Hedonism and Utility
There are two kinds of people in Philosophy. Philosophy Hedonists and Philosophy Users.
The distinction is made clear in our course Epistemology and Metaphysics. We are dealing with the classic argument against the existence of God, by appealing to the existence of evil. In explaining what we do, my bias, and ergo the camp in which I'm is obvious. We play around with arguments, question premises, find counterexamples, discuss catagories, identify catagory errors and circularity, and discuss the nature of possibility and necessity. It's fun. You see, the nature of philosophy is two fold. Firstly, you can use arguments to support or form your beliefs. Secondly, the process of supporting and forming belief is stimulating in itself. The Users would primarily do philosophy for it's utility. In the case of this course, it would be to refute the atheists or the theists. The Hedonists, like myself, like to have our brain tickled and we don't care too much about the content.
It's a little more complex than that, though. I *do* care about the content. This determines its relevancy. But again, this could just be more intellectual exercise. And the Users, in the end, enjoy the end the means (philosophy) brought them.
So I'm not just being a Hedonist, I'm going to draw a parralell. With theology.
I wonder, are many of us academic types Theology Hedonists? If so, is this neccessarily a bad thing?
posted by The Borg @ 8:48 PM
25 comments
25 Comments:
Yes, a bad thing...
I hate theology. I love story. Which is why I love the bible.
Hrm. See John Piper (Desiring God) and all that.
I enjoy theology. I enjoy story and narrative too.
But I'm also philosophically committed to practical theology as well---i.e., learning and understanding more about the bible should change our lives: either the way we understand God, the way we pray, the way we read the Bible, the way we treat others. So I've started getting slightly frustrated with theology in thought-experiment type vacuum. Because most real people ask hyptheticals to get out of real life situations. (So what if I believed in God but kept on sinning...)
But the Bible is the word of God. More than that, its the word of God!!! It's real food, it's living water. It SHOULD be enjoyable. You can learn to like something, and I think we should learn to like the word of God. (end of rant)
What do you mean by 'theology', Shaun?
JD
Oh I'm not sure where I'm putting the line yet, I just threw that out to see what kind of a response it got ;)
But it does frsturate me that far too often Christians like to forget Story in favour of theology. I believe there's a very good reason the majority of the bible (and much of how Jesus himself taught people) uses story. There's certainly a place for theology, but I believe story to be far more important than people give it credit for.
It's one of the worst false dichotomies I've seen. Doesn't anyone have any notion of theological story?
JD
Replied on my blog -- jml
"It's one of the worst false dichotomies I've seen..."
C'mon JD - tell us what you *really* think... ;-)
False dichotomy? Rubbish. Perhaps the way you're defining Theology and Story.
I think I know what JD means, but it's Shaun's response that escapes me.
Theology = study of God. Story = study of...?? Not the study of anything. The two are not even in the same catagory for a dichotomy to be made.
Don't blame me for the issue of definition - I asked you to define your terms, Shaun, and you declined. ;)
Again I ask, what do you mean by theology?
JD
I'm not defining the words in terms of what they study, that wouldn't make sense. Theology is just that - study of God, and Story is not study at all.
Rather than defining the words exactly I'll give you biblical examples of both (in the manner I'm talking about). First, theology, the mode Paul was often in. 1 Cor 8 is a good example - food sacrificed to idols. Paul tells us the facts of the matter, and the reasoning. Plain and simple (relatively). The Corinthians needed to know what they should do about the issue, Paul plainly told them.
Now, Story. Plenty of very obvious examples of this, and I'll use a very obvious one. Jesus' parable of the prodigal son. Through this story we learn amazing things about God - but none of it outlined. Jesus knew people would come to a greater understanding of what he wanted to communicate through this story instead of him just handing over the cold hard facts. The truth in the story isn't obvious, and attempts to translate the story into a nice succinct little list of Things About God miss the point of using parables (story) in the first place.
People seem to come to a stronger belief about something if they earn their understanding rather than have it handed to them on a plate. Of course, some things do need to be handed out on a plate, as Paul showed.
That is the dichotomy I'm talking about. Two very different ways of learning about God. Some would just call what I'm defining as story another form of theology (and in a manner it is, given the root meaning of the word), but I'm talking real world meaning.
I always get suspicious when people talk about "real world meaning".
You admitted that the story of the prodigal son teaches us amazing things about God. Well, that makes it theological.
The fact is, nowhere in Scripture does the Biblical writer give us only the "cold hard facts" or "a nice succinct little list of Things About God". For example, in 1 Corinthians 8, Paul's teaching may contain propositions (as all teaching must) but this is teaching with purpose. It is directed towards the well-being of the community. It is designed to change people's lives.
Indeed, it locks into the greater Story of our Salvation in Christ and what implications that might have for God's people living in God's world under God's rule.
The other question I have, of course, is: even granted your definition, why do you hate theology?
JTD
" I always get suspicious when people talk about "real world meaning". "
Why? Because reallu understanding language means relying on life experience of the language rather than a dictionary?
"You admitted that the story of the prodigal son teaches us amazing things about God. Well, that makes it theological."
By the root definition of the word, yes. Again, we're talking real world meaning. If you don't like that, tough titties, welcome to the real world. When people talk of theology, they mean a fairly specific manner of learning about God. People who try to be smartarses and never look at the real world meaning of a word only reduce their ability to relate with those around them.
"The fact is, nowhere in Scripture does the Biblical writer give us only the "cold hard facts" or "a nice succinct little list of Things About God"."
Compared to story? Yes, the writers do actually, like that example I gave. You seem to have jumped to an interesting conclusion, when exactly did I suggest these writings were without purpose? Of course it's important, it wouldn't be there if it wasn't.
"Indeed, it locks into the greater Story of our Salvation in Christ and what implications that might have for God's people living in God's world under God's rule."
Nothing I disagree with. Indeed, like I said before, I love story and as such I love the bible ;) I see it as all part of the larger story. However, at this point, Paul himself is not using story to teach.
"The other question I have, of course, is: even granted your definition, why do you hate theology?"
I was using "hate" in the Luke 14:26 sense ;) (and for that matter, shit stirring)
So who decides what the real-world meanind is? You?
"When I use a word," Humpty Dumpty said, in rather a scornful tone, "it means just what I choose it to mean — neither more nor less."
JTD
"So who decides what the real-world meaning is? You?"
Yes, I do actually. Along with everyone else around me.
I guarantee the amount of the language you use on an everyday basis that was learnt from a book or some other "official" source is a mere fraction. Which comes first, a change in language in society or in the dictionary? It's fairly clear which one defines and which one records that definition.
What do you think the purpose of education is, Shaun?
To gain experience beyond our own life experience, a wonderful opportunity.
Certainly isn't to discover the meanings of words. Words are wonderful, but at the end of the day an arbitrary method of communicating things quickly. Semantic arguments? A very efficient way of getting distracted from real issues, and beyond clarifying what someone meant, nearly always a complete waste of time.
swil,
I'm still trying to understand your point. Are you talking about the distinction between systematic and biblical theology? What exactly do you mean by "Story"? (and why the Pooh Bear caps?) Also, what do you think the purpose of parables is?
I'm not being deliberately dense, nor am I being sophistic in my questions — I am simply curious.
-- jml
The purpose of parables? To communicate something about God so amazing there aren't words for it. Put words together into a story and all of a sudden you have something that is more than words (sing it with me now).
Also, communicating something through story (a good one anyway) means the listener has to use their brain to figure out the truth held within. It's amazing how much more someone will hold to a truth if they figured it out for themselves.
That's why Jesus didn't like explaining his parables.
Oh, and no I'm not talking about the difference between systematic and biblical theology. I would describe the most commonly practiced forms of theology (and as such what most people mean when they use the word "theology") as distilling what we can understand about God into something we can communicate quickly and easily. Just like we have a word for water to describe that wet stuff that things float in, we have the term "justification by faith". Which is certainly a helpful thing, but ho boy have we lost the art of story (which I described above).
PS I like pooh bear caps ;) Actually I think it comes from reading a lot of John Eldridge last year, he had a habit of doing it.
OK Swil, I think I get where you are coming from. Here's my two cents: I think you are on to something, but you aren't going far enough.
Your point is fair in that we cannot exchange the richness of Scripture for a series of facts. If God wished us to know him in that fashion, God would have revealed himself in that fashion. After all, it's not as if it would have been difficult for him.
* God explains his nature in point form in Scripture. "The Lord, the Lord, the compassionate and gracious God...". So there can't be anything innately wrong with it. I doubt it is even inferior to story.
* Scripture isn't just made of "theology" and story. The bible also consists of poetry (Psalms) and riddles (Proverbs). The truth about God is too big to be conveyed in one media. Are you making a bigger deal about story than is necessary?
* God provides examples in Scripture which do "theology" to stories. 1 Corinthians 10 and Galatians 4 spring to mind. Maybe you could see Romans 1-3 as Paul relating a narrative of the fall of mankind, and then examining what that means for Jews and Gentiles. Even Jesus explained what his parables meant after telling them. (Thus showing that the purpose of parables is to obfuscate, not to provide a path to a deeper knowledge of truth. Mark 4:10-12).
If this is your point restated, then you are comparing a knowledge of God founded in the flow of Scripture to a knowledge of God founded in a sequence of assertions. That is, you are comparing biblical theology to systematic theology.
I think that both are necessary, and that the former is richer, and more rewarding in terms of knowing God. But I really couldn't back either of those claims up with Scripture.
-- jml
PS. I like Pooh Bear caps too.
PPS. I quote theology because I'm using it in your sense. I generally follow JD and Shy in their use of the term.
Firstly, people seem to keep saying I keep saying there's something actually wrong with theology. Please point out where I've said that (beyond my initial shit stirring comment). I've gone out of my way to say the opposite.
"Scripture isn't just made of "theology" and story. The bible also consists of poetry (Psalms) and riddles (Proverbs). The truth about God is too big to be conveyed in one media. Are you making a bigger deal about story than is necessary?"
Yes, there are many other ways of communicating truths about God, and many are used in the bible.
Although, I'd like to see someone to do a percentage table of how much there is of story vs poetry vs "theology" etc in the bible. I think it's fairly safe to say the majority is story.
"* God provides examples in Scripture which do "theology" to stories."
Yep, he does. I'm going to try not to split this off into another issue (one that would actually be interesting to discuss tho, perhaps in The Bible thread over at Stuph), but my view of the New Testament is this: The story of Jesus' life (the gospels) and epilogue (Acts), followed by a lot of explanation for what just happened. We still get hints of story within those letters, a lot of it hinting at the Larger Story (whoops there's those caps again), but largely Paul sits in theology mode. Paul is sharing his perspective on those stories (and being Paul it's a bloody important one), just like we sit around discussing the meaning of parables. There is more to those stories than what Paul tells us, Paul just shares with us some very important insights.
"Even Jesus explained what his parables meant after telling them. (Thus showing that the purpose of parables is to obfuscate, not to provide a path to a deeper knowledge of truth. Mark 4:10-12)."
An interesting passage. But Jesus only explained a few of his parables, what about the rest? Do we learn nothing from them? Obviously not. So what was Jesus getting at?
Say a*7 = 42. a therefore must be 7. But, however briefly, it takes you a second to figure out that truth. You only gain the truth if you're really looking for it. If I just told you a was 7, you'd know the truth whether you wanted to or not.
If we don't want to know what the parables are getting at, we won't figure it out. But if we stop and listen, and try to hear what God is telling us, we do learn something. This is nothing new - God has always given us the choice to come to him or to turn away.
I'm not convinced Biblical Theology equates to the way you learn from story.
"Although story may make up the majority of scripture, it's never given biblical mandate as the highest part of scripture. You seem to be arbitrarily picking one category of writing and elevating above the others."
Arbitrarily? By taking the (by far) most used technique of communicating about God in the bible? I'm certainly not saying the other methods are not as good at doing what they do, I'm just trying to rebalance a terrible shift within churches away from story.
"Together they make up the perspective on the life of Jesus, and indeed the entire Old Testament."
So why do we have the gospels & the OT, if what the epistles have to say is all we need?
"So, I'm not quite sure what you mean by "Paul just shares with us some very important insights". The statement makes me feel a little uneasy."
The truth tends to do that. What I'm getting at is that Paul's explanation of what happened does not cancel out the need for us to hear the story for ourselves - he just shows us the more key things we can learn from certain stories.
Anyway, moving on. Ask the average churchgoer what the last 5 sermons they heard were about. Then ask them what the last 5 movies or books or TV shows they saw were about. Christians are largely ignoring a very powerful method of communication, generally for the sake of being concise & making sure we communicate the message exactly. We're scared of letting people use their own brains to discover the truth, and because of that many important truths get forgotten.
Six. a equals six.
I'm not going to bother responding to most of your post as I've already stated my opinion on most of it. Just one thing:
"I love the Bible because it tells me good things about God. Next to that, story can go hang."
From where I sit, this sounds like "I like driving because I move along the road and get to steer. Next to that, cars can go hang."
Why do I ultimately love the bible (which is not what I was stating before)? Because through it I learn the very meaning of life, centred around a very worthy God. It tells me this largely through story, a method of communication I love.
Post a Comment
<< Home