Monthly Archives: May 2013

Entitled to your opinion, eh?

Posted on by
Reply

So, does everyone have a right to their opinion?  It depends what you mean by “opinion” and by “right,” I suppose.  But, no, everyone does not have a right to every opinion, whether their own or by taking on the opinion of someone else.

An interesting commentary by Patrick Stokes, Lecturer in Philosophy at Deakin University in Australia.  Read the whole thing article: “No, you’re not entitled to your opinion.”

Quotes from paragraphs:

Secondly, I say something like this: “I’m sure you’ve heard the expression ‘everyone is entitled to their opinion.’ Perhaps you’ve even said it yourself, maybe to head off an argument or bring one to a close. Well, as soon as you walk into this room, it’s no longer true. You are not entitled to your opinion. You are only entitled to what you can argue for.”

A bit harsh? Perhaps, but philosophy teachers owe it to our students to teach them how to construct and defend an argument – and to recognize when a belief has become indefensible.

The problem with “I’m entitled to my opinion” is that, all too often, it’s used to shelter beliefs that should have been abandoned. It becomes shorthand for “I can say or think whatever I like” – and by extension, continuing to argue is somehow disrespectful. And this attitude feeds, I suggest, into the false equivalence between experts and non-experts that is an increasingly pernicious feature of our public discourse…

Perhaps that’s one reason (no doubt there are others) why enthusiastic amateurs think they’re entitled to disagree with climate scientists and immunologists and have their views “respected.”…

So what does it mean to be “entitled” to an opinion?

If “Everyone’s entitled to their opinion” just means no-one has the right to stop people thinking and saying whatever they want, then the statement is true, but fairly trivial.

But if ‘entitled to an opinion’ means ‘entitled to have your views treated as serious candidates for the truth’ then it’s pretty clearly false. And this too is a distinction that tends to get blurred.

….or to borrow a phrase from Andrew Brown, it “confuses losing an argument with losing the right to argue.” Again, two senses of “entitlement” to an opinion are being conflated here.

 

Marwage…

Posted on by
Reply

So, I’m reading through Genesis. I find it funny how certain segments of God’s crazy Church talk about “Biblical marriage.” So far, without commentary or condemnation within the text, the only marriages I’ve encountered are incest (Abraham married to his half sister Sarah by their father, etc.) and polygamy (Abraham married Hagar to have Ishmael, etc.). Not only that, but Lot’s two daughters get him drunk to have sex with him (their father) to keep the bloodline going. And, of course, this is how “marriage” is throughout Scripture.

I always find it particularly ironic that those who cry for the internal integrity and infallibility of Scripture (which I understand) twist it for their sociology-political or personal interests (which I don’t understand). But, there is nothing new under the sun and the willful ignorance at best or the compromised intentions, the dark hearts at worst, of men are always with us.

Pay attention clerics and search committees…

Posted on by
Reply

Attention clerics and search committees of the Church – This short blog post: Rectors (Pastors): The Odds are Against You! from an experience, retired cleric (Fr. Robert Terrill) is simply the reality and everyone has to face up to it – particularly those bishops with jurisdiction, especially the Executive Council, and finally the General Convention (throw into the mix seminary deans and professors).

From the Episcopal Journey of Hope blog of

“Again the question, ‘Parish clergy, do you want to improve the odds?’ First, you must be a strong leader.  Barna’s [Barna Research Group] studies found that churches that ‘call’ caretakers, healers, managers, administrators, teachers or consensus builders fail to gain ground.  Good intentions coupled with the title of Pastor or Rector is not enough.  Barna states, ‘toughness is requisite for leadership in making decisions that disturb the status quo but benefit the body.’  The point is that leadership is not about being loved by everybody.  It is doing what is best for the parish even though it may stir up some complaints or disturb tranquil settings.”

Read the whole post here.

Trans-cultural

Posted on by
Reply

“Oddly, I leave this project [the National Study of Youth and Religion] strangely hopeful. The best news about Moralistic Therapeutic Deism is that teenagers do not buy it as faith. They but _into_ it – it shapes them nicely for fitting into American society, since it conforms so neatly to America’s dominant cultural ethos. Youth and parents are correct if they think Moralistic Therapeutic Deism will outfit them better for success in American society than Christianity will. Those who want to succeed in American life, and attain high levels of visibility in it, will find that being theologically bland helps immeasurably. Yet the gospel is very clear: God wants to liberate us from being defined by these circumstances, so that we are free to follow Jesus regardless of the culture we call home” (“Almost Christian”, by Kendra Creasy Dean, p. 192)

So then, what is our goal as the Church, as priests of the Church, and as the people who are the Church?

Will it be whatever gets us the most attention from the general public? Will it be what makes us the most successful within general society? Will it be whatever we think will cause those in power to like us? Will it be bland conformity to the cultural zeitgeist? Will it be the vain presumption that we (of a generation) can make up the religion that comes from the Faith under our own volition?

Or… or will it be faithfulness to the enduring way if Christ? The way that has not only survived but thrived through the millennia, through a vast array of cultures and languages, through very divergent circumstances – will it be by way of the wisdom of generations past who found life-to-the-full in the troublesome Gospel of Jesus Christ?

Change and adaptation are always with us! Change isn’t the enemy, but we must be wise about the change we engage in. We must be discerning concerning the change agents.

The adaptation we need most right now revolves around perception and intention. We will be, must be even now, trans-cultural with respect to the prevailing American culture and the Way of Christ – in the world and all that is positive and negative, yet not of it. We chart an independent course. We will acquire by the way if grace the strength and resulting freedom for doing so.

Changing perceptions

Posted on by
Reply

prattshowposterIt was interesting to me to see and hear what these young “creatives” from the Pratt Institute are thinking about in their design theory, creative process, social understanding, and sense of where things are going through their art (fine, graphic, communications, media, digital, etc.) and design (architecture, industrial, interior, fashion, furniture, etc.).  300 of Pratt’s most accomplished graduating students are presenting their work at the annual Pratt Institute juried exhibit at the Manhattan Center.

One observation deals with their projection of the “post-digital” age – their words.  Did you “hear” that? A rediscovery and assertion of the analogue concept – not really about sound recording, but applied to all manner of things.  There is a sense that their current reality is within a developing “post-digital” age in conceptual ways, but most profoundly in relational ways.

The other interesting observance deals with social understandings.  In the “interior design” exhibit, there is a presentation of interior space as a means for relational community generation and development.  The project deals with ways of designing large, interior gathering spaces, and in this instance a “mega-church” is the project focus.  Remember, these are all incredibly well thought out projects – many have won national awards. Smack-dab in the middle of the interior depiction graphic of the “mega-church” are people in pews (yes, pews) as if right after the service is ending.  Along with others, there are two guys holding hands, a couple.  There are a good number of Christians at Pratt – and they are very adept at naturally integrating their faith in their creative work, but not like what general society is used to.  My assumption is that a project depicting a “mega-church” is probably a Christian student’s.

Which leads me to this: The profoundly destructive battles being waged in the Culture Wars are just not there for these folks (a war mostly being fought by Baby-Boomers and the first part of GenX – like me).  The dualistic tendencies (and frankly, fundamentalistic whether political or religious) are not present, as of yet.  Yet, I say, because moving into adulthood in these times seems to dictate a giving up of hope, excitement, wonder, and discovery for something like cynicism, drudgery, abject anger, bitterness, and forlornness.

In these students, there is still hope!  That’s why I like working with students – there is still positive hope!

College Students and the Hook-up Culture

Posted on by
Reply

A review by Caroline Simon of Donna Freitas‘ new book, “The End of Sex: How Hookup Culture is Leaving a Generation Unhappy, Sexually Unfulfilled, and Confused About Intimacy.” (Simon is professor of philosophy at Hope College in Holland, MI and Freitas was a former professor of religion at Boston College.) The book is written for a secular audience, but this review is from Christianity Today. Interesting propositions and insights on today’s college students and their attitudes and actions revolving around sex and intimacy.

A paragraph:

What Freitas finds most disturbing about hookup culture is that most of those who participate do so less than willingly. The students that she interviewed almost always saw their hookups as imposed by social expectations or as random acts—”It just happened” was a prevailing theme. In this context she has illuminating observations about the link between hookup sex and alcohol. Students “pre-drink” before going to parties because they want to be numb enough to do things that they would not do if sober. At some level they know that engaging with sexual behaviors of various sorts with strangers and casual acquaintances is demeaning. They brace themselves to do these things because they “know” that this is what “everybody” does at parties.