Postmodern Mistakes

The postmodern vantage point exists beyond the position where religion tries to own the world and beyond the modern position where the world tries to remove religion. Post-modernity is the synthesis of faith that looks past superstitious beliefs and also resists a prideful mandate for reason at the expense of our sacred stories and traditions. John Caputo makes a wonderful point in his book “On Religion” by suggesting that post-critical thought doesn't simple reject modernity's bent for criticism, but absorbs it before it moves on to other things.

But I hasten to add that this “post-secular” frame of mind is not uncritical or naïve. It has arisen as the result of an “iteration” process that by criticizing the critique ends up in a post-critical position, one that is interestingly like the unearthing of a certain analogy between the pre-critical and the post-critical and newly opened lines of communication between them. But this is only an analogy, because the post-critical will have also passed through the critique and taken it to heart, even if it has moved on. - John Caputo “On Religion” (p.38)

Postmodern deconstruction is not as simple as going back to a ancient naivety. It requires a robust understanding and inclusion of the contributions of modernity even as we move on.

Wake Up America!

Most of America missed this speech, but Dennis Kucinich woke up the room.

Truth About Taxes

I'm sick of candidates throwing out the term tax cut as if they expect the average middle class person to assume it means there is something in it for them. I hope that just once a so-called "journalist" will actual make John McCain articulate what he means by tax cuts. I'm tired of softball questions and journalists who allow candidates to spew their rhetoric without criticism. I hope that one of the national debates about taxes will include a description of our marginal tax brackets. I don't think many Americans really understand how our income tax system works. I also hope they will force the candidates to describe what we mean by "the Bush Tax cuts". This is another mystery for most voters. Republicans have been very clever about talking tax cuts and avoiding a discussion of exactly who benefits, how much they benefit, and how they intend to make up the differences.

Here is an outline of the proposed tax cuts by both candidates...




HT: Bob Cornwall

We Can Solve It!

We can kick our fossil fuel addiction, but cheaper gasoline is not going to solve anything. It isn't even something we should want. Drilling for more oil is ridiculous. Oil should be costly and rarely ever used. The last thing a crack addict needs is more cheap sources for cocaine. Clean electricity and more conservation are better answers.

Here is a great new ad developed by WeCanSolveIt.org...

The Conscious Mind

One of the most important topics at the intersection of science and religion is the nature of human consciousness. Scientific knowledge acquired in the coming decades will likely create divisive reactions similar to the fundamentalist reactions to Galileo and Darwin. Nancey Murphy at Fuller Theological Seminary has written a couple of books that were helpful in introducing the topic. Recently I found a series of web audio discussions with Dr. Murphy along with David Chalmers and John Searle on ScienceAndTheSearch.org. It is worth the time to listen or read the transcripts. I don't agree 100% with Murphy's conclusions because she doesn't go far enough for me. However, I applaud her rejection of classical dualism and her ability to interact with the data and open up the discussion.

Like many Christians, I spent most of my life with the understanding that consciousness was an unnatural (supernatural) thing. I thought the notion of a soul that could somehow be disembodied or could survive after death was the only way to explain consciousness. It is not that I was previously irrational or illogical. It was simply that I had never thought about it much. I just accepted the beliefs of my religious ancestors and assumed that consciousness was a question for religious authority rather than the realm of science. It seems almost silly now. This is clearly a question that falls under the realm of physical science. I suspect most Christians have never put much thought into this topic.

Our religious ideas are expressed through the ever expanding limits of our current scientific knowledge. There is no way to get past that fact. This means religious understanding must always be developing in step (or slightly lagging behind) our best science. Those who think religious views should be universally bound to an ancient understanding of our ancestors are setting themselves up for the never ending cycle of war with the next scientific discovery. If we thought Galileo or Darwin rocked the boat, then we are about to face a monsoon of epic proportion as the 21st century brings a dramatic leap forward in our understanding of the human brain.

Also, see my review of Murphy's book ""Bodies and Souls, or Spirited Bodies".