Why it is Hard to Make Progress

Muslims in this country, and around the world, complain that when they see protesters near ground zero or the dude in Florida they feel "demonized as a people" for the actions of a few.

When I see Muslims in other lands burning flags and holding signs denouncing America, I feel demonized as a people for the actions of a few.

A man in Florida wants to burn a sacred symbol of Islam.

Because they are angry at the man for threatening to burn their sacred symbol , Muslims overseas burn a sacred symbol of America.

Because Timmy pushed Johnny on the playground, Johnny pushed Timmy.

You have heard it said, "an eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth. But I say do not resist an evildoer. But if anyone strikes you on the right cheek, turn the other also.

The Power of the Book

Ok... for the moment let's bracket the events in Gainesville. Let's take a step back and a broader question.....

What is it about books?

Mr. Jones is not the first person to ever dream up the idea of burning books. It is an old practice. They used to do it to people, too, although that is a somewhat different question. But I think it is related.

Why burn books? What does book burning represent? And, why are we bothered by book burning?

Ray Bradbury, whose novel Fahrenheit 451 explores the subject, had this reflection on his novel which appeared in the 1987 mass market paperback:

There is more than one way to burn a book. And the world is full of people running about with lit matches. Every minority, be it Baptist / Unitarian, Irish / Italian / Octogenarian / Zen Buddhist / Zionist / Seventh-day Adventist / Women's Lib / Republican / Mattachine / FourSquareGospel feels it has the will, the right, the duty to douse the kerosene, light the fuse….Fire-Captain Beatty, in my novel Fahrenheit 451, described how the books were burned first by the minorities, each ripping a page or a paragraph from this book, then that, until the day came when the books were empty and the minds shut and the library closed forever.

Books contain ideas. And ideas have always been dangerous. But ideas also exist in other forms, other media. The internet is full of ideas. But books are unique in two significant ways.

The are permanent. They embody accountability.

Once something is printed, it is there, in the world. Television programs come and go. Internets sites can be taken down. But books sit on shelves. Ancient writings are still in print. Ancient talk over the fence long since drifted away. But writings stay around. Ideas stay around. And when ideas are committed to print, they might be read. And if they are read, they might provoke thought. And if thought is provoked, who can say where the chaos and anarchy might end?

Not every book can be traced to its author. But, by and large, books and their authors are inseparable. Even Soren Kierkegaard, who utilized a variety of pseudonyms, could not separate his responsibility as creator from the texts he created.

In today’s world of social media and electronic communication, there seems little need for many to associate themselves with the words they produce. Whether this is a good thing is a matter of debate. But a book and its author are known. The writer is responsible for his words. I still believe that is a good thing.

So what about burning? The number of books, and the historical periods in which they were burned, are too many to mention. Perhaps at root is the perennial reality of human fear. Fear on what is different. Fear of change. Those in power fear the challenge to power. Those whose world view is carefully and fearfully constructed are afraid of learning or ideas that challenge the world view. If we destroy the idea, it does not exist. If we destroy the one who brought the idea, it does not exist. Ultimately it is about control. We desire to control that which we cannot control. But we can burn or destroy that which represents what we cannot control. And so we do. We censor, burn, destroy, execute.

But the book is not the idea---or the reality. The book only points toward the reality. They might have burned Galileo but that would not have made him wrong. You can burn Das Kapital but that does not make Marx’s observations less cogent. You can burn To Kill a Mockingbird but that doesn’t remove racism.

I understand why Muslims are offended at the burning of the Koran. I know why Christians would be upset if Bibles were burned. Many people are disturbed when flags and other symbols are burned.

But a book is just a book. A symbol is just a symbol. What the book and the symbol point to cannot be burned, executed, or destroyed. Ideas are immortal, even if the earthly body in which they live is destroyed.

While on the Subject

of science and religion.... here is another piece on the subject

A Sympathetic View of Beck

I have posted an article or two of skepticism surrounding Glenn Beck's recent march on Washington. So in fairness I want to draw your attention to a sympathetic piece written by Taylor Branch for the New York Times. Branch is a Pulitzer Prize winner for his three volume history of the civil rights era.

You can link the article here.

Stephen Hawkings' Amazing Revelation

Physicist Stephen Hawking has a new book. According to press reports Hawking answers the definitive question--- GOD IS NOT NECESSARY FOR THE CREATION OF THE UNIVERSE!!!!

Oh dear, what shall we do? All is lost!!! Centuries of writing on science and religion--- centuries of religious faith--- all gone, all wasted.

Because Stephen Hawking says God is not necessary.

Seriously, if this is what sells books I should have thought of that long ago. Of course God is not NECESSARY to understand the universe and its origins. You think Hawking is the first physicist to ever state that the Big Bang is simply the inevitable result of the laws of physics? I know of a certain Cosmology textbook in which the first chapter pretty much differentiates between religious "myth" and science. And it is also available on Amazon! (But it is WAY more expensive)

However, just because Hawking (or anyone else) says God was not necessary for the creation of the universe, this does not mean they are right. The word "necessary" implies an either/or which is not called for. Perhaps, as faith would have it, God is at the heart of the creation of the universe. Perhaps not. But necessary? This sounds like a marketing word. But there is a more important point here. This rhetoric (I have not read his book so do not know all of what Hawking says) diverts us from what I think is a more significant matter. Creation is not an either/or with God and science. We need to be clear as to what "creation" we are talking about.

The Bible does attribute creative powers to God. Beyond the obvious Genesis references, the prophets, such as Isaiah, invoked God's universe creating persona as a way of inducing the people to return to the covenant. After the exiles in Babylon grew accustomed to their new life, the prophetic wing of the faith felt obliged to remind them that, of all the gods at their disposal, only one was capable of creating the heavens and the earth. But this was not a matter of physics, it was a matter of pre-eminance. This claim that God is the Creating God was to differentiate Yahweh from any number of social and cultural gods which vied for the attention of the people. This was a matter of idolatry, not of physics.

Did Jesus ever wonder why he did not just float out into space? Surely an apple fell on his head at least once. Why did that not lead him to think about gravity centuries before Isaac Newton? Perhaps because his attention was diverted by the question of why religious leaders where exploiting the people for their own sakes? He seemed more interested in why people were captive to injustice and disease than why they were captive to gravity. When asked what the greatest of the laws was, Jesus did not respond with the laws of physics. He responded with the laws of ethics. To love one's neighbor as oneself.

In the beginning was the Word. All things were created through the Word. So says the Gospel of John. Now we could spend a lot of time parsing the word Word--its LOGOS origins-- but it is sufficient to say that the Word is, well, the Word. In the beginning was the Word--language, thought, idea. And all things are created through Word. Cat becomes Cat by naming it Cat. Tree becomes Tree by naming it Tree. Language builds and creates world. This is good insofar as we can tell the difference between and cat and a dog. It is bad when language creates a world that is racist, hateful, unjust. If you don't believe that language can create world than you haven't been paying attention to political advertisements, 24/7 cable news and right wing talk radio.

Christianity is a faith rooted in the world creation of the Word. And the Word is not a physical principle, a first cause, or a big bang. The Word is a man--Jesus Christ--who came not to argue with Stephen Hawking but to dwell among us with grace and truth and to witness the love for the Cosmos that God intends. I feel God is necessary for such world creation as this. For the world we inhabit is a world that is created in and around our perception of it, the language we use to describe it, and the communication we use to relate to it and each other. If that is to be a world of mutual love and justice--God is, indeed, necessary.

All of which has nothing to do with the Big Bang.

Wednesday Haiku- Secrets

I have been out of the loop for a bit on the Haikus.... but here is an effort based upon today's theme.... secrets. This event sponsored by youknowthatblog.com.


Quiet....come closer
bend your knee and lend your ear
I have a secret

It is worse than that
There is no gain in guessing
Do not draw your breath

your eyes dialate
Good! They need to claim the light
Hold on to hope's thread

and strike a balance
as my words like coal darken
what's left of your dreams

The secret? Ah, yes,
I nearly forgot to share
but now it is late

And the secret waits
nocturnal instinct aroused
behind every bush

Five Guidelines to Rational Thinking

I was going through a box of old papers and memoribilia from my father's past when I came across a small card, upon which were typed Five Guidelines to Rational Thinking. I have no idea of thier origin, or why specifically my father kept this card. I do not know if they are his guidelines or borrowed from another. In any event, I post them here for whatever value they may have. After all, anything that promotes us to better rational thinking is ok in my book.

1. Is this thought based on objective reality?

2. Does this thought help me to protect my life?

3. Does this thought help me to reach my short and long-term goals?

4. Does this thought prevent significant conflict with others?

5. Does this thought help me to feel the way I want to feel?


Incidentally... I have gone over 5000 page views since I started earlier this year. Don't know what that means, exactly, but it sounds significant.