Can You Change God’s Mind in 30-Seconds?

I stumbled upon The Possibility of a God last night and found it interesting reading for several reasons.

Obviously the question of whether there is a God is still a popular one.

What jumped out at me was how all the comments to the original post are so different. There certainly is no one prevailing way to argue this topic, even among the christians.

You would expect the answers from non-believers, even if they all believe in nothing, to be dissimilar. However, I was surprised at how the answers the christians give to the original post have little similarity. Most christians apparently have no one answer to this question, have no idea how to argue it logically, and for the most part confirm the perceptions held by our wider society that they are illogical, insular and not very smart.

Very few commenters on either side of the issue were able to identify the faulty logic in the original post. If somebody had made the same argument 150 years ago any decent student in America or Europe would have been able to identify the problems with this particular argument.

It was also fascinating to see how the most logical comments, pointing out the inaccurate assumptions about items 4-8, were completely ignored by the other commenters, who instead chose to focus on more easily-rebutted remarks.

The original post, and the resulting comments, are a clear example of how our culture has lost the ability to study and talk intelligently about a subject.

We live in a culture of sound-bites and 30-second commercials because that is as deep as our knowledge goes. Marketers have disovered that it only takes 30 seconds to change our shallow minds.

On a subject as obviously important as “Does God Exist” you would think that people would take the time to study and read what other, wiser people have had to say about it over the past 4,000 years. But judging from the comments, there is very little deep-thinking going on today.

Why do you think that is?

Nuclear Bombs in My Aluminum Drawer

One of the very first podcasts, and still my favorite, is Radio Zero. Rick and Rose, husband and wife, founders of the rock band Poster Children, discuss their very interesting lives.

They talk about their jobs, children, parents, movies and of course politics. They happen to be liberals (they prefer the Green party) living in Champaign, Illinois. I like to listen because they have very different lives from mine.

Rose’s consistent (and perhaps only) political diatribe is ranting about President Bush’s pronunciation of the word “nuclear.” This is commonly held up by liberals as evidence that our president is uneducated and dumb.

The usual argument is that anyone who can’t pronounce “nuclear” obviously isn’t smart enough to be running our country – or to have his finger on the button.

Now I have been amused at this particular criticism because until George W did it on national television, I also pronounced “nuclear” the same way, even though I am an english major. It probably has something to do with my parents growing up in west Texas. Pronunciation of this word is different in various parts of the country. Just as my in-laws from New York can’t pronounce “drawer” correctly and brits add a syllable to “aluminum.” There are thousands of similar examples.

While the United States has become much more homogenous in how we speak, there remain variations by region or even city. This is part of our great heritage as a country with residents from all over the world. Our differences in speaking should be revered as much as our differences in race, religion or even personal style.

I find it worrisome when the political party that prides itself on inclusiveness and diversity are in many cases the ones making the most prejudiced comments. “George W doesn’t say “nuclear” the same way I do so he must be stupid – along with all those hicks in the red states who voted for him.”

Yes, they welcome gays, lesbians and transgenders. But what about evangelical christians with a southern accent? Or small townsfolk who count their pennies and their cows? Or business people with a silk tie?

Apparently the sound bites which have become our political philosophy must be in the proper accent and pronounced a certain way.

This kind of nit-picking gets in the way of debating real ideas and issues intelligently, recognizing that both sides always have something to say, no matter what accent they have when they say it.

I’m sorry to make Rose an example when this viewpoint is so prevalent among liberals today. Spending time with Rick and Rose continues to be one of my favorite things, even if I don’t always agree with them. They live a life different than mine, but I know they want many of the same things that I do.

What is Agonistes?

What does “agonistes” mean? Well it has greek roots and generally means “the struggler” or “combatant.” I intend to use this space to write about topics I am thinking about – often political or philosophical.

Of course the most famous use of the “agonistes” is in John Milton’s work “Samson Agonistes” about the end of Samson’s life when he was a blind captive of the Philistines and his struggle to renew his faith.