and just associate with good Christians? It sometimes seems like we are attempting to create a world where non-Christians are forced to act outwardly as Christians by legislating this result. Is this because we think that outward expressions that appear Christian are enough? But the Bible is quite clear that outward actions without inward change is nothing. (6)

1. Romans 1:18-23.
2. Matthew 22:15-22.
3. Luke 7:36-50.
4. 1 Corinthians 5:12-13
5. Matthew 5:13-16.
6. 1 Samuel 16:7.

Equality

2011-10-03T19:17:00.000-07:00

The race is not to the swift or the battle to the strong, nor does food come to the wise or wealth to the brilliant or favor to the learned; but time and chance happen to them all. – Ecclesiastes 9:11.

Equality

We are told as children that everyone should be treated equally. Stories of those who fought to make things equal are celebrated. It is apparent to even the youngest school child that we don’t live in an equal world – otherwise why would Rev. Martin Luther King have struggled. So it is not the idea that equality is the status quo but that it could be the future default mode.

We are taught that because the world is equal hard work and talent will always rise to the top. Work hard in school, turn up on time, do your best. So an equal world does not mean that everyone will be the same – after all there can only be one President of the United States – but that everyone has a chance of success. It also should mean that those that do succeed deserve their status because of inherent talent and diligence.

Therefore, according to this theory, while we may not agree with those in influential positions, we cannot say they don’t deserve to be there. However, many of us have experienced people in power over us to be somewhat less than brilliant. I’m not talking about jealousy, but about the smart and talented being bossed by those less so.

The ancient writer of Ecclesiastes, thought to be King Solomon, summed up this dilemma.

There is an evil I have seen under the sun, the sort of error that arises from a ruler: Fools are put in many high positions, while the rich occupy the low ones. I have seen slaves on horseback, while princes go on foot like slaves. (1)

The current economic climate is causing many who have taken to heart the lesson that if you work hard at school and work things will eventually work out to consider whether the game is rigged against them. Is it really who you know rather than what you know that counts? Does influence trump innovation? Can you keep a good man or a good woman down?

In good times such morbid reflections are less cutting. Sure, we may question the rise of some in prosperous times, but in harder times like we find ourselves in today, we question our personal ability to succeed.

We are not the authors of our own destiny. This is both disturbing and liberating at the same time. All we can do is our best – the results are not predictable, but not necessarily our fault either. It also means we should hold success loosely.

Why if life is unequal do we aspire to live in a fair world? I believe it is because some part of us longs for a world different from the one we find ourselves in, a world of fairness and justice. A world where everyone has a fair shake. However, this ideal we cherish hits against the cold reality that our world is not that way. So what are the choices?

One, ignore the clues that the world is not fair and keep fighting. Eventually, this choice will lead to disillusion.

Two, embrace the unfairness, and the therefore meaningless and random nature of life. This is the approach taken by existentialist philosophers such as Jean-Paul Sartre. Realize that life has no point and try your best to come up with some individual meaning in the chaos. This approach leads to despair.

A third approach was taken by the ancient author of Ecclesiastes. He recognized along with Sartre that our physical lives are meaningless - he urged us to find enjoyment where possible - but he found consolation in the belief there was more to life than our earthly existence. He concluded that wrongs would be righted in the end. He wrote:

Now all has been heard; here is the conclusion of the matter: Fear God and keep his commandments, for this is the duty of all mankind. For God will bring every deed into judgment, including every hidden thing, whether it is good or evil. (2)

Sartre rejected belief in God as an easy escape from the overbearing meaningless of life, and that is a choice that we are obviously free to make. But if life is meaningless why do we have this desire for fairness and equality? Why do we see meaning in the struggle for equal rights?

The only way to make sense of our wish for equality in a world irreparably infested with all kinds of unfairness, is to accept there is a greater reality where fairness is more than an aspirational dream that we never quite reach. A world built on fairness and justice.

Click here for some thoughts on why our world is so imperfect.

Since Martin Luther King Jr. Day is coming up, I've updated this post with some other posts on equality. Here are some posts you should check out: Martin Luther King Jr. vs. Evolution at Faithful Thinkers and Was Adolf Hitler a Better Man Than Martin Luther King, Jr.? at Cold and Lonely Truth Blog.

1. Ecclesiastes 10:5-7.

2. Ecclesiastes 12:13-14.

First Day

2011-09-07T18:28:00.000-07:00

You will need me less after today

At least not in the same way as before

Some day you will be the one to lift me up

To drive me there, to help me fix it

To explain, to help me see

Growing as I fade away

I hope to help you on your course

There is no time to waste

For it's a short privilege that you are

My daughter, my son.

Cynicism

2011-09-02T07:24:00.000-07:00

“I think we too often make choices based on the safety of cynicism, and what we're led to is a life not fully lived. Cynicism is fear, and it's worse than fear - it's active disengagement.” - Ken Burns

Standing on the sidelines and making witty commentary is much easier than a full-throated engagement in the fray. It’s easy to ridicule what has not worked, it’s much harder to dream up the solutions. So, for many, cynicism has become the default mode.

Cynicism is created when hope meets experience and experience shows hope up. We leave high school or college with grand ideas of how the world can be a better place. We wonder why our parents seemed jaded. We embark on careers full of hope, believing a little inspiration and perspiration go a long way, until many of us hit the walls of organizational politics, bureaucracy, or most depressing of all, people who can’t or don’t want to be helped. Eventually, most of us settle for making a living and doing good where we can. We smile a little at those who still think they can make a difference, but mostly we entertain ourselves with witty, cynical comments.

It’s embarrassing to admit that our dreams of bettering humanity have failed. It’s not the right thing to admit that society is still plagued with poverty, crime, illiteracy, and poor health. Indeed, it seems these problems are likely getting worse. While we lock our doors at night and look for the best schools for our children there is still a part of us that resents ourselves for fleeing instead of engaging the problems. So what do we do?

We laugh at ourselves rejecting vigorous engagement as uncool. We feel we have a part to play in making the world a better, fairer place but have no idea where to start. In fact, it seems the more we try the worse things become. But we can’t come right out and say it.

I believe it is a good urge to want things to be better. I also firmly believe this amelioration to be beyond our grasp. Human greed and selfishness always get in the way.

If we humans were perfectly fair, just creatures there would be no problems in the world. There are enough resources. We would delegate to those most suited to organizing the sharing of resources and everyone would be happy with their allocation. No one would demand more. No one would seek to profit. We would care just as much about the loved ones of others as we do our own. I don’t think it takes much reflection to realize that this is not and will never be the case for the human race. It should be possible to make things better - this is where the hope comes from - but we find that it isn’t.

As a Christian I believe the world was divinely created with order and justice but human nature became corrupted. You might reject the biblical story of the fall of man as mythical but I don’t think you can so easily dismiss the evidence that something is rotten with us – individually and as a whole.

But this leaves us with a problem. We still care. Our frustration with our efforts to create a better world leads to cynicism.

The Bible describes this frustration as groaning for a better world. It states that creation is groaning for regeneration that God promised. (1)

You might reject the Bible but you cannot argue that it doesn’t provide an accurate description of the human predicament. We are yearning for a perfection we don’t find on earth and no witty remark can obscure this fact for long.

(1) Romans 8:19-22. New International Version.

Fear

2011-08-24T03:41:00.000-07:00

A clean page

A pictureless frame

An empty suitcase

No bridges burned

No lessons learned

Never say the wrong thing

Never say anything at all

Fear of looking a fool in the everyday

Is to throw it all away

Beginnings

2011-08-05T06:10:00.000-07:00

We all have a beginning – a start date. There was a time when we were not. This fact is frequently brought back to me as I listen to my children. Young as they are, they are fascinated by their birth stories. They find it hard to think there was a time before them. I find it difficult too. They want to find their place in the story.

Adults too are fascinated by our past, and in particular the past of our ancestors. The story of how we came to be is after all not just our story but the story of those who came before us and, directly or indirectly, caused us to be instead of not.

Why do children love to hear about their beginnings? Why do we as adults desire to learn about not just our personal pasts, but the history of our families? I believe we are fascinated by the journey. We want to see how far we have come from Point A. We may not yet have reached Point B, or even know what Point B is, but we want to see progress.

It is as if we are climbing a high mountain. Looking ahead it seems to continue forever. But, just then, as we think we may never reach the top, we turn slightly and gaze over our shoulder. We see valleys that have fallen away beneath us; the paths must have people on them but they are too far away to see. Messy, cluttered landscapes and scattered buildings have a clean, colorful symmetry from this height. We look back at the winding path that brought us here. Then we think that of how far we have come, not how far is left to go. The young school child wonders that she was once a helpless baby like her younger sibling. The young professional imagines his grandparents toiling over rocky soil to eke out a meager living. The new parent marvels that she was once as new to the world as the child in her arms; the new grandparent that his child is now responsible for that young life.

The sense of progress, of becoming, is part of what it is to be human. That is why despair and hopelessness can set in when our lives fall into a rut; the pain of not becoming, of not achieving, of falling short. The pain of thinking we are about to reach the summit only to have the earth crumble away beneath us, or discovering there are heights that we cannot reach.

We have a sense of becoming – not a sense of repetition of what has gone before; a sense of purpose, a desire to leave a mark on something or someone. If we are simply part of an unending circle of life our dreams of progress are at best a source of frustration.

The Bible tells us there is a purpose for our lives. (1) That we are not meant merely to be born, work, procreate and die. Life has meaning. There is hope.

(1) For I know the plans I have for you,” declares the LORD, “plans to prosper you and not to harm you, plans to give you hope and a future. Jermiah 29:1 (New International Version).

Time

2011-07-14T09:57:00.000-07:00

No time to waste

Days that never end

No time like the present

Days over before they begin

Chasing, ticking, counting

We do not set the pace

Too much or too little

No time to say goodbye

Finale?

2011-07-09T20:10:00.000-07:00

“Let us eat and drink; for tomorrow we die.” (1)

We have an inbuilt desire to do things that matter. But what if everything we build and love and fight for is gone someday? Without a trace. As if it never was. Would it matter that we existed for an instant in the face of an eternity without us? The inescapable answer is that it would not.

The problem is that we know, with the rarity of absolute certainty, that we will die.

However, modern science tells us the universe is not about us. It tells us via evolutionary biology that we owe our existence to chance. With all the potential apocalyptic disasters looming over our heads, it is possible that we as a species will not endure forever. We know we have our own expiration date. Yet, the thought of our non-existence causes us great angst.

“Let us eat and drink; for tomorrow we die.” This is how Paul of Tarsus, the writer of much of the New Testament, which is the second part of the Christian Bible, summed up life if death is our final curtain call.

But even hedonism, the pursuit of pleasure and avoidance of pain, doesn’t work out. We can’t do what we want because of limitations that all of us (to some extent or another) face. We may lack the material resources: money, power, or physical capacity, to do what we want. Further, more often than not, our desire to do something will conflict with someone else’s desire to do something else. Someone may prevail (there is a possibility that neither person will get what they want) but it may not always be you. We also know that many aspects of our lives are beyond our control. Disease, natural disaster, war, economic collapses, and political convulsions, can all radically alter the course of our lives. As we are all too painfully aware, there is little we can do to insulate ourselves from these things. So the best we can hope for is to strive to eat, drink, and be merry as it is not within our power to achieve even this modicum of happiness.

Why do we feel this need for significance in the face of our insignificance? Is it some kind of cosmic joke? If so, I don’t hear too much laughter.

The Bible reassures us that there is a meaning to all of this. The writer of Ecclesiastes, a part of the Old Testament, the first part of the Bible, outlines the meaningless nature of life coming to the conclusion that life only has meaning because God judges everyone in the end. The Bible tells us there is a life after this – heaven and hell. After advising those who reject the resurrection of Jesus, the central element of Christianity, to “eat and drink, for tomorrow we die”, Paul points out the difference for Christians is that we have a hope because the end of this life is not our end. For those who believe and obey Jesus, who defeated death, there is a hope that will never be destroyed. Paul writes: “O death, where is thy sting? O grave, where is thy victory?” (2)

You may choose to reject the idea of eternal life through the death and resurrection of Jesus, but if this life is all there is, any attempt to find meaning is doomed, fulfillment is fleeting, and significance illusory.

(1) 1 Corinthians 15 v.32. King James Version.

(2) 1 Corinthians 15 v. 55. Kings James Version.

Summer Rain

2011-06-25T17:39:00.000-07:00

Summer rain leaves little trace
Of endless torrents
That so soon before promised to wash the day away
I venture out in mindless complacency
Lacking wonder at the restoration
Hasn’t it always been this way?
A few scars of lingering puddles
Show the lie of my easy ways

Conspiracy Theory

2011-06-21T16:35:00.000-07:00

Many today are obsessed with conspiracy theories. They believe that hidden from view those with great power and influence manipulate everything for their personal gain. Behind wars, economic disasters, disease lies the guiding hand of an unseen group of politicians and bankers who really rule the world. They think there is a double-game; a powerful group of kingmakers and breakers meeting in secluded luxury to decide the fate of the world; that they are not being told the truth; that something deeper is going on.

We humans will never be satisfied until we can explain everything and remove every mystery. Science has also got into the act with the search for theories that explain everything and the quest for the end of inquiry. Philosophers have also sought to find great forces that cause the changes that we see around us. Karl Marx theorized that class warfare was the driving force. Adam Smith believed in the invisible hand that guided human commerce. In addition, we think the explanation will boil down at its core to some overriding cause or principle behind everything.

Today, we want to see that cause as something physical or material and not metaphysical such as an omnipotent God. Indeed, religion and Christianity in particular, are theorized to be great conspiracy theories at their heart. The wildly popular novel the Da Vinci Code, purported to expose a conspiracy to conceal the fact that Jesus Christ married Mary Magdalene. Even though numerous authorities have exposed this theory to be pure hokum, more than eighty million people have read this book.

Why do we look for a cause that links everything together? What if instead of a hidden group in control of everything, there is no one pulling the strings. Chaos. Every man and woman for his or herself? Frightening? Definitely. But we don’t think like that.

The Bible provides an answer why we have this sense of something deeper going on. That reality is not all that meets the eye. The Bible presents a world where there is an unseen spiritual dimension that determines what occurs in the physical world.

In the movie the Matrix, the hero Neo has an inkling that there is more to life than his hum-drum existence as a corporate cubicle-clone. Neo’s eyes are opened after he comes into contact with Morpheus and his cohorts. The grey everyday world in which he has existed was a sham all along. This movie exploits the familiar feeling that surely this can’t be all there is.

Plato described this feeling as living in a cave sitting in front of a fire watching shadows on the cave wall made by people and objects that pass the entrance of the cave. He claimed that like the cave dwellers we only see shadows of reality in our everyday existence and not the true reality that exists outside of the cave.

Some might argue that one day science will demystify this sense of the spiritual. But this claim is profoundly unscientific. Science deals with what can and has been proved. So until science proves this spiritual sense away, this argument has no power. To claim it is an answer is to make science a religion.

This idea that for all we know, our everyday physical world is a shadow of something greater, obviously has legs. Plato’s cave allegory and the Matrix are separated by over two thousand years. The sense that we live our lives in monochrome while a technicolor universe lies hidden behind every curtain - from time to time brilliantly shining through to expose the drabness of the quotidian - has not diminished since ancient times. Try as we might we can’t seem to shake the sense there is something else happening on a greater stage.

Tomorrow

2011-06-10T05:21:00.000-07:00

I build and break for you
I weep and pray for you
While today passes unloved

It’s easier today - a day of light
After the night of dark and rain
But that doesn’t change
The working out in the end

That sun follows rain
That joy follows pain
That there is no tomorrow without today.

A Post-Modern World?

2011-06-08T09:08:00.000-07:00

Today there is much talk about how we live in a post-modern world. What does that mean? What does it mean to assert that we have moved from modernism to post-modernism? Has the nature of truth changed or just our view of it? What was the motivation for this change – whatever it is?

Let us define the terms. Modernism is the view that asserts that there are objective truths out there to be discovered. It maintains however that these objective truths are material truths that can be discovered by empirical scientific discovery.

Modernism, marked a change from what went before as it explicitly rejected the existence of spiritual or metaphysical truths; modernism was driven by the Enlightenment and the explosion of scientific discoveries that followed. In other words, that everything about our world, where we came from, art, love, hate and the morality that binds us could be discovered and broken down into material, empirical terms.

Before modernism the prevailing view was that our world had a material as well as a metaphysical or spiritual dimension. It was also held that we humans had a dual nature – a material physical body and a spiritual soul. [1] The traditional answer to why we have a drive to be good, to why we are exhilarated by great art, to why we dream of utopia, was that these concepts, which were grounded in a higher spiritual reality, touched our souls in an intangible way. Throughout much of the world it was believed that Christianity explained this higher reality.

The end goal to which modernism was travelling was to make sense of the world without metaphysics – without God. Modernism wanted to answer these questions about morality, art, love and human aspiration, without resorting to positing the existence of a Supreme Being. But modernism concerned with only examining the tangible proved not to be so good at explaining the intangible.

The end point of modernism in a philosophical sense was logical positivism, a philosophical movement that held that any statement that was not a logical tautology or that could not be empirically tested and verified was meaningless. [2] This left ethics, art, love out in the cold.

Post-modernism is a reaction to the failure of modernism to account for essential facets of humanity such as poetry, politics, love and morality. Since objective answers to these questions proved impossible to come by so there was a migration to a different paradigm of truth that was subjective. Post-modernism rejected of the dogma of objective empiricism and instead insisted that truth was based on community. The post-modern worldview asserts that our values about ethics, art, politics, love and hate evolved over time as humans evolved and formed societies. [3] Post-modernism is therefore another attempt to come up with satisfying answers to the essential human questions without the need to talk about metaphysics and spirituality. Its solution is that there is no objective truth and we haven’t discovered it because we’ve been looking for something that isn’t there. On this view all of our current values are the result of historical accident and could have been otherwise – they are contingent.

According to a post-modern view, truth is pragmatic, subjective and contingent. Truth is made not discovered. But this also means that truth changes over time. Nothing is absolute. Nothing is guaranteed.

The problem with post-modernity is that if truth is contingent and subjective, nothing has any meaning. If our concepts of truth are based on society they could change at any moment, and there is no basis for calling action something right or wrong, beautiful or hideous. Everyone is right and wrong at the same time.

So I don’t think that post-modernism provides meaningful answers. Many people insist that the prevalence of post-modernism is a death knell to belief in the spiritual and therefore to traditional Christianity. However, I think the opposite is true. The failure of modernism and the inherent contradictions at the heart of post-modernism show that attempts to reject a spiritual or metaphysical dimension to this world do not cut the mustard. Indeed, belief in spirituality among “non-religious people” is marked. [4]

Instead I think there are cosmic clues that alert us to the fact that there is more to the world than meets the physical eye – a spiritual as well as a material dimension to our world. Our desire to be good, our desire for utopia, our love of art, our wonder in the face of nature, our fear of the end are some of these clues. The modernist project to ground these clues in the physical world has come up empty, the post-modern attempt to ground them on society has not provided any answers to the big questions just denied there are such big questions to be answered.

What’s the upshot? First, new atheism is in trouble. Much of the current crop of new atheists, such as Christopher Hitchens and Sam Harris, are modernists. They answer questions about morality, love, society and art by reducing them to material terms. If modernity has been replaced by post-modernity, this approach has been widely rejected. Second, post-modernism doesn’t provide meaningful answers. If you want meaningful significant answers they must be objective. Searching for objective answers about morality, art and love inevitably leads to contemplation of the metaphysical or the spiritual. The surge in interest in spirituality provides evidence for this thesis. Human attempts to answer these questions in terms of science and society have failed. Maybe that’s because we had the answer all along.

1. Plato. Republic. Trans. Waterfield, Robin. New York: Oxford University Press, 1994; Descartes. Discourse on the Method and the Meditations. Trans. Sutcliffe, F.E. Penguin Books. Middlesex: 1971.

2. See, for example, Ayer, A.J. Language, Truth and Logic. New York: Dover Publications, Inc., 1952.

3. See, The Cambridge Dictionary of Philosophy. Ed., Robert Audi. Cambridge: University of Cambridge, 1995; 634-35; Wittgenstein, Ludwig. Philosophical Investigations, Anscombe, G.E.M., Hacker, P.M.S. and Schulte, Joachim trans. Oxford: Wiley Blackwell, 2009; 99, Investigation #261; Rorty, Richard. Contingency, Irony, and Solidarity. New York: Cambridge University Press, 1989.

4. See Hemmingway, Mollie Ziegler. “Look Who’s Irrational Now”. Wall Street Journal 19 Sep. 2008: W13. Available at http://online.wsj.com/article/SB122178219865054585.html.

Hope

2011-05-18T18:29:00.000-07:00

I want you to remember it won’t always be like this
There is something else, another place
This life of lies sprouting slander
Reaping loss and decay
But we are not of this place

We travel through the loving and dying
Broken and bloodied
He made the way
Above the horizon
Flying as it all melts away
We see the first sun on the first day

The Race

2011-05-05T16:26:00.000-07:00

A trapped animal in a cage
Driven rabid by what it can’t catch

I gnawed on the bone till I broke my teeth
Empty, burnt and tasteless

There is an empty meadow
A reason to live and love and remember

I see the beauty in your face
Of letting go of the chase

Earth Day

2011-04-28T09:01:00.000-07:00

The world of the living contains enough marvels and mysteries as it is – marvels and mysteries acting upon our emotions and intelligence in ways so inexplicable that it would almost justify the conception of life as an enchanted state. – Joseph Conrad, Author’s Note to The Shadow Land (1)

I recently attended an earth day celebration with one of my children. The kids sang a couple of songs celebrating the earth and proclaiming the virtues of tree planting and not littering. Of course, these are positive things to tell our children to clean up after themselves and to recycle where possible. But earth day, or international mother earth day as the international version is called, is not just about cleaning up litter or recycling – it’s much more than that.

The traditional Christian view that the earth and all that exists is the result of divine creation has been rejected as unscientific - fine to teach at home but not suitable for the classroom. However, the idea of celebrating mother earth is also unscientific when viewed through the paradigm of evolutionary theory.

The dominant scientific theory regarding the origin of the earth presents the world gradually through the process of evolution. Leaving aside any argument regarding the truth or falsity of evolutionary theory, is an evolved earth a sensible thing to celebrate? Earth day as a secular celebration is celebrating an earth that we find today as the result of evolution.

Evolution we are told occurred because of a unique set of circumstances that resulted in the world we live in today. If anything was the slightest bit different as evolution worked its way along, life as we know it would not exist. (2) So it isn’t as if mother earth somehow set out to make us what we are. So what are we celebrating on earth day – random chance that somehow worked out in our favor. That is a scientific and rational basis for a truly secular celebration of nature. But that doesn’t make you feel warm and fuzzy inside. In fact the opposite is true. If you truly embrace the idea that life itself is the result of a series of random events the rational person won’t see much purpose. You can’t sing too many happy songs about that.

The Bible states that the wonders of nature point to God. (3) Evolutionary theory contends to have demystified nature and exposed divine creation as a myth. However, we are still spellbound by nature.

Atheists state that there is no need to appeal to the divine or the supernatural to experience awe and wonder. Instead they argue that nature itself is a wonder. See the quote at the beginning of this piece by Conrad that Christopher Hitchens quotes in his book God Is Not Great. But doesn’t this beg the question?

When surrounded by the wonders of nature do you think that it’s really amazing that everything here happened by chance? Or do you have an inkling that this couldn’t have just come about by pulling the lever on some cosmic slot machine.

Unless of course you think nature is indeed a terrible mess. But we have to be taught to think like that. Left to our own reflection on a summer day we have an intuition that nature is in fact truly wonderful. Beautiful even. Some atheists agree that nature itself is amazing and wonderful except when they want to criticize the notion that nature did not come about by chance but by design.

Earth day cannot be rationally explained. It is not a celebration of nature as the prevailing scientific worldview paints it. The best explanation is that it is the celebration of nature itself as if nature were responsible for making itself and us – as if it were mother earth. This is surely totally irrational. Yet many do it. We claim that science has disproved the idea of divine creation but instead of truly embracing the non-teleological nature of evolutionary theory (that is to say that nature is essentially random and purposeless) we celebrate mother nature as if it was teleological or purposeful.

The Bible states that humans have two modes when it comes to nature. Either we worship God as creator or nature itself (4). Paul of Tarsus wrote these words two thousand years ago, and despite the myriad of technological changes, very little has changed. This is not surprising as the Bible, whatever you think about it, provides much valuable insight into our world today, e.g., that there is nothing new under the sun (5).

It seems that the natural world inspires us to think there must be some purpose to all of this. We have to place this purpose somewhere – either in the mind of a divine being that created the world or in nature itself. Evolutionary theory prevents us from locating purpose in nature so either we remain consistent to this worldview and refrain from deifying random chance or embrace the idea that the natural world is evidence of something higher.

But if after tracing these thoughts through you still celebrate nature for its own sake you should remain aware that doing so is no more "rational" than worshiping God as creator of the world. If you can’t bring yourself to see nature as purposeless and random, maybe you should consider the possibility that there is a divine purpose behind the natural world.

1. Quoted in Christopher Hitchens. God Is Not Great. Twelve. P.73.

2. Hitchens. God Is Not Great. P. 92-93. Quoting Stephen Jay Gould.

3. Holy Bible. New International Version. Psalm 19 v. 1-4

4. For since the creation of the world God’s invisible qualities—his eternal power and divine nature—have been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made, so that people are without excuse. For although they knew God, they neither glorified him as God nor gave thanks to him, but their thinking became futile and their foolish hearts were darkened. Although they claimed to be wise, they became fools and exchanged the glory of the immortal God for images made to look like a mortal human being and birds and animals and reptiles. Holy Bible. New International Version. Romans 1 v 20 -23.

5. What has been will be again, what has been done will be done again; there is nothing new under the sun. Is there anything of which one can say, “Look! This is something new”? It was here already, long ago; it was here before our time. Holy Bible. New International Version. Ecclesiastes 1 v 8-10.

Free

2011-04-12T16:21:00.000-07:00

The world drove past
As I looked you in the eye
I felt the wind in my hair
As I said good bye

Freedom is not free
But some things aren’t worth dying for
It's knowing the difference
Between vanity and responsibility

So I will walk away and leave you behind
I wish you well but you won’t understand
I will go home and kiss my wife
And let the waters rush over me
Submerge and rise free
To start again
A life rich in possibility.