Posted by: gcarkner | February 28, 2015

What Happened to Ideals?

In Search of a Few Good Adventurers

Screen Shot 2015-01-04 at 6.37.10 PM

Some see this as such a cynical age that they wonder whether ideals have currency anymore. We wish to protest. As a ministry to graduate students at UBC and beyond, in Graduate Christian Union and the Graduate & Faculty Christian Forum, we are diligently on a quest. It is not an easy, safe or superficial desire. Quite the contrary, in our quest, we are looking to find and nurture the next generation of culture- and nation-shapers, builders of the literary imagination, institution-shapers. We are looking for the future apologists, justice-seekers, politicians who care about the common good and the weaker members of society, peace-negotiators, international relations adjudicators. Read More…

Posted by: gcarkner | February 27, 2015

The (Un)Common Good

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CpJ5oxcBx8k The (Un)Common Good by Jim Wallis, Bestselling Author

In his important 2014 book The (Un)Common Good:How the Gospel Brings Hope to a World Divided, Jim Wallis posts an epilogue of Ten Personal Decisions for the Common Good which relate strongly to the concept of a calling where human beings can flourish together. We highly recommend this book of solid, tangible vision. Wallis is one of the mature prophetic voices in our day. I find this book offers a great balance in the path of following Jesus and a close reading of Scripture. Wallis expands the horizons of the possible for believers

~Gordon E. Carkner Ph.D. Philosophical Theology

Screen Shot 2015-02-27 at 5.04.43 AM

1. If you are a father or a mother, make your children the most important priority in your life and build your other commitments around them. If you are not a parent, look for children who could benefit from your investment in their lives.

2. If you are married, be faithful to your spouse. Demonstrate your commitment with both your fidelity and your love. If you are single, measure your relationships by their integrity not their usefulness.

3. If you are a person of faith, focus on not just what you believe but on how you act on those beliefs. If you love God, ask God how to love your neighbour.

4. Take the place you live seriously. Make the context of your life and work the parish that you take responsibility for.

5. Seek to develop a vocation and not just a career. Discern your gifts as a child of God not just your talents, and listen for your calling rather than just looking for opportunities. Remember that your personal good always relates to the common good.

6. Make choices by distinguishing between wants and needs. Choose what is enough rather what is possible to get. Replace appetites with values, teach your children the same, and model those values for all who are in your life.

7. Look at the business, company, or organization where you work from an ethical perspective. Ask what its vocation is, too. Challenge whatever is dishonest or exploitive and help your place of employment do well by doing good.

8. Ask yourself what in the world  today most breaks your heart and offends your sense of justice. Decide to help to change that and join with others who are committed to transform that injustice.

9. Get to know who your political representatives are at both a local and national level. Study their policy decisions and examine their moral compass and public leadership. Make your public convictions and commitments known to them and choose to hold them accountable.

10. Since the difference between events and movements is sacrifice, which is also the true meaning of religion,  and what makes for social change, ask yourself what is important enough to give your life to and for.

Finding the integral relationship between your own personal and the common good is your best contribution to our future. And it is the best hope we have for a better life together. (Jim Wallis, The (Un)Common Good, pp. 297-8)

Gordon Carkner’s Talk on Charles Taylor and the Language of the Good

Posted by: gcarkner | February 24, 2015

Human Slavery in Canada: Feb 25 Professor Ben Perrin

Professor Benjamin Perrin

Screen Shot 2014-11-03 at 6.22.20 PM

Associate Professor UBC Law

Senior Fellow MacDonald-Laurier Institute for Public Policy

 

Confronting Modern-Day Slavery: Human Trafficking in Canada

Wednesday, February 25, 2015 at 4 p.m.

Woodward (IRC) Room 1, UBC

120101_003 Audio  File

Injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere. ~Martin Luther King Jr.

Abstract

Modern-day slavery is one of the most egregious human rights violations of our time. Human trafficking involving sexual exploitation and forced labour occurs around the world – including here in Canada. Professor Perrin will present the main findings from his study on human trafficking in Canada, including the shocking prevalence of Canadian women and girls as victims, and discuss how our country is responding to this hidden national tragedy.

Biography 

Benjamin Perrin is an Associate Professor at the University of British Columbia, Faculty of Law and a Senior Fellow at the Macdonald-Laurier Institute for Public Policy. He is one of Canada’s leading authorities on human trafficking and author of Invisible Chains: Canada’s Underground World of Human Trafficking (Penguin, 2011), which was named one of the top books of the year by the Globe and Mail. Prof. Perrin has served as Special Advisor in the Office of the Prime Minister and Senior Policy Advisor to the Minister of Citizenship and Immigration. The U.S. State Department has recognized him as a “hero” acting to end modern-day slavery.

He received a Bachelor of Commerce from the University of Calgary in 2001, a Juris Doctor from the University of Toronto in 2005, and a Master of Laws (with honours) from McGill University in 2007. He was called to the Bar in Ontario in 2007 and the Bar in British Columbia in 2010. Professor Perrin is an internationally recognized researcher and advocate for victims of crime. The Governor General of Canada and victims’ groups have also recognized him for his work to combat human trafficking and child sexual exploitation. Professor Perrin is the recipient of the Wilson-Prichard Award for Community and Professional Service from the University of Toronto. He is co-editor of Human Trafficking: Exploring the International Nature, Concerns, and Complexities (CRC Press, 2012), and editor of Modern Warfare: Armed Groups, Private Militaries, Humanitarian Organizations and the Law (UBC Press, 2012). He is also the author of numerous law review articles and book chapters, and regularly provides commentary in the media. Prior to joining UBC, he was a law clerk at the Supreme Court of Canada, judicial intern at the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia in The Hague, assistant director of the Special Court for Sierra Leone Legal Clinic (which assisted the Trial and Appeals Chambers), senior policy advisor to the Minister of Citizenship and Immigration, and executive director of a non-governmental organization that combats human trafficking.

 

Posted by: gcarkner | February 18, 2015

Bring Me Justice

Top Picks on Social Justice

Screen Shot 2015-02-18 at 2.53.10 AM

Strength to Love by Martin Luther King Jr.

Let Justice and Peace Embrace by Nicholas Wolterstorff

The (Un)Common Good by Jim Wallis

The Locust Effect: Why the End of Poverty Requires the End of Violence by Gary Haugen and Victor Boutros (OUP)

Leading with Cultural Intelligence by David Livermore

Rich Christians in an Age of Hunger by Ronald J. Sider

Justice Awakening: How You and Your Church Can Help End Human Trafficking by Eddie Byun

Reconciling All Things: a Christian View of Justice, Peace and Healing by Emmanuel Katagole and Chris Rice

The Paradox of Generosity: Giving We Receive, Grasping We Lose by Christian Smith and Hilary Davidson

Just Mercy by Bryan Stevenson

Invisible Chains: Canada’s Underground World of Human Trafficking (Penguin, 2011) by Benjamin Perrin–> See his upcoming lecture at UBC on February 25  https://ubcgcu.org/2015/02/06/ben-perrin-on-human-slavery-in-canada/

The Idea of Justice by Amartya Sen

I am Malala: the Girl Who Stood Up for Education and was Shot by the Taliban by Malala Yousafzai

 

Posted by: gcarkner | February 9, 2015

Poem from C.S. Lewis

From the Collected Poems of C.S.Lewis

‘Set on the soul’s acropolis the reason stands

A virgin arm’d, commercing with celestial light,

And he who sins against her has defiled his own

Virginity: no cleansing makes his garment white;

So clear is reason. But how dark, imagining,

Warm, dark, obscure and infinite, daughter of Night:

Dark is her brow, the beauty of her eyes with sleep

Is loaded, and her pains are long, and her delight.

Tempt not Athene. Wound not in her fertile pains

Demeter, nor rebel against he mother-right.

Oh who will reconcile in me both maid and mother,

Who make me in a concord of the depth and height?

Who make imagination’s dim exploring touch

Ever report the same as intellectual sight?

Then could I truly say and not deceive,

Then wholly say that I BELIEVE’.

Screen Shot 2014-12-21 at 6.40.46 AM

 

 

 

 

 

 

Take note of the upcoming March 25 lecture by Jason Lepojarvi of Oxford

Agape Versus Eros: C.S. Lewis and Anders Nygren on the Meaning of Love

Woodward (IRC) Room 1 (4:00 p.m.)

Posted by: gcarkner | January 29, 2015

Jesus is an Affirmative Statement of Human Existence

Jesus is the Yes and Amen to it All

Screen Shot 2015-01-13 at 10.22.07 AM

Kari Jobe Forever https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=huFra1mnIVE

His divine power has given us everything we need for a godly life through our knowledge of him who called us by his own glory and goodness. Through these he has given us his very great and precious promises, so that through them you may participate in the divine nature, having escaped the corruption in the world caused by evil desires. For this very reason, make every effort to add to your faith goodness; and to goodness, knowledge; and to knowledge, self-control; and to self-control, perseverance; and to perseverance, godliness; and to godliness, mutual affection; and to mutual affection, love. For if you possess these qualities in increasing measure, they will keep you from becoming ineffective and unproductive in your knowledge of our Lord Jesus Christ. (II Peter 1: 3-8)

In II Corinthians 1, the Apostle Paul writes that Jesus is the Yes and the Amen to it all. Here are some reflections on what this might mean. It is a statement on the multi-dimensionality of the one that billions follow today.

  • Colossians 1: 15-20 speaks of Jesus as the source and “glue” of creation and the purpose or end (telos) of creation, both the alpha and omega. He is more than 13.8 billion light years of time. He is above all things in creation and at the same time the ground of creation (the very ground of being itself), without which nothing would exist, without which this very text would be meaningless. All the fullness of God dwells in him (he is God with us–Emmanuel). He is God incarnate (fully God and fully man as per the Athanasian view); in him, God’s eternity connects with creation’s temporality. It is through Christ that all things are reconciled to God—providing the source and basis of healing relationships, both divine and human, the prince (champion) of peace. He is the cornerstone or foundation of the church, through which he is most visible and present to the world by means of the Holy Spirit.
  • He is the fulfillment of all the promises made to the patriarchs (Abraham, Isaac, Israel, etc.) and the prophetic utterances and longings of the Old Testament, the Jewish Messiah, fulfilling the promise of redemption, renewal, justice and reform. He is the mysterious Son of Man spoken about in ancient Hebrew discourse. Jesus is prophet, priest and king. His is the final priestly sacrifice for the sins of mankind.He is also a poet, firing the imagination with his life-giving, inspiring teaching, causing us to rethink our identity and purpose, our vices and virtues. His represents both a unique and universal story, real story, an anchor for a powerful human narrative (its very architecture). He calls humanity to a new level of existence, a journey upward, calling us to a new level of responsibility for the Other, for personal choices and values and for creation.

Read More…

Posted by: gcarkner | January 29, 2015

Building Bridges…5

Dialogue About Jesus of Nazareth

Screen Shot 2015-01-27 at 1.10.37 AM

Few people doubt any more that Jesus actually existed historically (N.T. Wright among many of the greatest world scholars on the ancient world). Most people also agree that he was indeed a great moral teacher and miracle worker. Religious and political leaders throughout the world, including many of the great opponents of Christianity, hail the moral superiority of his life. Mohandas Gandhi the Indian reformer aspired to the ideals of the teaching in the Sermon on the Mount, a monument of justice combined with mercy, a trajectory of peace and nonviolence. The philosopher John Stuart Mill thought Jesus a genius and probably the greatest moral reformer who ever existed. Even Napoleon Bonaparte considered him a superior leader (although these two men were very different in character and ambition). Islam heralds him as a prophet. American civil rights leader Martin Luther King Jr. saw Jesus as someone who could end segregation and bring equality of opportunity between blacks and whites. He could produce the beloved community from all nations and tribes of the world. Bishop Desmond Tutu was assured that Jesus teaching could end the injustice of Apartheid in South Africa and bring reconciliation and healing to a nation torn apart.

There exist today in the minds of people many different versions of Jesus. Cultural interpretation is a key factor in this dialogue. Few would dispute that Jesus is a historical figure, that he is public truth. He is a major culture driver all around the world; his life has had huge impact. But so often, it depends on which version makes a person or group comfortable, which form of Jesus resonates with the cause. Which version do we want to believe? There is the blond-haired, blued-eyed Jesus that Malcolm X despised; to him, this Jesus is a white racist. Others prefer the revolutionary Jesus who looks more like Che Guavera of Liberation Theology, a freedom fighter  keen to overthrow an oppressive government. There is the Jesus who justifies the wealth and hoarding of the privileged classes. Yet others want a Jesus who fits the children’s story book genre: gentle, sweet and loving. Many Global North skeptics, agnostics and atheists are happy with a good moral teacher, a Jesus who is safe and innocuous; this group usually has little concern for the actual content of what he taught (that might clash with their values) or who he actually claimed to be. Let’s not forget the feel good Jesus of the Moral Therapeutic Deism crowd (Christian Smith) who is my Facebook friend, there to make me feel alright, to bless all my desires and gaols and to give me just what I want.  Or worse, there is the Jesus of the health and wealth gospel who will make me rich, if I play my cards right. There seems to be a different Jesus of the political right and left? He is depicted in a variety of motifs in films and plays: Jesus of Montreal, Godspell, Jesus Christ Superstar, The Passion, The Gospel of John. Read More…

Posted by: gcarkner | January 28, 2015

Building Bridges…4

Dialogue Through Language of  the Moral Good

Screen Shot 2015-01-27 at 1.10.37 AM

How can we talk about morality these days in a civil, rational manner? Opinions can be strong and emotions can be close to the surface. Discussions can be quite heated and many fear entering the fray. Charles Taylor offers a way to recover an ancient but lost language for today in his important contribution Sources of the Self (1989), discovered in the research of my Ph.D. thesis on the brokenness of the self and the crisis of identity in late modernity. His challenge in a day of innovation, radical self-construction or self-invention, is to ask what are the goods that you and I are relating to, and in what community and what historical context? This offers some balance to the current rhetoric of radical freedom—a rhetoric which is often bereft of the good. See Taylor’s template to analyze one’s self-construction (from Malaise of Modernity) below:

 

Taylor’s Moral Self-Construction Diagnostics

Category A (Creativity)

(i) Creation and construction (as well as discovery) of the self.

(ii) Pursuit of originality in one’s self-crafting.

(iii) Opposition to the rules of society and even potentially to what one recognizes as morality, or the moral order.

Category B (Social and Moral Accountability)

(i) Openness to horizons of significance prevents one’s self-creation from losing the background that can save it from insignificance and trivialization (self-destruction of meaning).

(ii) Self-definition needs to be developed in dialogue with significant Others, that is, fellow moral interlocutors within a community and a narrative. (Taylor, 1991, pp. 65, 66)

Tension exists between the quest for freedom and creativity and the quest for the good, as most people feel the need to pursue freedom, first and foremost. Thereby people tend to focus on Category A to the exclusion of Category B. Individual autonomous choice is a high priority for late moderns. The movie: Wall Street: money never sleeps kicks into a great discussion about such values. Taylor believes that there is great potential in recovery of the ancient language of the good for today’s moral culture, and in the reassessment of morality within a communal context. In many ways, radical individualism has run into a wall and led to a number of extremes. Poststructuralist philosophers of freedom are also know as philosophers of the extreme. There is maturity and self-undertanding to be achieved through this discourse. He does in the end raise the tough question: “Does the best life involve us seeking or acknowledging or serving a good which is beyond (independent of) mere human flourishing? This also has serious implications for basic happiness or well-being. In this pursuit, Taylor suggests the need for a recovery of the thickness of language:

Our language has lost, and needs to have restored, its constitutive power. This means that we can deal instrumentally with realities around us but their deeper meaning (background in which they exist) the higher reality which finds expression in them, is ignored and invisible. Our language has lost the power to Name things in their embedding, their deeper and higher reality. The current incapacity of language is a crucial factor in our incapacity of seeing and being; our vision and our lives are reduced and flattened.

 A Fruitful Angle on Moral Dialogue

  1. Try to discover the goods (values, human qualities, virtues, ideals) in your friend or interlocutor (dialogue partner). What are their instincts with respect to the good? Are they embracing or running from the good? What good or goods shape them and their outlook?
  1. Get to know them well enough to understand what is their ‘hypergood’ (dominant and controlling good)—something in their ‘heart of hearts’ or core motivation. This is key to connecting with them at the deepest spiritual level, finding that common ground to talk about, breaking through suspicion and building trust.
  1. Discern what they consider the sources of this good (invented, self, nature, God, fantasy/mythology). Where do they look for inspiration of for an example to follow? Where do they find their metaphor for living? This is the motivation question, the constitutive good. Another way of putting it is their moral driver. Where is their community? Their favourite songs, hangouts or movie offer a clue.
  1. Affirm what you can in all of this, and begin your dialogue on this positive common platform: it might be the value of respect for others, concern for the biosphere, protection of the poor, homeless or exploited, social justice, love of children, concern about global warming. You will also find much that you disagree with, but your common cause is what they consider the good. Spend a good amount of time talking about this and understanding it. The common ground creates the arc for significant dialogue and mutual growth.
  1. Dialogue on sources of the good: Respectfully reveal to them some of your common and also divergent commitments. If you are a Christian, share something of how God’s grace and goodness has transformed you and share the joy you experience when mediating this goodness to others. Share some of the stories you have heard, or been a part of, where the good is motivated by God. Discuss the idea of a gift and how it does not fit normal economic exchange.
  1. In love, challenge the person that maybe they have left out (or buried) some of the most important goods in life, things that could animate their existence, give them hope and deep meaning. The gaps in a person’s moral worldview are telling. Taylor insists that we must see the empowerment of self and identity in recovering the language of the good.

We all attempt to construct and make sense of the world. But ultimately, it is God’s infinite goodness that is the measure of all human attempts, human constructions of the good. This is a major gift to our humanity, our human flourishing, our civilization. His glorious goodness (Psalm 107) is our final or ultimate aspiration or marker; it is a powerful form of inspiration. This should keep us humble in our approach; human standards are always somewhat insecure, transient, subject to will to power, tribalism, self-interest and conflicts of interpretation. D. Stephen Long in his brilliant book, The Goodness of God, writes:

The task of Christian ethics is to explain the church’s relationship to other social formations as they develop, die, and mutate into different forms. It will do this by recognizing God’s goodness as that against which all things are measured (including the church). This task will remain as long as those other formations exist. It is a task where our primary vocation is to bear witness to God’s goodness. Such a goodness is not natural to us, although God seeks to share it with us. It is a gift, the gift of Jesus Christ. He is God’s goodness, for God’s goodness is God’s own self.

See also the recent academic book by from Professor R. Scott Smith from Biola University: In Search of Moral Knowledge: overcoming the fact-value dichotomy. (IVP Academic, 2014); and the profound statement by Jim Wallis, The (Un)Common Good: how the gospel brings hope to a world divided. (Brazos, 2014); and the dialogue on The Qualities of the Will within this blog.

~Gord Carkner

 p.s. Dr. Christian Smith, noted sociologist from Notre Dame University, sees that American university students fit generally into a more or less relativistic frame of ethics. They ought to be open to the above discussion of the good amidst a culture of hyperpluralism.

The individual relativist (sometimes called a soft relativist) often makes up morality as life unfolds, sometimes choosing from different religious and philosophical traditions; it is taken to be a matter for self-construction. There is nothing transcendent, objective or systematic about values; moral convictions belong strictly to an individual’s free and personal choice. Tolerance then becomes a necessary sanction of an individual’s views or opinions, so we can loosely get along within a pluralistic values society. It promotes the outlook that there are no absolutes, no right or wrong, no transcendent source of the good, only individual or social constructions, personal values within a marketplace of possible options. Christian Smith (Souls in Transition) articulates the mood this way in his award-winning study on 18-23 year olds. He notes the following characteristics in this generation:

  • soft ontological antirealists
  • epistemological skeptics (question everything)
  • perspectivalists (various ways to see this; mine is only one among many alternatives)
  • in subjective isolation (following my own unique path)
  • constructivists: building my self and my morality from the ground up (often rejecting the tradition of my parents)
  • moral intuitionists (how I feel about a situation or decision is the most important factor)

 

Posted by: gcarkner | January 27, 2015

Building Bridges…3

Dialogue Concerning One’s Worldview

Screen Shot 2015-01-27 at 1.10.37 AM

 

The ability to think, dialogue and examine arguments and evidence within the context of worldview gives a tremendous edge, latitude and creativity to any discussion, academic or personal. It liberates and opens up the field of discussion rather than getting it trapped in a corner or dead end. What’s the value of an intellectual tug-of-war between your opinion and mine? Contextualizing a friend’s various convictions can really help focus your discussion, and move it in a fruitful direction of mutual understanding. It is key that we be patient and listen to each other. We begin from a platform of agape: listen, show respect, try to understand, take responsibly for good discussion. Ask some important, provocative or tough questions as well. Analysis can lead to curiosity and pushing out the envelope of the typical campus dialogue.

Three Major Worldview Categories

Naturalism  Matter alone exists; no God exists; the belief in spiritual entities is superstition or myth, to be replaced by scientific knowledge. Examples of this ideology/religious view is Western secular humanism, Marxism, various forms of materialism. Science is the key source of knowledge. It can lead to Nihilism.

Pantheism  Spirit exists; all is God and God is all; Atman is Brahman (the individual soul longs to be united with the world soul); the material world is maya or illusion). Such views are now global but tend to emerge from India, China and Southeast Asia (e.g. Hinduism, Buddhism) 

Theism   Matter and spirit  co-exist; God is transcendent Creator of all that exists: God is separate from the world, but regularly engages with it; God communicates to the world and his supreme goodness grounds human morality. Theism includes Judaism, Christianity and Islam

While these descriptions are radical oversimplifications, they provide a helpful starting point for dialogue and growth in understanding other views. Naturalism believes the least about the world–most minimalist and mechanistic; Christian Theism believes in the most complexity to reality. See James Sire, The Universe Next Door: a worldview catalogue; Arthur Holmes, Contours of a Christian Worldview; Walsh & Keesmaat, Colossians Remixed. In our world, a whole gamut of positions, from the most militant atheism to the most orthodox traditional theisms are represented and defended somewhere in our society. We often move in and out of various worldviews carried by different groups and institutions all the time in the pluralistic West. Learning worldview language is an essential coping skill and can promote peace and mutual respect.

Dr. Dan Osmond, University of Toronto, School of Medicine: “Whether we realize it or not, all university people have some sort of a view according to which they select, organize and interpret knowledge. Similarly, their behaviour is governed by a moral code [or style] of their choosing. Such views and codes differ widely in their validity and content as well as the quality of the behaviour that they engender.”

 Charles Taylor, Professor Emeritus Philosophy at McGill University (paraphrased): A worldview is a picture that holds us captive; it involves our overall take on human life and its cosmic surroundings. It is the background to our thinking, within whose terms it is carried on, but which is often largely unformulated, and to which we can frequently imagine no alternative. It includes aspects or features of the way experience and thought are shaped and cohere. It is something invisible which people inhabit and it gives shape to what they experience, feel, opine, and see. It is like a set of philosophical glasses. Depending on what worldview has taken us captive, we can either see the transcendent as a threat, a dangerous temptation, a distraction, or as an obstacle to our greatest good. Or we can read it as answering to our deepest craving, need, fulfillment of the good life.

 

Tests for a Good Worldview

a. Coherence: justified by internal coherence and coherence with one’s other knowledge and beliefs.

b. Empirical Openness: it is a conviction which maintains openness to new information rather than being based on a limited data base. It is self-critical and open to thoughtful questions from outside.

c. Personal Relevance: must be livable and fruitful sociologically, i.e. to promote the personal and common good.

d. Explains the Existence of other Worldviews: understands them and how they relate to one’s convictions rather than just being rejected out of hand as a system of thought without any truth-value. Other views are respected and not superficially written off or explained away. Each one has some insights into human nature or the world at large.

Important Note: Key books to assist in dialogue: E.F. Schumacher, A Guide for the Perplexed. (reductionism) James Sire, Why Believe Anything at All? (epistemology); John Stackhouse Jr., Need to Know (epistemology); the literature of Dostoyevski, such as The Brothers Karamozov as a point of entry to one’s worldview; Walker Percy (Lost in the Cosmos); Viktor Frankl (Man’s Search for Meaning); or Charles Taylor, (The Malaise of Modernity). Glenn Tinder The Political Meaning of Christianity. The movies Eat, Pray, Love and  The Life of Pi are worldview journeys which reached cult status for awhile.

     Some Questions to Explore a Person’s Worldview

 Could you identify, diagram and define for me the framework of your present philosophical stance? What are your working assumptions? Who is your favourite thinker? Where do you position or locate yourself in the current plural world of convictions? What resonates with you? What influences have shaped this conviction?

Questions regarding its coherence, unity or consistency as a view of reality as per above.

Is your view open to the data of other people’s experience or do you have your mind made up? Do you maintain a closed or open stance? Agnostics are generally more open and less dogmatic than atheists.

Look for the person’s interpretive paradigm, the intellectual grid through which they sift ideas and issues (philosophical glasses). E.g. Marxism, feminism, scientific materialism, environmentalism, Nihilism, New Age, or some form of liberation. This reveals what Charles Taylor calls the hypergood or dominant value. It is vital for you to understand this core dominating and controlling good in colleagues. When you discover this, handle it with appropriate care.

Ask the questions of the livability and relevance of their view: use the Pragmatic Life Test. How does it improve human life or solve human problems, promote more justice or hope, feed the poor, heal racial relations, help with global warming? Does it have power to promote the common good? How far can the assumptions be taken without promoting evil or destructive consequences?

Are you happy with your present views or are you shopping around for something new, more substantial or a better fit? People have emotions around their cherished beliefs, so tread carefully.

Is your worldview naive or deeply examined? (e.g. Is Richard Dawkins your expert source on religion?)

On what grounds have you ruled out the possibility of the supernatural or transcendent? Do you sense any conflict between Naturalism and science as such? (Alvin Plantinga)

Where do you see yourself moving philosophically at the moment? Are you sensing some doubts about your worldview?

One might even explore the need for a whole new human narrative (Jeremy Rifkin, The Empathic Civilization) beyond greed, violence, individualism, aggressive behaviour, biosphere devastation.

What is the explanatory power of your materialistic Naturalism?: David Bentley Hart The Experience of God: Being, Consciousness, Bliss; Thomas Nagel, Mind and Cosmos; Alvin Plantinga, Where the Conflict Really Lies.

What gives your life hope, meaning, strength and direction? Does the cynicism of many people bother you?

  •  Spark Curoiosity
  • Build Relationship
  • Leverage of Language
  • Show Patience
  • Provocative Questions
  • Build a Connection–Common Good
  • Creativity of Approaches
  • Investigation
  • Intellectual Hospitality
  • Poetics to Help Fresh Thinking
  • Tell Your Story
  • Rebuild Plausibility Conditions
  • Tell the Jesus Story
  • Develop a Platform
Posted by: gcarkner | January 27, 2015

Building Bridges…2

Robust Evidence and Argument that Have Currency Today

Screen Shot 2015-01-27 at 1.10.37 AM

 

There is a strong heritage of evidence and good argument, a multivalent discourse, to establish the credibility and viability of the Christian faith. It is a several stranded cord which represents centuries of work, research, and debate by scholars. There is a strong rational and empirical ground or space to discuss all the parameters of the Christian convictions and spiritual journey. It offers a rich array of evidence for the seeker and the interested skeptic or agnostic.

  1. Meaningful Religious Experience: This refers to the power of individual stories with God, divine encounters and personal transformation. Where has God met me in my human situation and pain? How has my faith made an impact on my life? Stories of other saints who incarnate love or radical pursuit of God (Mother Teresa, Jean Vanier, Francis of Assissi, Martin Luther). David Adams Richards a famous Canadian novelist has such evidence: God Is: my search for faith in a secular world. (bestseller). Two billion plus believers is quite a number to deceive from all walks of life, all cultures, all careers, and all levels of education and wealth.
  1. Philosophical Credibility Tests These include criteria of coherence, consistency, unity, comprehensiveness (more important in the early modern outlook or those oriented to Anglo-American philosophy and the laws of logic). What is the explanatory range and cogency of  the Christian worldview? How much of reality can it explain? Is it compatible or does it conflict with science and how so?  Natural theology uses the wonders of nature to point to a creative mind, a cosmic artist; human consciousness and moral bent to point to a cosmic mind or a moral ground of the good (e.g. Robert J. Spitzer, New Proofs for the Existence of God: contributions of contemporary physics and philosophy; Faith and Reason: Three Views. edited by Steve Wilkins; David Bentley Hart, The Experience of God: being consciousness. bliss). Critical realism is a key term; it encourages critical thinking and an open mind.
  1. Historical Evidence or Verification Who was Jesus? Can we believe in his resurrection? What about the scholarship behind the Scriptural documents? What evidence do we have from archaeology of the Ancient Near East? (See Rodney Stark, One True God: Historical Consequences of Monotheism. He is a major contributor in research on Christianity’s social impact. See also David Bentley Hart Atheist Delusions: the Christian revolution and its fashionable enemies.) See also the new Christianity on Trial: a lawyer examines the Christian faith by W. Mark Lanier (IVP 2014). This tends towards the empirical test or the integrity of the Christian story.
  1. Practical/Pragmatic Test or Livability We might say to our friend, “That’s a clever idea of reality that makes you God, but can you live it out responsibly without hurting a lot of people?” It is one thing to think nihilistically, another to live it to its bitter end. Reality bites back: this is important for university students who love those all-night residence discussions. One can invent sophisticated views of the universe, but can we build any long-term relationship upon it? You may like the idea of a world without God and without morality, but you may also be the first to cry injustice if you or your family are violated in some way. One cannot have the proverbial cake and eat it as well.
  1. Special Revelation This includes the prophetic and apostolic records in Old and New Testaments. This is a really astounding set of records with millions of hours of top scholarship behind it. Bishop Lesslie Newbigin in Gospel in a Pluralistic Society says we need to inhabit or indwell the biblical story, be embedded and nourished by it thoroughly. Natural revelation in creation is not enough; otherwise Christian ethics would be full of violence and cannibalism, tooth and claw; we need natural and special revelation in balance (Alister McGrath, A Fine-tuned Universe: the quest for God in science and theology) What is the Creator like and what does he have for us, expect of us? What is the storyline, the human narrative of the Bible? Is there meaning beyond mere survival, beyond mere human flourishing? The human narrative is powerfully recast in the Bible; it suggests that we are hard-wired for community and benevolence.
  1. Love, Compassion & Community People need to witness the human good incarnated in Christian believers, a good which is sourced in the infinite goodness of God. Incarnational humanism can be impressive: (Jens Zimmerman, Incarantional Humanism; D. Stephen Long, The Goodness of God)). One’s apologetic has to include words and argument, but also more than words–integrity, hope, compassion. James Davison Hunter in To Change the World articulates a very powerful idea of faithful presence, a commitment to shalom, the well-being or human flourishing of others. Jim Wallis has a new book along this line which includes compassion and the transformation of society in the gospel of Jesus: The (Un)Common Good.People need both reasons of the heart and reasons of the mind: credibility and relevance.” writes scientist and theologian Blaise Pascal.

Our Experience Establishes this Conviction: Intellectual Credibility/Cogency + Personal Relevance + Demonstrable Moral Integrity –> promotes Serious Plausibility and Curiosity in the Mind of the Seeker. Click on the Apologetics Resources button on this Blog to get a taste of some excellent writing in this area and answers to your questions.

This multifaceted approach builds bridges and can rebuild the plausibility conditions for Christian faith in our late modern culture, in order to help people escape from Nihilism (a failure of culture). This is a trajectory of intrigue, attraction and engagement and hopefully down the road a life of faithful discipleship, meaning and joy. Willingness to deal with doubts and skepticism is vital. We are all some admixture or  combination of faith and doubt; it is a question of how we sort through both our faith and our doubt as a journey to maturity: See Philip Yancey, Reaching for the Invisible God. At the end of the day, we all have to make sense of our world and our experience. We can ill afford to keep our head in the sand and hope the issues will disappear.

~Gord Carkner

« Newer Posts - Older Posts »

Categories