We were having a lovely discussion in preparation for Don Rags, when I suddenly had the most amazing epiphany. God is so amazingly beautifully merciful. I had been getting inklings of it while I was studying the Pentateuch, and more as I studied Hebrews with Melanie, but I saw a much more full picture of it tonight. I shall try to explain it here, but I'm really not sure that I can do it justice.
We started the semester with Homer, Virgil, and Ovid. These books taught us that the gods are arbitrary, unjust, and chaotic. Ovid in particular portrayed the gods as being immortal and powerful humans, more human than we are.
Then we moved on to Dante, who even in Hell offered us hope. Here was a system that is ordered. Hell is not a random pile of all the humanity that ever offended a God. It is instead a carefully organized and orchestrated system of punishment based on a very detailed moral system. In Purgatory and Paradise, we got a glimpse of a way of escape from the doom that we all seem to deserve.
Spenser's Faerie Queen was next. Here we saw the possibility of redemption displayed in myth. Here was a good human wanting to accomplish his quest, but he is incapacitated by weakness. Then he is healed, and equipped to conquer, redeemed.
Milton then went to the root of everything, the very beginning. He showed how the thing that brought this chaos in the first place was that Satan wanted to be God, and then brought mankind around to his way of thinking as well. Satan is the ultimate Homeric hero. He is in it for the glory. In Paradise Regained, we see the perfect man being the perfect hero: Christ is in it for God's glory, not his own. So here we see the problem begin, and how to defeat it, but we are incapable of being the perfect man. We cannot beat this problem.
Then we move on to the Pentateuch. Here we see God show an insane amount of mercy. Even as he punished mankind for their disobedience, he shows mercy. He saves us from immortality. If the gods are what we would become if we were immortal, than this is a mercy indeed. Humans, in this weakened state cannot stand immortality. Also, from the midst of the horror of the Canaanite and Egyptian gods, we see him rescue a nation. He calls them his own people, and says that he will be their God. He gives them these laws that separate them from the other nations and mark them as his. Some of these laws must have seemed so arbitrary at the time, but with modern technology, they make perfect sense. The laws he gave them protected them from many ills, both physical and societal. He offers them a way to atone for their rebellions so that he can live among them without destroying them. His mercy seen here is exquisite.
But then comes Hebrews, and the world suddenly becomes painfully beautiful. In Hebrews we see that the mercy show in the Pentateuch is nothing compared to the mercy that has been shown us. We thought that the sacrificial system was merciful. Christ accomplished more in one death than the death of all of the animals killed in the history of the world. In the death of the perfect man, the debt owed by sinners was forever paid. In the resurrection of the triumphant sacrifice, death was forever conquered. We may die, but there is no longer any need to fear. The sort of immortality we were created for awaits us on the other side. In the continual perfection of the perfect man sin was destroyed. Suddenly we are no longer trapped in the chaos. The door to heaven has been unlocked, and all that is needed now is to enter it.
How is that we miss this? God is good. infinitely so. He is not safe, but he is good. The beauty of what he has done and who he is is breathtaking and so much more than we can even begin to imagine...I am blown away.
Friday, December 08, 2006
Sunday, December 03, 2006
Saturday, November 18, 2006
The Lady Is Not For Buning
Christopher Fry's play The Lady Is Not For Burning is AMAZING!!! It shows us ourselves in a mirror, and gives hope to the hopeless, rest for the weary, and courage to the faint of heart. God is good.
Thursday, November 09, 2006
Elections
It was a very odd feeling to realize that I actually have a say in what is happening in this country. It is also a rather interesting feeling to realize that my vote is not included in the the current election results. Alas for absentee voting. Regardless, I now have the right to complain about the state of this country. I voted.
While I don't claim to know the statistics, the general impression that I get is that there are a whole lot of people out there who weren't willing to vote for some reason or other. I also get the impression that a lot of those people are pretty vocal about their disapproval of the state of our country. To them I say, if you don't like the way this country is being run, do something about it. Vote. If you are not willing to do so, then don't complain. You chose this state of affairs by refusing to make a choice.
To those of you that did vote, I salute you. Whether or not I agree with how you voted is immaterial, I'm just thankful that you care about our country.
To those who serve in our armed forces, and to their families, THANK YOU! With out your courage and sacrifice, this country would probably not exist as we know it. God bless you and keep you from harm and set his angels to protect you.
While I don't claim to know the statistics, the general impression that I get is that there are a whole lot of people out there who weren't willing to vote for some reason or other. I also get the impression that a lot of those people are pretty vocal about their disapproval of the state of our country. To them I say, if you don't like the way this country is being run, do something about it. Vote. If you are not willing to do so, then don't complain. You chose this state of affairs by refusing to make a choice.
To those of you that did vote, I salute you. Whether or not I agree with how you voted is immaterial, I'm just thankful that you care about our country.
To those who serve in our armed forces, and to their families, THANK YOU! With out your courage and sacrifice, this country would probably not exist as we know it. God bless you and keep you from harm and set his angels to protect you.
Friday, November 03, 2006
Monster House
Today I took a break from studying and went with some friends to see the movie Monster House. It was a very interesting movie. I enjoyed it, but I think that it would terrify a lot of little kids...or at least, I would have been terrified. All in all though, I liked it. The plot was a bit predictable, but not in an ordinary way. I did find some of the unnecessary crudeness annoying, and disliked their stereotyping of law enforcement. But other than the usual annoyances....
*SPOILER*
In order to stop Constance, Mr. Nebbercracker had to become her. When they show
Constance before she falls, her reaction to the children is almost the same as Mr Nebbercracker's reaction to the kids on his lawn. So to stop her, he had to become her. But it didn't work. It ended up destroying her, and almost destroying him, and imprisoning them both for 40 years.
I also thought it was interesting that despite the occasional crudity, femininity played a very wholesome role. The mother is rather clueless, but she had a point in trying to make the dad tell his son that he loved him. "Z" had a point in kicking Bones out for disrespecting her (isn't it sad that like a lot of girls, she didn't have the confidence in herself to leave him out). Then you have Jenny spurring both Chowder and DJ to heroic deeds. They would never have had the gut to do what they had to if it hadn't been for her, but she didn't overpower them. They were definitely the main players.
Monster House was also a story about what it means to grow up. It starts out with DJ not quite sure of himself, somewhere between childhood and adulthood. He wants to be grown up, but somehow he's just a wanabe. But by the end of the movie, he has learned to be responsible, but is okay with having fun and acting like a kid. That is maturity.
*SPOILER*
In order to stop Constance, Mr. Nebbercracker had to become her. When they show
Constance before she falls, her reaction to the children is almost the same as Mr Nebbercracker's reaction to the kids on his lawn. So to stop her, he had to become her. But it didn't work. It ended up destroying her, and almost destroying him, and imprisoning them both for 40 years.
I also thought it was interesting that despite the occasional crudity, femininity played a very wholesome role. The mother is rather clueless, but she had a point in trying to make the dad tell his son that he loved him. "Z" had a point in kicking Bones out for disrespecting her (isn't it sad that like a lot of girls, she didn't have the confidence in herself to leave him out). Then you have Jenny spurring both Chowder and DJ to heroic deeds. They would never have had the gut to do what they had to if it hadn't been for her, but she didn't overpower them. They were definitely the main players.
Monster House was also a story about what it means to grow up. It starts out with DJ not quite sure of himself, somewhere between childhood and adulthood. He wants to be grown up, but somehow he's just a wanabe. But by the end of the movie, he has learned to be responsible, but is okay with having fun and acting like a kid. That is maturity.
Monday, October 30, 2006
Poems
As I was looking through my poems for a particular song, I happened to find this hodgepodge of poems and thought that I would share them. (I just came up with the titles today to differentiate the different poems, so the titles are not the best.)
*EDIT*
Salvation
Between us and despair
Is a cross that is bloodstained
A tomb that is empty
God, with holes in his hands.
Is a cross that is bloodstained
A tomb that is empty
God, with holes in his hands.
Wistful Hello
As we past in the street,
Practically strangers,
I said hello.
He only smiled.
A slow, sad, wistful smile
That would break your heart
Practically strangers,
I said hello.
He only smiled.
A slow, sad, wistful smile
That would break your heart
Weeping Laughter
She laughs at me, herself, the world
Defiant, yet she cowers
The laughter, a cover for tears
Defiant, yet she cowers
The laughter, a cover for tears
My Friend
The past, the tears, the terror, the fears
The memories that destroy
I weep for you, my brother, my friend
I weep for you, when will it end?
The hurt, the pain you try to deny
I see the path you walk, and cry
Joe
I could have sworn there were tears in your eyes
When I turned to you and told you
Christ will not give up on you
A soul on the rack, your voice nearly broke
As you said, I’ve already given up on myself
You punched the wall till blood fell
Trying to forget.
Your face a mask of agony.
When I said Christ will not give up on you
You said “I already have”
I don’t know what you have been through
But on that fateful day
your allegiance you changed.
Your soul belongs to Christ,
and he will bring you home
Even when you’ve given up
When I turned to you and told you
Christ will not give up on you
A soul on the rack, your voice nearly broke
As you said, I’ve already given up on myself
You punched the wall till blood fell
Trying to forget.
Your face a mask of agony.
When I said Christ will not give up on you
You said “I already have”
Since that day, I’ve rarely seen you
I don’t know what you have been through
But on that fateful day
your allegiance you changed.
Your soul belongs to Christ,
and he will bring you home
He will not give up on you,
Even when you’ve given up
The road home will not be easy,
it rarely is
but through the fire he’ll bring you,
pure as gold.
Though we pass through the fire,
Or over us the waters roll,
He will never leave you
In his hands he holds your soul.
Broken Soul
Defiance and rage
Combine in his face
Yet powerless to change
Destroy or erase
The terror of the past
The power it wields
How long will it last?
How long till it yields?
Combine in his face
Yet powerless to change
Destroy or erase
The terror of the past
The power it wields
How long will it last?
How long till it yields?
The power of the cross
Can heal this soul
Find this one who is lost
Make the broken whole
Saturday, October 28, 2006
No fairytale dreams for you
none of this dream come true
Far from a dream, your life's a wreck,
a nightmare of your own creation.
Where do you go from here?
Where's the prince charming to stop the spell,
save you. Awaken you once more.
All you have is what you have left
No less. No more
Your soul is sickened, weak and dying
who can save you, make you whole?
Where is prince charming to ride in and rescue,
to take you from this mess?
The sword you've been given, but you're too weak to lift it.
The power to break the spell you have but cannot use.
you are all that stands between you and certain death,
But you have no strength to fight
hope is lost. Darkness falls.
another head fell, and lost all hope.
he breathed his last and died.
But that was not the end.
Nor was it the beginning.
This was no mere mortal man
This was god incarnate.
God all powerful became a helpless infant
Then, when he became a man
Other men betrayed and killed their creator.
But like I said, 'twas not the end
Three days after he breathed his last
three days after he was nailed to a cross
those lungs took in air
That still heart began to beat
and that once dead body got up and walked right out of the grave.
he let them kill him for you
he died so that you might live again.
He died to weild the sword.
He died to break the spell
He died your death you could not stop
He died to make you whole.
Your prince is out there
beyond the wall
Calling
Will you let him take you
from this place of death and destruction?
Will you let him take your place and bring you to life?
none of this dream come true
Far from a dream, your life's a wreck,
a nightmare of your own creation.
Where do you go from here?
Where's the prince charming to stop the spell,
save you. Awaken you once more.
All you have is what you have left
No less. No more
Your soul is sickened, weak and dying
who can save you, make you whole?
Where is prince charming to ride in and rescue,
to take you from this mess?
The sword you've been given, but you're too weak to lift it.
The power to break the spell you have but cannot use.
you are all that stands between you and certain death,
But you have no strength to fight
hope is lost. Darkness falls.
another head fell, and lost all hope.
he breathed his last and died.
But that was not the end.
Nor was it the beginning.
This was no mere mortal man
This was god incarnate.
God all powerful became a helpless infant
Then, when he became a man
Other men betrayed and killed their creator.
But like I said, 'twas not the end
Three days after he breathed his last
three days after he was nailed to a cross
those lungs took in air
That still heart began to beat
and that once dead body got up and walked right out of the grave.
he let them kill him for you
he died so that you might live again.
He died to weild the sword.
He died to break the spell
He died your death you could not stop
He died to make you whole.
Your prince is out there
beyond the wall
Calling
Will you let him take you
from this place of death and destruction?
Will you let him take your place and bring you to life?
Hope in the Dark
You hold the knife
And wonder how to stop this pain
You don't want to die,
You don't want to live.
You simply want the pain to end.
The pain you feel inside is killing you
This life is destroying you
You wonder if there is any reason to live
Is there a world beyond the pain?
If there is, is there anyway to that world?
Or is a knife your only answer?
You drop your head and weep,
Desperate for hope
Empty
Dying
Beyond the graveyard of dreams
There is hope
There is light to illuminate this darkness
There is a love greater than your pain
There is healing for your soul
There is one who died to give you his life
Life without this crippling agony
He suffered so you could go free
And wonder how to stop this pain
You don't want to die,
You don't want to live.
You simply want the pain to end.
The pain you feel inside is killing you
This life is destroying you
You wonder if there is any reason to live
Is there a world beyond the pain?
If there is, is there anyway to that world?
Or is a knife your only answer?
You drop your head and weep,
Desperate for hope
Empty
Dying
Beyond the graveyard of dreams
There is hope
There is light to illuminate this darkness
There is a love greater than your pain
There is healing for your soul
There is one who died to give you his life
Life without this crippling agony
He suffered so you could go free
Monday, October 23, 2006
A (disturbing) Cinderella story
Last night I watched A Cinderella Story. I liked the movie for the most part. Yeah, it was a Hillary Duff movie, meaning chick flick and a bit cheesy. But it was cute. Until the last 30 seconds. The movie ends with them driving off into the sunset, and then her saying something to the effect of that this is only a temporary state of affairs. That disturbed me. Aren't faerie tales supposed to end with a happily ever after? How can it be a happy ending if it is a happily ever until I find someone new? That is what disturbed me about Princess Diaries as well (or one of the many things). The first movie ends with her happily ever after being Michael. The second movie starts off with Michael completely gone. He's off touring somewhere...but he and Mia are definitely not still a couple. I've noticed that while in the old days happily ever afters ended in marriage, nowadays they end with a kiss. No commitment, just a kiss. That's a happy ending, but it certainly doesn't seem to last ever after...
To me, that is selling out, selling yourself short. Don't listen to Hollywood. No matter who you are, you are worth more than a happy ending. You are worth an ever after.
To me, that is selling out, selling yourself short. Don't listen to Hollywood. No matter who you are, you are worth more than a happy ending. You are worth an ever after.
Friday, October 13, 2006
blue green dragon
Help would be appriciated in figuring out how to change my blue title to a more appropriate green...
oh, and also how to monitor who sees my site when
oh, and also how to monitor who sees my site when
Abortion and Breast Cancer
For my sophomore term paper in high school I wrote a paper on the risks of abortion to the woman. Unfortunately, it is really hard to find scholarly reports on abortion risks because it is such a loaded issue. Almost every source that claimed that abortion is risky were also pro-life, while those who denied that there were risks worth mentioning were pro-choice. However, the more I researched it, the more it became clear that while there were mere propaganda sites on both sides, the better scientific arguments were on the side of there being risks. One of the risks that has been researched the most is the link between breast cancer and abortion.
It seems reasonable to think that risk of breast cancer would increase if cells are pushed to partial differentiation, and then the hormone that got them there (estrogen) is removed, leaving the cells very vounerable to carcinogens. It is also a reasonable idea that being exposed to large doses of estrogen will raise the risk of breast cancer. Another logical idea is that having an abortion would raise one's risk of breast cancer, since the later one has children the lower your risk is. These are, as far I have learned, factors that lead to an increased risk of breast cancer.
The above factors are all factors caused by an abortion. Some of these risks are lessened by having a late term abortion rather than an early to mid term abortion. The first two factors also are not caused by most spontaneous abortions (miscarriages) because most spontaneous abortions occur in the first trimester and are caused by a deficiency of estrogen. This, however, is just the logic of the link, not conclusive proof.
Conclusive proof one way or the other on this issue is really hard to come by. Most studies done on this link rely on women reporting accurately whether or not they have had an abortion. This, however, is not accurate. Women who have had abortions and have not been diagnosed with breast cancer are likely to hide their abortions. Women with breast cancer who know that they are participating in a study are less likely to hide their abortions. This leads to skewed results. Also, there are other factors that lead to breast cancer, so it is hard to test for just one factor. The research that has been done is not conclusive and there is a lot of disagreement among the different projects that have been done. As far as I am aware though, the majority of the reliable research supports the link between breast cancer and abortion.
Whether or not we know for sure that the two are linked, women should be made aware of the possibility. We have a right to know what the side effects of medical procedures are, whether or not they are morally controversial.
It seems reasonable to think that risk of breast cancer would increase if cells are pushed to partial differentiation, and then the hormone that got them there (estrogen) is removed, leaving the cells very vounerable to carcinogens. It is also a reasonable idea that being exposed to large doses of estrogen will raise the risk of breast cancer. Another logical idea is that having an abortion would raise one's risk of breast cancer, since the later one has children the lower your risk is. These are, as far I have learned, factors that lead to an increased risk of breast cancer.
The above factors are all factors caused by an abortion. Some of these risks are lessened by having a late term abortion rather than an early to mid term abortion. The first two factors also are not caused by most spontaneous abortions (miscarriages) because most spontaneous abortions occur in the first trimester and are caused by a deficiency of estrogen. This, however, is just the logic of the link, not conclusive proof.
Conclusive proof one way or the other on this issue is really hard to come by. Most studies done on this link rely on women reporting accurately whether or not they have had an abortion. This, however, is not accurate. Women who have had abortions and have not been diagnosed with breast cancer are likely to hide their abortions. Women with breast cancer who know that they are participating in a study are less likely to hide their abortions. This leads to skewed results. Also, there are other factors that lead to breast cancer, so it is hard to test for just one factor. The research that has been done is not conclusive and there is a lot of disagreement among the different projects that have been done. As far as I am aware though, the majority of the reliable research supports the link between breast cancer and abortion.
Whether or not we know for sure that the two are linked, women should be made aware of the possibility. We have a right to know what the side effects of medical procedures are, whether or not they are morally controversial.
Thursday, October 12, 2006
Wow.
The world is so immense, and our every action is so huge. We are not insignificant. History is in our hands. All of creation waits with baited breath to see what we, chosen, created, beloved of God will do. The future of human kind is in our hand. How frightening. But we are beloved of God Almighty. He loves us so much, we are so important to Him that He became man, and died to redeem us. We are His children. What an amazingly beautiful thing. What a terrifyingly beautiful place we have. Praise him. Rejoice!
Education: The Purpose is…?
Throughout history, education has been a much-debated subject. There are many different views on what the purpose of education should be and what the best methods are. Some say that the purpose of education is to teach information, and that teaching how to use the information is unnecessary. Others, such as Dorothy Sayers, say that the purpose of education is to teach students how to think and use information. Some, like C.S. Lewis, argue that the purpose of education is to teach students morals and how to subjugate their emotions to reason. However, there are problems with using any one of these to the exclusion of the others. Each is valid, but none can stand alone. Although some think that education should center on only one or two of the following three things—information, reason, or becoming a proper human—education should focus on all three, because if any one of the parts is missing, the resulting education will produce people ill-equipped to be productive members of society.
The popularity of the conveying of information as the sole purpose of education varies from time to time and from place to place. Dorothy Sayers, writing in England around the time of WWII, says in her essay The Lost Tools of Learning, “modern education concentrates on teaching subjects, leaving the method of thinking, arguing and expressing one’s conclusions to be picked up by the scholar as he goes along” (10). At that time, teaching ‘subjects’—information—only was the popular purpose of education. Although unfashionable in some circles, teaching information only is in use here in the United States, sometimes under the guise of ‘teaching to the tests’. When questioned about educational methods in the United States, Elizabeth Pocock—a retired public school teacher—said that she taught her students more than just ‘subjects’. The catalyst for her resignation was a directive from higher officials demanding that teachers teach only what was required to pass the standardized tests.
Teaching information is vital to education, because without knowledge of information, people are ill equipped to fulfill their roles. Those who are illiterate, with no more than a rudimentary command of language, will find it very difficult to be responsible citizens because they will be unable to make informed decisions regarding public policy. Those with only a basic knowledge of math and economics will be an economic burden on society, since they will be unable to make informed decisions in business and personal finance. Those who know nothing of science and ecology are likely to wreak havoc on the environment, since they will be unaware of the ecological consequences of their actions. Those who are ignorant of history will be unable to learn from it, and will find themselves repeating it. All in all, lack of knowledge makes it very difficult to make responsible decisions, and therefore, to be a productive and responsible citizen.
However, although information is necessary, it alone cannot create productive members of society. If one knows facts, that does not mean that one is equipped to use those facts. Dorothy Sayers discusses the inadequacy of merely knowing facts, saying that although students who are taught only information may have knowledge, they may be unable to think, and to use or increase their knowledge (7-8). In order to use what they have learned, students need to be taught at least that it has an application outside of the schoolroom, and preferably to be taught how to use it.
Another educational purpose that some espouse is to teach reason primarily and information secondarily. This is what Dorothy Sayers advocates in her essay The Lost Tools of Learning. She points out the obvious failure of an educational system that produces a ‘gullibility rate’ higher than its high literacy rate (1-7). She goes on to suggest that perhaps education has been ‘improved’ much to its detriment, and that the cure of education’s woes can be found in a return to the medieval method of education (7-8). In medieval times, formal education was divided into the Trivium and the Quadrivium (Sayers 8). The purpose of the former was to teach the students to think and reason well, before moving on to studying primarily information in the Quadrivium (Sayers 8-10). In the Trivium, students were taught information, but information was merely a tool by which to learn to think, rather than being the focus (Sayers 8-10).
The advantages of teaching reasoning as well as information, as opposed to teaching only information, are readily apparent. Teaching reasoning plus ‘subjects’ has most of the benefits of teaching ‘subjects’ alone, with very few of the disadvantages, since students are not only taught the information that they will need to be productive citizens, they are also taught how to use it . Some might argue that spending time learning how to think takes away from the learning of facts, and that therefore teaching students to think is detrimental. Although it is true that there may be less time for facts, it is a choice between more time for facts with little ability to use them, or less time for facts with the ability to use them.
While much better than teaching only information, teaching reasoning plus information is not totally adequate either. Although it provides the skills required to become productive members of society, it fails to provide an impetus to use them productively. It is possible that a murderer could master the art of reason, and thereby escape capture for quite some time, but such a person is far from being a productive member of society, and is in fact pathogenic. C.S. Lewis says in The Abolition of Man, “It still remains true that no justification of virtue will enable a man to be virtuous. Without the aid of trained emotions the intellect is powerless against the animal organism” (24). Without morals, one has no reason to be a productive member of society, and further, one is unable to be one.
As seen in his book The Abolition of Man, C.S. Lewis believes that one of the main purposes of education should be training in morals, or ‘just sentiments’— teaching students to like what they ought and dislike what they ought—because “the little human animal will not at first have the right responses. It must be trained to feel pleasure, liking, disgust, and hatred to those things which really are pleasant, likable, disgusting, and hateful” (Lewis 16). As was said above, Lewis argues that without such ‘just sentiments’, reason is incapable of controlling the emotions, and that therefore ‘just sentiments’ are very necessary.
The advantages of teaching ‘just sentiments’—or morals—are immense, since morals are what allow reasoning and information to be put into use. Morals are the catalyst that push people to become responsible citizens, to be honest, to work to conserve the environment. They are the reason why people choose to be virtuous. Without morals, there is no reason why people should not lie, steal, cheat, and murder their way to the top. Without morals, there is no reason why power should not be the ultimate goal, rather than filling one’s role well.
Although morals are a necessity, they cannot stand alone. Without a foundation in absolute truth, morals become merely a tool for creating human puppets, since without an absolute standard the only standard for right and wrong is that of the person in control. As Dr. John Mark Reynolds points out in his lecture Religion, Politics, and Culture: Late 18th to the 20th Century, morals alone cannot create virtuous people. If one relies on morals alone to create virtuousness to the exclusion of reason, one may succeed for a small amount of time, but if the reason is unconvinced the heart will follow eventually. Reasoning and information are also necessary since without them people are ill equipped to fill their proper roles.
Looking at these three possible purposes for education, it becomes apparent that although none of them can stand on their own, they work quite well together. Lewis says that the teaching of proper sentiments must be in place before rationality can effectively be used. Sayers says that without reason, facts are unusable. Facts, of course, must be taught in order for students to have the knowledge necessary to fill their proper roles. Therefore, education should have all three elements—moral instruction rooted in absolute truth, the teaching of reason, and the teaching of facts. None of these elements is complete in itself, but together they create a comprehensive educational system capable of producing truly educated people—people who are decent humans who can think and who know their facts—people equipped to be productive citizens.
In conclusion, while it is possible to focus on one or more of these three elements of education, only a combination can create a truly complete education which will prepare people to be productive citizens. If even one of the elements is missing, it renders the rest ineffective. Teaching facts alone is unproductive, since if one cannot think, one will be unable to use whatever knowledge one manages to gain. Teaching facts plus reasoning is better than teaching only facts, but it is still less than ideal, since without morals people have no reason to use their gifts and fulfill their roles. Teaching morals is effective, but only when based on absolute truth and paired with teaching reason and information. However, the three fit together quite nicely into a combined educational philosophy capable of turning out whole and educated people. This is much needed today when both morality and reason seem to be crumbling. If reason and virtue are restored to their place in education, there may yet be hope for humanity. If they are denied, what hope is there for the future?
Works Cited
Lewis, C.S. The Abolition of Man. New York: HarperCollins, 2001.
Pocock, Elizabeth. Personal interview. 15 March 2005.
Reynolds, John Mark. “Religion, Politics, and Culture: Late 18th to the 20th Century.” Torrey Honors Institute. Biola University.
Sayers, Dorothy. Creed or Chaos? Including the Lost Tools of Learning. Eugene: Wipf and Stock 2004.
The popularity of the conveying of information as the sole purpose of education varies from time to time and from place to place. Dorothy Sayers, writing in England around the time of WWII, says in her essay The Lost Tools of Learning, “modern education concentrates on teaching subjects, leaving the method of thinking, arguing and expressing one’s conclusions to be picked up by the scholar as he goes along” (10). At that time, teaching ‘subjects’—information—only was the popular purpose of education. Although unfashionable in some circles, teaching information only is in use here in the United States, sometimes under the guise of ‘teaching to the tests’. When questioned about educational methods in the United States, Elizabeth Pocock—a retired public school teacher—said that she taught her students more than just ‘subjects’. The catalyst for her resignation was a directive from higher officials demanding that teachers teach only what was required to pass the standardized tests.
Teaching information is vital to education, because without knowledge of information, people are ill equipped to fulfill their roles. Those who are illiterate, with no more than a rudimentary command of language, will find it very difficult to be responsible citizens because they will be unable to make informed decisions regarding public policy. Those with only a basic knowledge of math and economics will be an economic burden on society, since they will be unable to make informed decisions in business and personal finance. Those who know nothing of science and ecology are likely to wreak havoc on the environment, since they will be unaware of the ecological consequences of their actions. Those who are ignorant of history will be unable to learn from it, and will find themselves repeating it. All in all, lack of knowledge makes it very difficult to make responsible decisions, and therefore, to be a productive and responsible citizen.
However, although information is necessary, it alone cannot create productive members of society. If one knows facts, that does not mean that one is equipped to use those facts. Dorothy Sayers discusses the inadequacy of merely knowing facts, saying that although students who are taught only information may have knowledge, they may be unable to think, and to use or increase their knowledge (7-8). In order to use what they have learned, students need to be taught at least that it has an application outside of the schoolroom, and preferably to be taught how to use it.
Another educational purpose that some espouse is to teach reason primarily and information secondarily. This is what Dorothy Sayers advocates in her essay The Lost Tools of Learning. She points out the obvious failure of an educational system that produces a ‘gullibility rate’ higher than its high literacy rate (1-7). She goes on to suggest that perhaps education has been ‘improved’ much to its detriment, and that the cure of education’s woes can be found in a return to the medieval method of education (7-8). In medieval times, formal education was divided into the Trivium and the Quadrivium (Sayers 8). The purpose of the former was to teach the students to think and reason well, before moving on to studying primarily information in the Quadrivium (Sayers 8-10). In the Trivium, students were taught information, but information was merely a tool by which to learn to think, rather than being the focus (Sayers 8-10).
The advantages of teaching reasoning as well as information, as opposed to teaching only information, are readily apparent. Teaching reasoning plus ‘subjects’ has most of the benefits of teaching ‘subjects’ alone, with very few of the disadvantages, since students are not only taught the information that they will need to be productive citizens, they are also taught how to use it . Some might argue that spending time learning how to think takes away from the learning of facts, and that therefore teaching students to think is detrimental. Although it is true that there may be less time for facts, it is a choice between more time for facts with little ability to use them, or less time for facts with the ability to use them.
While much better than teaching only information, teaching reasoning plus information is not totally adequate either. Although it provides the skills required to become productive members of society, it fails to provide an impetus to use them productively. It is possible that a murderer could master the art of reason, and thereby escape capture for quite some time, but such a person is far from being a productive member of society, and is in fact pathogenic. C.S. Lewis says in The Abolition of Man, “It still remains true that no justification of virtue will enable a man to be virtuous. Without the aid of trained emotions the intellect is powerless against the animal organism” (24). Without morals, one has no reason to be a productive member of society, and further, one is unable to be one.
As seen in his book The Abolition of Man, C.S. Lewis believes that one of the main purposes of education should be training in morals, or ‘just sentiments’— teaching students to like what they ought and dislike what they ought—because “the little human animal will not at first have the right responses. It must be trained to feel pleasure, liking, disgust, and hatred to those things which really are pleasant, likable, disgusting, and hateful” (Lewis 16). As was said above, Lewis argues that without such ‘just sentiments’, reason is incapable of controlling the emotions, and that therefore ‘just sentiments’ are very necessary.
The advantages of teaching ‘just sentiments’—or morals—are immense, since morals are what allow reasoning and information to be put into use. Morals are the catalyst that push people to become responsible citizens, to be honest, to work to conserve the environment. They are the reason why people choose to be virtuous. Without morals, there is no reason why people should not lie, steal, cheat, and murder their way to the top. Without morals, there is no reason why power should not be the ultimate goal, rather than filling one’s role well.
Although morals are a necessity, they cannot stand alone. Without a foundation in absolute truth, morals become merely a tool for creating human puppets, since without an absolute standard the only standard for right and wrong is that of the person in control. As Dr. John Mark Reynolds points out in his lecture Religion, Politics, and Culture: Late 18th to the 20th Century, morals alone cannot create virtuous people. If one relies on morals alone to create virtuousness to the exclusion of reason, one may succeed for a small amount of time, but if the reason is unconvinced the heart will follow eventually. Reasoning and information are also necessary since without them people are ill equipped to fill their proper roles.
Looking at these three possible purposes for education, it becomes apparent that although none of them can stand on their own, they work quite well together. Lewis says that the teaching of proper sentiments must be in place before rationality can effectively be used. Sayers says that without reason, facts are unusable. Facts, of course, must be taught in order for students to have the knowledge necessary to fill their proper roles. Therefore, education should have all three elements—moral instruction rooted in absolute truth, the teaching of reason, and the teaching of facts. None of these elements is complete in itself, but together they create a comprehensive educational system capable of producing truly educated people—people who are decent humans who can think and who know their facts—people equipped to be productive citizens.
In conclusion, while it is possible to focus on one or more of these three elements of education, only a combination can create a truly complete education which will prepare people to be productive citizens. If even one of the elements is missing, it renders the rest ineffective. Teaching facts alone is unproductive, since if one cannot think, one will be unable to use whatever knowledge one manages to gain. Teaching facts plus reasoning is better than teaching only facts, but it is still less than ideal, since without morals people have no reason to use their gifts and fulfill their roles. Teaching morals is effective, but only when based on absolute truth and paired with teaching reason and information. However, the three fit together quite nicely into a combined educational philosophy capable of turning out whole and educated people. This is much needed today when both morality and reason seem to be crumbling. If reason and virtue are restored to their place in education, there may yet be hope for humanity. If they are denied, what hope is there for the future?
Works Cited
Lewis, C.S. The Abolition of Man. New York: HarperCollins, 2001.
Pocock, Elizabeth. Personal interview. 15 March 2005.
Reynolds, John Mark. “Religion, Politics, and Culture: Late 18th to the 20th Century.” Torrey Honors Institute. Biola University.
Sayers, Dorothy. Creed or Chaos? Including the Lost Tools of Learning. Eugene: Wipf and Stock 2004.
Welcome
Well...the Jolly Green Dragon is now in existance. Now for some thoughts...and time with which to post them...
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
