Mar

31

Rethinking Higher Education

Filed Under Education, Ideas, Philosophy, Random Thoughts | 2 Comments

There has been an interesting series on edwired about changing higher education to match the “free” economy. The series is called “The End of Western Civilization (as we know it).”

My question is this: Would the amorphous, free learning environment that the author appears to propose actually contradict the content of the learning? Part of education (a liberal education) is to learn the structure of and connections between spheres of knowledge. I would be concerned that the undirected learning approach might create a contradiction between content and vehicle.

Thoughts?

Feb

18

Richard Weaver on Social Security

Filed Under Ideas, Philosophy, Random Thoughts | Leave a Comment

From Ideas Have Consequences (1948).

The notion that the state somehow bears responsibility for the indigence of the aged is not far removed from that demoralizing supposition that the state is somehow responsible for the criminality of the criminal. I will not deny that the dislocations of capitalism afford some ground for the former….The point here is that no society is healthful which tells its members to take no thought of the morrow because the state underwrites their future. The ability to cultivate providence, which I would interpret literally as foresight, is an opportunity to develop personal worth. A conviction that those who perform the prayer of labor may store up a compensation which cannot be appropriated by the improvident is the soundest incentive to virtuous industry.

I don’t have the time to exegete the quote, but Weaver, as always, challenges our basic assumptions about how to live. Imagine if current political candidates thought this way, or if (shocking) they actually said something like this. If anyone could understand them, they’d never get elected.

Dec

22

Roger Scruton

Filed Under Education, Philosophy | Leave a Comment

Roger ScrutonI’m a big fan of Roger Scruton. His books on philosophy and culture have done much to create my love of philosophy and to deepen my understanding of culture. He has a recent article called “Two Virtues of Western Culture” which addresses culture, philosophy, and education. It is an excellent article.

Nov

6

Rhetoric in Christianity

Filed Under Philosophy | 8 Comments

I’ve been reading a lot recently by some very liberal guys. My current read is Richard Hofstadter. I’ve read his essay on the “paranoid style” in American politics and now I’m reading Anti-Intellectualism in American Life. He has little use for fundamentalist Christians, especially the evangelists of the 20s (i.e. Billy Sunday). But he also criticizes John Dewey for writing things that no one could understand. In fact, he suggests that much of Dewey’s fame and influence came from those who couldn’t understand him.

But to the point at hand. Christians don’t explain the Gospel very well. We struggle to present a coherent, cogent narrative of God’s work. We don’t know where to start, so we return to formulas and gimmicks. But God’s Truth is too big for little tricks.

Beyond our trouble with evangelism, we constantly fight to focus our behavior by our faith. I have wondered for some time if we don’t make Christianity too difficult, even for ourselves. I suspect that we don’t really understand God’s program all that well. Other ideas, even good ones, sweep us up into tradition and habit, and eventually we lose sight of the big picture.

Camille Lewis wrote a recent post that suggests a way for us to recapture some of the simplicity of the Gospel. Her observations are worth your time.1


  1. note: I don’t necessarily endorse everything at this link, just as I don’t endorse completely anything I link to–or even everything on this site. :-) back↩

Apr

4

Rights

Filed Under Philosophy, Random Thoughts | 7 Comments

Unfortunately, I am bound by an Internet filter that prevents me from getting to all of my friends’ blogs, so I won’t be able to see what others have said about this — at least not for a while.

Mel R. over at Chosen By Grace has posted some questions about rights. I hear about rights all the time when I am judging debate, and the level of analysis is often quite low. Sadly, even “educated” people don’t always make a lot of sense either.

What rights do we have?

This question begs another question: Where did we get our rights? Let me first take it from a non-Christian point of view. I hear debaters assert that we have a “right to _______.” I write on the ballot, “where did we get this right?” It appears that we have given ourselves our rights. We talk of the Social Contract (whatever that is) and how it is supposed to protect our rights, but we never establish where our rights come from. As I see it, we call “rights” things that we want (or expect): liberty, justice, equality, property, housing, health care, free BMWs, whatever. As long as our rights stem from our desires, there is no stopping what rights we might invent. People don’t always want the same things.

From a Christian point of view, I think we can make a better case for some rights. Mel actually asks two different questions and the Christian perspective informs both answers. First, rights are built into who we are, as bearers of God’s image. Read more

Mar

29

Simply Christian by N. T. Wright

Filed Under Books, Philosophy, Theology | Leave a Comment

Many fellow Christians of my generation have found C. S. Lewis’s Mere Christianity a very helpful and thoughtful expression of their faith. In a way, this phenomenon is a testimony to the quality of Lewis’s thought and writing. The book was edited from radio talks he gave in the 1940s. Since then, arguably no one has made as good a case for Christianity.

In 2006, N. T. Wright published Simply Christian. Critics have lauded it as a worthy successor to Mere Christianity. It is. Wright reintroduces many of Lewis’s arguments, but comes at the issues from a different perspective, providing helpful clarifications and some novel thoughts as well.

In fact, the perspective of the book is one of its greatest virtues. Wright, like Lewis, comes at the topic of Christianity in a fairly non-Christian way. The book’s subtitle is “Why Christianity Makes Sense.” It reads like a grand (if brief) tour of biblical theology intended for those who have little knowledge of Christian ideas. Wright tries to demonstrate that Christianity is more than a run-of-the-mill religion, and that it makes a compelling case for belief. However, as Christian readers of Mere Christianity have seen, sometimes a thoughtful examination of Christianity from the outside (or what seems like the outside) can be immensely helpful.1 By the end of the book, it is sometimes hard to decide who Wright’s intended audience actually is. He still targets unbelievers, but an honest believer will find plenty of food for thought. In fact, if a Christian reader has never considered Wright’s ideas, he might think that Wright is trying to convince him.

Wright begins by addressing four areas that modern ideas of life and the world fail to adequately address. Read more


  1. Wright himself has reviewed Mere Christianity and his thoughts are quite helpful. back↩