Thursday, December 03, 2020

The Ultimate Power of Truth

I ran across a powerful quotation from Romano Guardini that's appropriate to this time of year when we're thinking about the Last Things, and the coming of Jesus:

In this world, the truth is weak. A trifle suffices to hide it. The stupidest persons can attack it. But someday the time will come when things will change. God will bring it about that truth will be as powerful as it is true; and this will be the judgement.

Judgement means that the possibility of lying ceases because omnipotent truth penetrates every mind, illumines every word, and rules in every place. Then falsehood will be revealed as what it is. However expedient, clever, or elegant it may have been, it will be exposed as an illusion, as a nonentity.

We should let these thoughts occupy our minds, our understanding, and our hearts. Then we shall perhaps sense what truth is, its steadfastness, its calm radiance, and its nobility. Then we will enter into union with it, through all that is most intimate and loyal within us. We will accept responsibility for the truth and expend our efforts in its behalf.

All this will suffer opposition and trials, because we are human. But our lives must testify to the fact that truth is the basis of everything: of the relation of man to man, of man to himself, of the individual to the community, and above all, of man to God—no, of God to us.


Romano Guardini, Learning the Virtues that Lead You to God (Manchester, NH: Sophia Institute Press, 1992), 22-23.

Thursday, November 26, 2020

Gratitude

It's been a tough year, but there are still many reasons to be grateful. Actually there are reasons to be grateful no matter how bad things get.

Gratitude is the most important virtue, and our most important duty, both to God and to other people, as you can read in more depth thanks to "Reading Cicero on Thanksgiving " by Jim Tonkowich.

Here's a short (under 7 minutes) video on the beauty of the world and all we have to be grateful for:

Gratitude: The Short Film by Louie Schwartzberg from ecodads on Vimeo.

Thursday, November 19, 2020

The magic is back!

Existential Comics had a funny and funnily true Facebook post a couple years ago that's worth remembering:

Science has been the slow process of showing that the exciting magical world we believed in doesn't exist, and there is nothing but boring reality. Well, except for quantum mechanics, which showed boring reality doesn't exist, and everything is basically magic. (December 13, 2018)

That's actually a strong theme among Thomistic-Aristotelian philosophers these days: the vindication of Aristotle's natural philosophy in quantum mechanics. The world needn't be the disenchanted drudge modernity has made it. Instead we have back the world of possibility and meaning.

Some references:

Edward Feser, Aristotle’s Revenge: The Metaphysical Foundations of Physical and Biological Science (Editiones Scholasticae, 2019).

Robert C. Koons, “Hylomorphic Escalation: An Aristotelian Interpretation of Quantum Thermodynamics and Chemistry,” American Catholic Philosophical Quarterly (2018) 92:159-78.

Adam Schulman, Quantum and Aristotelian Physics (Harvard University dissertation, 1989).

Sunday, August 09, 2020

Baptizing aliens?

There was an online dispute recently about whether we would be able to baptize intelligent extraterrestrials. Many of the participants in this forum said no, of course not: God took on human flesh to save humans, he became a child of Adam to save the descendants of Adam. My response is: how do we know he didn't become a rational creature to save rational creatures? One can point to Scripture to argue agsinst my point, but I think it requires assuming that statements about whom Jesus died to save are meant not just positively, but also restrictively (he didn't die to save those others).

It's certainly a valid question whether we could baptize extraterrestrials. But I also think there's a certain naiveté about it. One big assumption is that whatever intelligent life we meet out there will have a biology relatively similar to our own, rather like in science ficton TV series, all the extraterrestrial life looks like us, except for maybe a few modifications to the face (looking at you Star Trek). I'm not talking about being carbon based or breathing oxygen, although those are relatively assured, based on what we know. I'm talking about the life cycle and the organization of its society.

Would you baptize a xenomorph from Alien or one of the hunters from Predator? Perhaps the latter, which are at least rational, if you could get them to put their weapons down long enough to talk. All sorts of forms of intelligent life are possible. One needn't go as weird as the creatures in H.P. Lovecraft's twisted meaningless universe (e.g., "The Color from Space," the Great Old Ones) to see that there might be beings for whom Christian faith would just make no sense.

Say there were an intelligent species that organized itself as a hive consciousness; what would salvation even mean to them? Or what if the life cycle of the intelligent species required that one mate to kill the other and lay eggs in its corpse? Actually the latter would be a relatively easy sell for the Gospel, despite being rather weird. There are possibilities far beyond our imaginings, possibilities that would go beyond just making us uncomfortable, but actually appear to us as violations of the integrity of persons.

None of this is to say that we wouldn't be able to baptize extraterrestrials, just that we may find fewer candidates out there than we in our earth-centric view anticipate.

In Fiction

Some time ago, I wrote a review of The Book of Strange New Things by Michel Faber, which was a sort of liberal Protestant imagining of aliens who wanted to hear about Jesus for their own odd purposes, but without any need for salvation from sin.

A much better book on baptizing extraterrestrials was Eifelheim by Michael Flynn. Insect-like (but also somewhat humanoid) aliens crash-land on Earth in the Middle Ages. A pastor and well educated priest befriends a group of them and evangelizes them. The second half of the book is a detailed imagining of the aliens' realization that they need salvation from sin (not just physical death), and their acceptance of faith in Jesus. I found it moving.

Sunday, March 29, 2020

Apocalypse, Hold the Zombies

The other day I bought some peanut butter at the upscale grocery story where it's surprisingly cheaper. The atmosphere was far from normal. "It's like the zombie apocalypse," observed the young woman with the purple highlights checking out my purchases. I looked at her quizzically. She hastened to add, "But without the zombies." I suspect the word she was reaching for was "apocalypse."

Indeed it's like the apocalypse: an uncovering, a revelation. Do you get the sense that we as a country, whether observing Lent or not, are in a period of forced penance?

Then tidings reached the king of Nineveh, and he arose from his throne, removed his robe, and covered himself with sackcloth, and sat in ashes. And he made proclamation and published through Nineveh, “By the decree of the king and his nobles: Let neither man nor beast, herd nor flock, taste anything; let them not feed, or drink water, but let man and beast be covered with sackcloth, and let them cry mightily to God; yea, let every one turn from his evil way and from the violence which is in his hands. Who knows, God may yet repent and turn from his fierce anger, so that we perish not?” (Jonah 3)

May we find forgiveness for our sins soon, very soon.

Monday, December 09, 2019

The Coffee Must Flow

Do you ever wonder how the small but pervasive details we take for granted, such as foods, subtly shape our lives and our world? I've been thinking about coffee lately. How much is it responsible for the modern world? How much of the modern world is it responsible for?

This page claims that it was discovered in Ethiopia in the 11th century. Wikipedia puts that discovery before the 15th century, and says it was introduced to Europe in the 16th century. Of course that time frame is the rise of the so-called Enlightenment.1

Caffeine is known to boost cognitive function and alertness. So people before the advent of coffee were less alert and functioned on a lower cognitive level. My question is: to what extent is that "lower" level of performance more essential to what it means to be human? To what extent does we humans being little lost dummies put us more in touch with the reality of our status as interdependent social beings, creatures dependent on God? To what extent does the improvement of focus that caffeine enables foster the illusion that we are autonomous masters of our own destiny?

For that matter, which cognitive faculties does caffeine promote? And which, by comparison, does it weaken? And how do these faculties compare with the list of human characteristics that have taken command since the Enlightenment?


Notes

1. Cf. Peter Ramus (1515-1572), Francis Bacon (1561-1626), Rene Descartes (1596-1650).

Thursday, November 21, 2019

The Butlerian Jihad and Humanae Vitae

It may not be immediately clear what connection could possibly exist between a ban on artificial intelligence in the Dune universe and a letter by a Pope on contraception, but let me explain.

One of the founding myths of the universe of Dune by Frank Herbert is the Butlerian Jihad . The Jihad was a conflict 10,000 years before the events of the novels whose effect was to ban the creation and use of artificial intelligences.

To replace the function of the banned "thinking machines", humans develop "human computers," known as Mentats, whose training, aided by the ingestion of "Sapho juice," allows them to exceed the performance of machines. Other orders of specialized humans also develop in the wake of the jihad. Most notable is the Spacing Guild, whose members use of the drug "melange," a.k.a. "the spice," to safely navigate enormous starships through space. Similarly the Bene Gesserit order owes its superhuman powers to use of melange.

It is interesting that this novel, published in 1965, envisions a world built on the use of chemicals to make up for the loss of mechanical means.

In 1968, Pope Paul VI published the encyclical Humane Vitae (On the Regulation of Birth) . The encyclical was written in the wake of the availability of hormonal birth control pills starting around 1960. The basic argument against chemical contraception is that it is wrong to do anything to interfere with the natural ends of sexual intercourse. (Abstinence of course is a different matter, because abstaining from a good but not obligatory thing is not the same thing as doing a bad thing.1) Mechanical contraception, like condoms and diaphragms, had long been unacceptable for Catholics. So, starting in 1968 both mechanical and chemical interference were taught to be equally wrong.

One of the early developers of chemical contraception, Dr. John Rock, was in fact a Roman Catholic, and he had campaigned for the invention to be accepted by the Church. Once Humane Vitae was published, he withdrew from the Church in disappointment. I haven't read his 1963 book The Time Has Come: A Catholic Doctor's Proposals to End the Battle Over Birth Control justifying his position, but I found this article that includes a summary:

In his book, Rock argues that since the pill functioned by suspending ovulation, it did not violate the Church’s edict that no one be permitted to deliberately suppress reproductive function. He contends that the rhythm method actually suppresses reproductive function, since by avoiding insemination the ovum cannot be fertilized; by contrast, if ovulation is suspended there is no egg to be fertilized, and he reasons that the contraceptive pill fulfilled the edict better than the rhythm method does.

Assuming his argument is conveyed fairly here, it is problematic in terms of any sort of traditional human morality. He seems to be focusing on the nature of the ovum (a part of a human), rather than the nature of the human persons, female and male, involved. It's kind of a crazy argument, in that it would seem to assume that it's somehow wrong to allow an ovum to go unfertilized, a position that if followed consistently would make women's lives (and secondarily those of their husbands) rather inconvenient! In reality it is not an ovum (or any human organ by itself) that exercises "reproductive functions" but whole organism, the human person, that does so, and the latter do right or wrong by respectively living or denying through their voluntary actions the nature that their Creator gave them.

To exercise will power in abstaining from intercourse for a good reason is an exercise of a natural human faculty that requires virtue and builds up and morally improves the human person. Avoiding conception in this case works with nature. On the other hand, taking a chemical contraceptive, no less than employing a mechanical contraceptive, to block the natural purpose of sexual intercourse (the conception of children) is a violation of human nature. Using chemistry rather than mechanism to manipulate nature doesn't somehow make a violation good, but just as much degrades the humanity of the people involved.2 And that's not even mentioning all the evidence of the physiological harm of chemical contraceptives.

To bring this back to Dune, humanity turns to chemicals to augment human abilities that would have been exercised by machines. The idea is that we humans don't want to give machines control over us, but want to keep power in the hands of humans. But it's not clear that these chemically modified humans are entirely aligned with the interests of human beings in general. Indeed, the (Spacing) Guild navigators, whose bodies have been mutated by exposure to the spice, don't even look human any longer. An argument could be made that the intrigue of the competing interests of the Dune universe is largely due to the respective differences of the orders/guilds, whose post-human identities were delineated by chemical manipulation.

That argument could be made, but I think a more powerful argument is that the source of the strife in that world is the lack of a single, unified vision of what defines humanity, human nature, and thus human rights and responsibilities. So each faction of post-humans is striving for a disparate vision for the future of "all humanity." But ultimately the same post-Darwinian nominalism that denies a single human nature also fails to recognize how chemical interventions could spawn a new species... and indeed denies that "species" is even a coherent concept.

There's a sense that Frank Herbert's depiction of the strife in the Dune universe was a prophetic warning against the use of chemical interventions to attempt to preserve humanity, but it's also true that he himself succumbed to the conceptual errors behind that mistake in his portrayal of the possibilities of a post-human universe. John Rock was no less a victim of the reductive nominalism that has infected the cultural atmosphere in our modern age.


Notes

1. Oh and by the way, to bat down a common misconception: natural family planning (NFP) is not the same as the "rhythm method." The former takes its cues from physiological changes that signal the phase of a woman's cycle, while the latter is understandably ineffective because it simply counts the days under the assumption that all women have the same periodicity.

2. Will power works in and through human nature (the human being a whole: an embodied spirit or an ensouled body), whereas mechanical and chemical interventions insert themselves into nature from outside as it were. The latter treat the human body as if it were a machine to be manipulated at will, rather than a whole whose integrity needs to be respected.