July 29, 2008
Posted by Stewart in All posts.Tags: character, egocentrism, facade, heart, opinion
add a comment
Once in a while there arises a situation the reveals to you how much you have succumb to egocentrism. These instances are both joyous in the sense that you are enlightened with new information, and deeply saddening as they reveal your flaws. By ‘your’ I am of course talking about myself, but generalizing also.
You feel as though you are the betrayal of integrity, and in that sense, dishonest – a fraud. Reading The Crucible, I certainly now understand why John Proctor regarded himself as a fraud. The outward face that he projected to society masked a deeper and darker secret shame which caused his heart to break of guilt. I sympathize with Proctor. And yet at the same time feel like him. Feel as though the outward projection I present to society is superficial and that beneath this thin, translucent layer I am something else. Something that, if others could see, they would not like, or would think of me differently. In that sense, like Proctor, I feel like a fraud. Like my inner intentions do not match my outward actions, or something of that like.
Recently, it has been suggested also that I have become a slave, a slave to other people’s opinion, in constant evaluation for the seeking of positive appraisal. I have given this some thought, and continue to do so. Should we really care about other people’s opinions. Human beings are subject to bias – their opinions always slanted in some direction, and rarely if ever, objective. Should human approval, therefore, matter so much to so many, including myself? The only One capable of truly passing authentic and honest judgment is God, thus his opinion is the only opinion that should matter. The opinions of humans are quite biased and based only the perception of someone’s outer presentation, not necessarily, the source of their actions in the heart of character. Humans cannot peer into the heart to form a holistic and total judgment or opinion, whereas God can. He sees far deeper than what meets the human eye.
Yet I still find myself in this trap of caring about what other people think, even though I know I should not. And it is neither wise… for caring deeply about human opinion and approval is a prerequisite to succumbing to peer pressure, which could lead to group think, and consequently, the loss of independent thought.
I hope this post makes more sense than a mere ramble. It is basically an outline of what I feel currently, and an attempt to analyse why I feel it and place such contemplations into perspective.
The Divine Design July 24, 2008
Posted by Stewart in All posts.Tags: cosmos, creation, design, narrative, theology
add a comment
Contemplate for a moment that all things in the cosmos are connected and interwoven in some grand pattern, tapestry or design. Many threads and strands interwoven together in the patterns of reality’s fabric. All our stories, intermingled with both happiness and sorrow, interwoven together in the great cosmic narrative.
Deacon Keith Fournier offers such a reflection in The Divine Design. He refers to the metaphor of a quilt, a grand tapestry and notes that, “The quilter begins at a center point, with a patch of cloth that becomes the reference point from which he or she weaves the entire pattern of the quilt. From that center, the design emanates and to it, the design returns.” The ‘center’ which Fournier is referring to is Christ. Christ is the center of the Divine Design, from which all things emanate and to which all things shall ultimately return. Fournier emphasizes this point, but it is also important to emphasize the other rich meaning behind it – that the Maker pours himself into the design also. He is not disengaged from the design, but present within it, and in that sense there is an intermingling between the Divine and the created order, and this intermingling is described as the Mystical Body of Christ (I Cor. 12:12), the intimate and mystical communion of love that we experience with our Creator – the Everlasting Covenant. The Maker is therefore revealed to be both transcendent from the tapestry but also immanent within it, at its very center. Perhaps that is how one can understand the phrase, “God’s … center is everywhere, but his circumference is nowhere.” (Apologies – I am not sure to whom that quote is attributed.)
Nature may be contemplated as a sort of narrative. According to Pope Benedict XVI, in his address to the Pontifical Academy of Sciences, nature is a “book whose author is God.” (see here) The Pontiff remarks that this image was particularly retained by Galileo and other scientists. It is an understanding that reflects the notion of a narrative underlying the evolution of the cosmos, and an Author who is not only transcendent from the narrative, but willingly enters that narrative so as to reach out to his own creation.
Course selection July 22, 2008
Posted by Stewart in All posts.Tags: course selection, studies, theology, university
add a comment
Soon it will come time to select courses for next year, and I feel an overwhelming urge at the present to study theology to some degree. It is difficult to explain, but I find theology an incredibly enlightening subject. I feel that it opens my mind. Considering this, my desire to do theology, I will now need to search for courses at universities that offer theology. However, I have yet to make any final decisions. I suppose you could say that my present desire to study theology has come from personal revelations and inspiration from others.
Happiness July 20, 2008
Posted by Stewart in All posts.Tags: false gods, happiness, superficiality, WYD08
1 comment so far
Happiness is a word we often hear. It is associated with a sense of contentment, a feeling of confidence in one’s self or others. It is associated commonly with the expression of a smile, which can seldom be hidden from view, even when not directly seen. Perhaps happiness is difficult to describe precisely because it is a feeling that one has, and it means different things to different persons. There are also different approaches to happiness, based upon different understandings of what constitutes the content of joy and how to attain it. How then are we to understand happiness?
In our culture, it seems that we have become driven to seek happiness in the pursuit of wealth or luxury. In a recent speech conveyed to thousands of young pilgrims at World Youth Day in Sydney, Pope Benedict XVI reflected upon the notion of the ‘false gods’ of earthly wealth and earthly power. The Pontiff stated:
“False ‘gods’, whatever name, shape or form we give them, are nearly always associated with the worship of three things: material possessions, possessive love, or power. … How many voices in our materialist society tell us that happiness is to be found by acquiring as many possessions and luxuries as we can! But this is to make possessions into a false god.”
How alluring is the prospect that some possession of earthly wealth or glory will fill the void deep within our hearts? How alluring is the false hope that perhaps with money, fame or self-gratification shall come some vestige of happiness? Dispelling such notions, such illusory hope, Helen Keller once wisely said, “True happiness… is not attained through self-gratification, but through fidelity a worthy purpose.”
In Matthew’s Gospel, Jesus reflects on the notion of these false gods. He states, “Do not store riches for yourselves here on earth, where moths and rust destroy, and robbers break in and steal. Instead, store riches for yourselves in heaven.” (Mt. 6:19-20) Jesus’ advice to store riches in heaven encourages one to seek something beyond the confines of this world. According to this understanding, furthermore, all earthly wealth and fame will ultimately shrivel and fade in the passing of time. I believe Italian poet Dante Alighieri describes this when he writes that “Worldly renown is naught but a breath of wind, which now comes this way and now comes that, and changes name because it changes quarter.” It is the understanding that earthly wealth shall rust and decay in the mists of time, and ultimately, how shall we ever take such wealth with us into the here-after? Even in the grave, precious metals rust and their meaning disintegrates. What worth are they now?
To demonstrate how earthly wealth and pleasures are temporal and fading, the Pontiff recalls the parable of the Prodigal Son. He comments on how the young man who sought “the illusory pleasures promised by false ‘gods’ … squandered his inheritance on a life of indulgence, and ended up in abject poverty and misery.” In this illustration, it is clear what results of appealing to a false and illusory hope that material possessions will somehow fill the void in one’s heart.
What is true happiness then? What are the riches of the Kingdom which Christ bids us to seek? What then can fill one’s heart? Perhaps it is, as Keller said, “fidelity to a worthy purpose.” Certainly, Jesus teaches that
“Happy are those who are meek, for they shall inherit the earth;
Happy are those who are merciful, for they shall obtain mercy;
Happy are those who are pure of heart, for they shall see God;
Happy are those who are peacemakers, for they shall be called children of God;”
(Mt. 5:7-11),
And happy are those who are persecuted because they seek what is right. Perhaps these are the riches of heaven – the simple intention of good will, to give and to love. Love which St. Augustine exclaimed is “the beauty of the soul.” Love, giving love, which St. Paul remarked is long-suffering, and yet paradoxically almost, love rejoices when it suffers. It suffers with joy for it knows that it suffers for a worthy purpose. Life is not so much about avoiding suffering, but rather suffering for a worthy purpose. For when one suffers for a worthy purpose one suffers happily. This stands in stark contrast to when one suffers for nothing or for something which will ultimately pass, rust, fade or fall to ruin.
I cannot claim that I have not myself been allured by illusory hopes in material possessions. I am guilty of it. Far often I have fallen into the trap of consuming extravagances, assuming that it will offer me a deep sense of happiness and fill a void. However, my hope is to return to this contemplative piece, to add to my understanding and to remind myself of what really matters – In the end, fame and wealth on this earth are of no significance. What matters lies in the heart. And only God can judge a person’s heart.
Bryan Patterson, in his piece Happiness without the drugs, featured in the Sunday Herald Sun on January 20, 2008, offers the same interesting perspective of what authentic happiness and success is. He writes, “The secret was realising happiness did not derive from wealth, power, learning, indulgence or even religiosity, but from living fully in the moment, becoming a ‘good’ human and risking the pain of giving ourselves to what matters. Life is a continuing challenge to be lived day by day.”
Authentic happiness, as Christ has revealed, does not come from the absence of suffering, nor from indulging in earthly wealth and fame, but rather from suffering for a worthy purpose, for a heavenly purpose, and seeking the riches of the Kingdom that lies beyond the confines of the cave of shadows. Authentic happiness does not depend on the magnitude of a person’s actions, but rather the intention, passion and love behind them. Authentic happiness comes from living fully in the present and maintaining fidelity to a worthy purpose.
The Hidden Dimension of State Power July 20, 2008
Posted by Stewart in All posts.Tags: government, state power
add a comment
The state describes an organized political institution; an entity which exists by the power of government conferred to it. A power over territory and all activities occurring within its authority, limited only by the provisions granted to it in the Constitution. The state, therefore, is an institution of power by its nature. And one may postulate that like all institutions it is oriented toward self-preservation.
What awareness do we possess of the inner workings and activities of the state, both in East and West? Quite simply it seems, we know only as much as they choose to reveal. What then of what is not revealed? What then of what is concealed and shrouded in secrecy? What of the activity that occurs behind the curtain? And is it really benevolent to democracy for any activity to occur behind the curtain, out of the sight and scrutiny of We the People? Quite I simply, I wish to question whether it is in the best interest of We the People that our governments are permitted to operate in such a manner, and wish to call into question the potential dangers that could arise from this, namely the threat to authentic democracy.
Contemplating Conspiracy Theories July 18, 2008
Posted by Stewart in All posts.Tags: conspiracy theory
1 comment so far
“In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act.” – George Orwell
In our society it may often seem frustratingly difficult to discern the veracity of information from among the various sources of either information, misinformation or pure disinformation, distortion of fact and propaganda. Retaining truthful information is, after-all, important if one wishes to formulate a veracious world-view and enact informed choices based on one’s cultivated awareness. How then are we to discern what is truthful from that which is not?
Theories seem to rise inevitably in an attempt to explain why or perhaps how certain events occurred and what forces and motivations triggered their occurrence. Often some of these theories retain an element of conspiracy as a critical component – they are then by that understanding, conspiracy theories.
The term ‘conspiracy theory’ seems to have retained a negative connotation of late. It is often conveyed as a derogatory term, and the basis of this negative connotation, as Dr. David Ray Griffin observes, seems to lie behind the “assumption that conspiracy theories are inherently irrational.” [1] However, let us put the term ‘conspiracy theory’ into its proper perspective.
A conspiracy theory is any theory that a criminal activity resulted from the actions of a party that conspired to perform some act, criminal or otherwise, against another party or that party’s property or assets. That is the meaning of the term. It is, quite simply, the belief that an event or attempted event resulted from a person or group conspiring against another person or group. Under this definition then, how many beliefs do we retain that involve conspiracy and are therefore conspiracy theories?
A theory may be rational or irrational. In his latest book, 9/11 Contradictions, Griffin provides some enlightening insight into how one may discern if a theory is credible:
“Within the philosophy of science, there are two basic criteria for discriminating between good and bad theories. First, a theory should not be inconsistent with any of the relevant facts. … Second, it must be self-consistent, devoid of any internal contradictions. If a theory contains an internal contradiction, it is an unacceptable theory.”
Unacceptable in the sense that it requires revision. Basically, as Griffin highlights above, how credible a theory is can be determined by critically analysing its correspondence to the factual evidence. Believing in a conspiracy theory, therefore, does not necessarily make one a ‘moonbat’ or paranoid, particularly if the theory retained holds correspondence to reality.
Not all conspiracy theories are created equal. Some conspiracy theories are based upon irrational paranoia or phobic hatred, generated when the need for an enemy to despise becomes psychologically appealing, or when prejudices are harnessed to target a particular individual or group for political, ideological or other interests. However, not all conspiracy theories follow this irrational pattern of thinking. Some conspiracy theories retain genuine and rational grounds upon solid evidence. The uniform treatment of all conspiracy theories as ‘irrational’ generates a climate of opinion where those who have the audacity to openly challenge prominent public myths are ridiculed for their efforts.
The veracity of a conspiracy theory can generally be measured by its correspondence to the factual evidence. This applies to all conspiracy theories, including those condoned by official agencies and the state. In order to determine whether a theory is valid, inquiry is required.
[1] Griffin, D.R. 2007, Debunking 9/11 Debunking: an answer to Popular Mechanics and other defenders of the Official Conspiracy Theory, Olive Branch Press, Canada.
On Modern Media July 18, 2008
Posted by Stewart in All posts.Tags: information ethics, mass media, media influence
add a comment
The media is a powerful tool that can be used to inform, to entertain, to educate and to broadcast a wide array of messages and perspectives, or in contrast, it can be misused to misinform, mislead, broadcast falsehoods and condition the masses. Given the increasing role of the media in shaping public opinion, perceptions and attitudes, and its increasing influence in shaping young and developing minds, the use of the power and scope of the media comes with considerable responsibility and ethical considerations for its use.
In contemporary society, there exists the dangerous possibility that the mass media could become hijacked by corporate giants or other entities and possibly used as a weapon for marketing and conveying information that either directly or indirectly conditions individuals, whether or not they are aware of it, and influences public perceptions and popular myths. In other words, there is the danger of considerable misinformation if the corporate media focuses only on a select portion of reality, or distorts it beyond due proportion, like a small misty window which restricts one from viewing the bigger picture. By limiting the scope of reality to a select portion, there is the risk that the corporate media may have the power to restrict, control and regulate the flow of information. Obtaining the totality of information is vital to establishing a clear view of the reality or a full understanding of events and their implications. Information influences a person’s attitude formation and perception of events and figures in society.
Now I’m only talking about the possibility of this occurrence, that is, the possibility that the mass media, an influential figure in terms of information, could be hijacked and misused for propaganda. Which is why I am not posting any specific accusation against any media organization or figure, rather encouraging media viewers to be cautious of what they perceive to be true from the information attained from various media sources.
The potential abuse of media power in controlling a limited flow of information would in turn mean that public perceptions, attitudes and even behaviours are based on limited knowledge, without a general awareness of the ‘bigger picture.’ J.R.R. Tolkien, in his literary work, The Lord of the Rings illustrates the effect of acting on limited information. Through the mystical Palantir (representative of media) various characters see what they perceive to be reality. However, what they perceive is only a tiny portion of the ‘bigger picture’ and so, based on la limited understanding the characters’ draw the wrong conclusions and thereby act upon their limited knowledge resulting in disastrous consequences. For example, the chief nemesis of the narrative, Sauron, sees his adversary Aragorn through the Palantir and acts on the perceived reality that Aragorn possesses the Ring. This is not true and results in Sauron performing a hasty motion which ultimately contributes to his destruction. Tolkien highlights quite clearly the potential fatal consequences of acting on limited knowledge. Brian Sibley, author of The Lord of the Rings: the Making of the Movie Trilogy, reflects on this in the documentary film J.R.R. Tolkien: The Legacy of Middle-earth. He states:
“It’s a very modern concept in a way. It’s the concept of misinformation. … And it so reflects how modern communication can give people a fraction of something and by so doing influence the way in which they react – the way in which they behave. … You may not have enough knowledge to be able to have just that one bit of information that would totally transform your supposition about the way things are.”
In his book, Propaganda, Edward L. Bernays illustrates how media can be abused as a channel for conveying various manifestations of propaganda and influencing a mass audience. He states that, “If we understand that the mechanism and motives of the group mind, is it not possible to control and regiment the masses according to our will without their knowing about it?” Bernays further highlights the influence of media on an audience, stating that, “We are governed, our minds molded, our tastes formed, our ideas suggested, largely by men we have never heard of.” As musician John Kellermann points out in his song The New Pearl Harbour, “If you get your views from television news, you’ll only hear stories that corporations choose. You’ll only get to see what they want to see.”
Today, seemingly as always, modern media runs the risk of being hijacked and used (or rather misused) as a weapon of mass deception against the public. There exists the possibility of its perversion into a propaganda and marketing machine; perhaps confining one’s view of reality to a limited scope (or bubble) of tightly controlled information. You’ve heard it said, ‘Don’t always believe what you see on T.V.’ Look beyond the confines of ‘the box’ and see the bigger picture. Think outside the square.
I write this not as an accusatory piece reveling against all forms and organizations of media, but rather like many of my posts as a piece of contemplation – something to think on.
The Matrix – exploring philosophy July 12, 2008
Posted by Stewart in All posts.Tags: philosophy, the matrix
3 comments
The Matrix, written and directed by the Wachowski brothers is an impressive science-fiction action film set in the distant future where intelligent machines are the dominant species and free humanity struggles for survival while the rest of their brethren are utilized as an energy source to power the machine world. In the film, ‘the Matrix’ describes the “computer generated dreamworld” that the vast majority of humanity plugged into it believes is real, when in fact it is nothing more than a web of illusion – a computer simulation designed as a system of control – a “prison for [one's] mind.”
Set in this context, the Wachoswki brothers encourage the audience, like Neo, to break through the illusion and ask the question “What is real?” It is a fundamental philosophical question that the film explores to a high degree. The Matrix is not real, it is an illusion, but also more importantly, a system of control. Here perhaps, the Wachoswki brothers make a social critique or commentary. They prompt the audience to consider the systems of control that exist in their own lives – the matrix in the real world.
The machines themselves act as a powerful symbol. They represent “rigid thinking and institutionalized control” (see video below – Return to the source.) And the matrix itself represents what becomes of humanity when we become “passive consumers” and when we are ‘asleep’ so to speak. When we are ignorant or unaware of our situation, we become open to manipulation, or in the case of The Matrix, we become the batteries that power a mechanical society – a “means of production” to an end. The Wachoswki brothers offer this commentary through such powerful plot devices, and lead us to ponder whether we are ‘asleep’ to reality or at least unaware to the point that we may become suggestible or subjects of systematic manipulation in a system of control.
2007, Return to the source [online], Available from: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xnn3Y9v_cww [Accessed: 12.7.2008].
The above video Return to the source offers some interesting analysis of the philosophical aspects that permeate throughout The Matrix triology. The commentators offer their insights and draw parallels between the narrative and themes of The Matrix, ancient stories, myths and beliefs, and society itself. It is an interesting look into the ideas that the film explores and highlights profoundly some of the messages the Wachoswki brothers sought to communicate to the audience.
Mysteries July 11, 2008
Posted by Stewart in All posts.Tags: knowledge, mystery, philosophy, theology, understanding, wisdom
add a comment
Mystery abounds in the cosmos. The universe is a mysterious place to us humans, for humanity with its finite knowledge and intellect bound by the limits of sensory perception cannot fully understand or comprehend all that there is to know- all phenomena and aspects of existence. Wisdom thus begins when one acknowledges that one’s knowledge and intellect is finite and limited. It is about embracing the mystery of creation and accepting uncertainty.
Can the human, on his own accord and applying the means of his own feeble intellect, ever come to an understanding of total veracity? Despite the limited capacity of our psyche can we ever possibly – by ourselves and our means of intellectual exercise with its ever evolving sphere of cultivated consciousness – reach an ultimate understanding of reality? Or is it the case that no matter how far we broaden the horizons of our understanding through inquiry, that we shall not, by our own means, come to the fruitful insights of all things real?
We may think that we know. However, even our thinking is limited by that which we can perceive through our senses, and even if it is perceived correctly, stimuli may be interpreted incorrectly, leading to false conclusions or premises that are not based on reality, but merely a misaligned perception of it.
We may think that we do know, or that we can comprehend, perhaps in the future, all that there is. However, this kind of pride is a delusion, or a false and illusory hope that humanity may be able to one day overcome its natural limitations and finite intellect to comprehend even the infinite using human rationality alone. How can that which is finite comprehend with complete accuracy that which is infinite? The infinite is far beyond our comprehension and certainly cannot be grasped by the application of intellectual activity alone.
Being limited in our knowledge, understanding and intellect, therefore, humanity can never fully comprehend the magnificence of its Creator. We fail to fully fathom the majesty of our Maker. St. Augustine contemplated this in having said, “God is not what you imagine or think you understand. If you understand you have failed.” In other words, God is beyond the realm of human comprehension, and no intellectual exercise can ever be performed to offer a full understanding of him. God, our infinite Maker, transcends the full comprehension of finite intellects. In Dante Alighieri’s The Divine Comedy, Dante sees a vision of God that is inexplicable and indescribable. Indescribable, as Dante remarks, “that was not a flight for my wings.” Dante admits that he cannot fully understand, comprehend or describe that which he experienced. It was simply beyond his imagination and reckoning. William Kilgore, in Our Mysterious God writes “God transcends human comprehension. He is beyond human logic, beyond man’s ability to reason and deduce.” Kilgore mentions Pslam 139:6, which reads: “Such knowledge is too wonderful for me; it is high, I cannot attain unto it.” Kilgore comments that “David’s awe-struck confession should be our own when encountering the mysteries of theology.” He concludes his piece, stating that, “our God is indeed ‘mysterious’, transcending finite comprehension.”
How then may we understand anything of God? Through revelation. God chooses what he wills to reveal to us about himself, the nature of creation and our own humanity. God chooses to enlighten humanity by the truth which he reveals, and with that truth comes liberation (John 8:32).
Admitting that we simply do not know everything about our Maker, ourselves and creation is an incredibly humbling experience. It reminds us that we are finite in our abilities; finite in our intellectual capacity, our knowledge and our understanding. It allows us to admit that we do not have all the answers, and indeed we cannot arrive at all the answers by our own limited means. We recognize, therefore, not only our limitations, but the need for faith and trust in our mysterious Maker, who reveals to us what he chooses too and what we could not possibly attain by our own means of understanding which are limited in scope. We are humbled, then, realizing that by our own merits we can never reach a state of static certitude. We are humbled in acknowledging the profound mysteries of our existence and contemplating the mysteries of the cosmos. We may not have all the answers, but perhaps that is where the beauty lies, in the mystery.
Mystery solved? July 6, 2008
Posted by Stewart in All posts.Tags: 9/11 mysteries, BBC, mystery, questions
add a comment
