Austin Hall Library

Life is Like the Book of Genesis

We always get what we choose in life.

As the years have passed, I have come to agree with James Schall, that "all of our lives when we come to recount them, are themselves a retelling of this same story [the story of the Book of Genesis], the story of what we choose, the story of whether we ultimately choose what is or ourselves to be the central event in our existence."

It is sometimes hard to grasp that we have a nature--an "inner configuration", as Schall calls it--that is given us. When we exercise our wills to act according to what we are, we get what we choose and life is well ordered. As St. Augustine noted, we have "restless hearts", that cannot find relief until they rest in ultimate reality.

If, however, presupposing only ourselves, we exercise our wills to act according to our own desires, we still get what we choose, but, in the end, our lives are disordered. Nonetheless, things work out according to our heart's desire. As Aslan maintains in The Magician's Nephew, "All get what they want: they do not always like it."  

The Difference Between Prostitution and Wisdom

For a while, I was a professor--the professional employee of a university that hired me to sell my mind for money, the way a prostitute sells her body.

At least that is what Socrates would have thought. He was not one of the Sophists; he never took a fee for his teaching. He had nothing to sell. He claimed even to have no wisdom, only to seek it.

The Sophists of Socrates' time were paid expensive tuition by wealthy Athenian parents to fill the minds of their children, without examining the product they were buying. Socrates offered the opposite service--to take out ideas rather than to put them in. Students' minds were filled with prejudices, error, fallacies, and confusion. And they emerged from a conversation with Socrates poorer, not richer, in opinions.

For the source of this idea and an overview of Socrates' thought and approach see Peter Kreeft's small but excellent book Philosophy 101 by Socrates: An Introduction to Philosophy Via Plato's Apology.

Cows Are Not Capable of Boredom

My work took me to Austin, Texas, earlier this week--a drive I always enjoy because the route takes me through country dotted by small farms and mid-sized cattle ranches. Along the way, various breeds of cattle languish in the hot Texas sun by water holes and beneath live oak trees. Whatever their circumstances, whatever the weather, the cows don't seem to mind. They are content.

On my trip to Austin I was reminded that human beings alone are capable of boredom. Cows may look bored, but they are not. That's what Thomas Dubay says in his book Faith and Certitude: Can We Be Sure of the Things That Matter Most To Us? In the opening chapter of this book, Dubay speaks about "existential boredom" as "an apathy about life itself", and points out that, while it may be common, it is not preprogrammed into our genes. He described such persons in the following words: "When a person is existentially bored, he may experience occasional pleasures, but for the most part his life is dreary, uninteresting, loveless. To him it also appears useless. Though he may retain some capacity for sense pleasures, he is incapable of the thrill of joy. He does not respond to reality. Splendid scenery, beautiful music, intellectual keenness, a sparkling personality all leave him untouched and unmoved. He may know the dictionary definition of love, but he has no experience of it. He is a stranger to enthusiasm, and he feels both rootless and restless."

Why are there seemingly so many such people in the world today? And what causes this state of existence? When our children were small and would exclaim, "I'm bored", we would quickly reply: "You are bored because you are boring. Go do something fun or interesting." It seemed intuitively like the right response at the time and, in part, it was true. As Dubay notes, there are probably several reasons for modern existential boredom--the cultural environment, interpersonal relations--but, most important is a person's use of freedom. Boredom has to do with "the quality of the person, not the state of the world."

In the end, however, humans are different from cows because they can experience an emptiness that cows cannot. Cows can be content with "cowness". But, human beings can never be ultimately content with the limitations of "humanness". We have inside us an "empty ache", as Dubay terms it, that cannot be completely filled in this material existence. That is "precisely the reason that every adult either is in hot pursuit of the One or is frantically seeking the many. Either we have God who does fill or we are endlessly pursuing things which do not."

A Requiem for Honest Liars

I awoke this morning thinking about yesterday--a day I spent in court. And, the images evoked by my memory were more akin to the famous Star Wars bar scene than they were to any hallowed halls of justice. When I go to court these days, the planets often do not seem to align for me for days thereafter. And, since I am in court every week, one might reasonably argue that I appear confused most of my waking hours.

Fortunately, many of the people I deal with in court are just liars. Nothing fancy, no hiding behind philosophical pretense, no epistemological angst. They're not self-deceived; they don't believe what they say; they know the truth; they just don't want to tell it. At least a man can respect that kind of prevarication.

But, unfortunately, the day of the honest liar is fading. He is being replaced by the person who distorts the nature of truth and then proceeds to believe his own distortion. Believing, for example, that truth is what one wants it to be, it then is only logical to think that when one wants to believe something, it must be the truth.

Notwithstanding Pilate's seeming confusion, the question of "what is truth" is not a difficult question to answer. When we know something, what we know is the truth about it. As Aristotle pointed out, we have truth in our mind if we think that that which is, actually is; or that which is not, is not. We have falsity in our mind if we think that that which is, is not; or that which is not, actually is. Consequently, to say "is" when one thinks "is not", or to say "is not" when one thinks "is"--is to tell a lie. Simply put, truth is the correspondence between the mind and reality.

In conflict with this correspondence view of the nature of truth is the idea that truth depends on the views of persons or cultures, not upon whether what one believes corresponds to objective reality. All that is necessary for something to be true in this view is that a person or culture believe it so. Also in conflict with the correspondence view is the idea that something is true if it "works" for a particular person or group of persons. Thus, something can be true for me if it benefits me, but false for another person, for whom it is without benefit.  

I admit to being somewhat gloomy at the prospect that there will one day soon be no more honest liars. Only the self-deceived will be left--those for whom the nature of truth is not the correspondence of the mind with reality, but only the function of individual preferences. I understand the former--they lie because they are human and weaker than they ought to be, and want to be. The latter, however, hold their human nature in contempt and do not speak the truth because they have lost touch with what is.

The Art of Living

Some books that will make life more meaningful because they help to make it more reasonable and more artfully lived.

Guide for the Perplexed (by E.F. Schumacher) A stimulating look at man, the world, and the meaning of living.

Small is Beautiful: Economics as if People Mattered (by E.F. Schumacher) Economics for humans that actually makes sense. Read Guide for the Perplexed first.

Leisure: The Basis of Culture (by Josef Pieper) This elegantly written book will make you want to take a meaningful vacation, and actually know the reason why you should.

In Tune With the World: A Theory of Festivity (by Josef Pieper) A call to the celebration of existence under various symbols.

Only the Lover Sings: Art and Contemplation (by Josef Pieper) Art, love, aesthetics, and spirituality cannot be separated.

Nicomachean Ethics (by Aristotle) A classic on living the good life--for thoughtful people.

The Intellectual Life: Its Spirit, Conditions, Methods (by A.G. Sertillanges) One of the most influential books I have ever read. Simple and yet profound. This book introduced me to the idea that the intellectual life does not consist in the perfection of rare powers of mind and expression, but in a constant and disciplined preference of higher thoughts over lower thoughts.

Descartes and the Redirection

During 2005-06 I was privileged to be invited to join a small seminar of 8-10 people from around the country, meeting quarterly in Washington, D.C., to study and discuss Descartes' fundamental contribution to the way modern man experiences the world and his existence in it. The seminar was led by a Jewish intellectual and professor and it was always a stimulating experience. I had little to contribute to the discussions and, as I recall, I was the only one present who was not a former student of the seminar leader. My invitation to participate came as the result of a good friend's recommendation.

I often think of the relevance of those seminars when I observe current events and other modern cultural indicators. I am convinced that the Cartesian shift (redirection) away from man's fundamental being to an attribute of man has resulted in profoundly negative effects on the human race.

The seminar and destructive contribution of Descartes came to mind early this morning as I read an article by Donald DeMarco titled, "I Am ... Therefore I Think". DeMarco writes: "John Paul II, in Crossing the Threshold of Hope, refers to 'the great anthropocentric shift in philosophy,' in which Descartes redefines the human being in terms of consciousness [Descartes alleged, "I think, therefore I am"]. Referring to St. Thomas Aquinas, John Paul reiterates that 'it is not thought which determines existence, but existence, 'esse', which determines thought!' In other words, it is man who thinks, not thinking that is man." 

It is difficult to overstate the rationalistic and practical effects of the Cartesian redirection on everything from philosophy to science to human rights. Since consciousness is now necessary to be a human being, no one is safe.

The Prerequisite to First Principles

Aristotle, in his classic The Nicomachean Ethics, discusses the importance of first principles (a first principle is one that cannot be deduced from any other--a self-evident proposition). While first principles cannot be deduced from another principle, reasoning proceeds from first principles. Thus, for instance, we reason ourselves to the various and specific laws that protect individuals from the first principle "it is wrong to murder"--not vice versa. 

Aristotle notes that when first principles are sufficiently clear to a person, "it will not be necessary to go on to ask the reason of it." For example, America's founders did not believe it necessary to state in the Declaration of Independence all the self-evident rights governments were established to protect (naming only life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness). At the time of the country's founding, it was assumed that most people would share an appreciation for the same first principles.

But Aristotle may shed some light on why it appears today that the country seems so lacking in a shared sense of first principles. He says, "But a person who has received a good moral training either possesses first principles, or will have no difficulty in acquiring them. But if he does not possess them, and cannot acquire them, he had better lay to heart Hesiod's lines: 'Far best is he who is himself all-wise, And he, too, good who listens to wise words; But whoso is not wise or lays to heart Another's wisdom is a useless man.'"

According to Aristotle, it is necessary, if one is to grasp the first principles of life and ethics, that one must have received a good moral training. If so, it might then be reasonably argued that the absence of first principles in the thought of so many today is the result of defective moral training. One doesn't have to look too far to find illustrations of the soundness of Aristotle's thought. 

Evil is Not a "Thing"

I was first introduced to the thought and writing of Fr. Robert Barron several years ago when I happened upon his short but deeply uplifting book Heaven in Stone and Glass: Experiencing the Spirituality of the Great Cathedrals. I was captivated by his simple and clear style and his deep insights. The intervening years have convinced me that Fr. Barron is one of the up-and-coming great communicators of theological truth out there today. In the short video below from his "Faith Clips" series, he touches briefly on perhaps the most profound question in world history--so deftly that it is easy to miss the weight and import of his "evil is not a thing."

Why I Need to Know That My Neighbor is Human

While reading Schall early this morning, it dawned on me that I have a very fine neighbor, but I cannot prove with any scientific certainty that he exists. I can see him, hear him, speak to him, borrow his tree trimming saw, but I cannot "prove" he exists; that is, I cannot "demonstrate" what is already so evident.

I cannot prove my next door neighbor exists, but neither can I doubt it without experiencing a sort of madness--a doubting the obviously undeniable. I can only decide how to deal with him, and how I deal with him depends upon whether he is a rock, an animal, a human, a god, or whatever he may be. As long as I do not know what he is, or do not admit that I really know, I may do with him whatever I want.

Augustine on "God's Problem"

I awoke this morning to thoughts about the problem of evil and suffering in the world--"God's Problem," according to Professor Bart Ehrman. Hardly a new problem, I recalled this morning that it was one of the intellectual impediments recounted by St. Augustine sixteen hundred years ago that needed to be settled in his own mind before he could give his free assent to faith. He discussed his struggle with this question, which he "turned over and over in [his] unhappy mind" in Book VII, paragraph 5 of Confessions.

In the remainder of Confessions, Augustine narrates his growing disenchantment with Manichaeanism, his continued bondage to materialism, his eventual rejection of astrology, and his turning to Neoplatonism. In Neoplatonism he finds the freedom he needs from an excessively corporeal view of God and the world. From that vantage point he begins a diligent study of the Bible and comes to see clearly his need for God's grace to free him from his sin and the bondage that kept him from faith.

A few things struck me as significant when I recalled St. Augustine's struggle with the problem of evil. I was reminded of how important a philosophical approach (Neoplatonism) was to Augustine's ultimate theological belief. Until he learned from the Neoplatonists that God must be understood as spiritual rather than material in nature, he could not reconcile the claim of a perfect and omnipotent God with the reality of suffering and evil in the world. From this he came to see the privative character of evil--that evil is not a being in its on right but the absence of the goodness that ought to be present in a given being. Finally, Augustine came to understand at a deeper level the causal connectedness of the material world and the root of free choice in the spiritual nature of the will. In short, understanding that evil is not a "thing"; it is the absence of some"thing" that ought to be present, and that there is genuine freedom at work in human choices based on the spiritual disposition of the will, enabled Augustine to make an act of faith in God as He is presented in the Bible.

There is no conflict between faith and reason properly understood. Christian thinkers throughout the ages have embraced some use of philosophical approaches in their theological work, sometimes for apologetic reasons and other times as a help in the technical articulation of theological doctrines (e.g., the Trinity). But, they were always clear that neither reason nor philosophy could alter the received deposit of faith (revelation).

The deposit of faith is received by the gift of grace. If a person does not have the grace--or if they have lost it or mislaid it--they are thrust back on naked reason alone--to be sure, the noblest of the faculties--but, a faculty nonetheless that cannot understand the mysteries of God, which are revealed only to those of faith. Rather than a sound faculty to guide us, in the words of Morris West, "reason may become an executioner's ax or an atomic trigger."

None of this solves with scientific certitude my questions about the problem of evil and suffering in the world. But, at a minimum, it prevents me from searching for answers where they may not be found. And, it cautions me not to lose sight of the fact that certain questions may only be answered in due time as impulses of grace, and that a man who loses his faith has, in a certain sense, lost his way entirely.