Tag Archives: Immanuel Kant

A Crooked Faith

Out of the crooked timber of humanity, no straight thing was ever made. Immanuel Kant

I love many kinds of music, but classical music is my first love. I was classically trained on the piano from age four through high school; my first piano teacher, a Julliard graduate who somehow ended up in northern Vermont teaching piano, was also the organist for the North Country Chorus, a volunteer choral group that was, in the estimation of Vermonters at the time, our version of the Mormon Tabernacle Choir. Every year the North Country Chorus performed Handel’s Messiah, which became—and still is—my favorite classical composition. Its music is inspired, of course, but in addition its settings of texts from the King James translation of both the Old and New Testaments were an artistic gift to a kid who was forced to study and memorize significant portions of the Bible from an early age. Even today, decades later, I hear Handel’s glorious music every time I encounter a passage from Scripture that is included in the libretto of Messiah.

After an instrumental introduction, Messiah begins with a tenor recitative and aria set to prophetic texts from the first verses of Isaiah 40:

Comfort ye, comfort ye my people, saith your God.  Speak ye comfortably to Jerusalem, and cry unto her, that her warfare is accomplished, that her iniquity is pardoned. The voice of him that crieth in the wilderness; prepare ye the way of the Lord; make straight in the desert a highway for our God. Every valley shall be exalted, and every mountain and hill made low; the crooked straight, and the rough places plain.

This is followed by the first chorus:

And the glory of the Lord shall be revealed, and all flesh shall see it together; for the mouth of the Lord has spoken it.

Handel’s music is so beautiful that it is possible to miss the power and promise of the text: When God arrives on the scene, messes get cleaned up, crooked things get straightened out, imperfections are made perfect, and problems get solved. A wonderful promise—but not one that squares with my experience.

I was reminded of these texts and this music as I read and responded to the Facebook comments on a recent blog post that a friend shared on a progressive Christian Facebook page that she administers. The back-and-forth started innocently enough:

  • Him: From the last couple of posts you have made it seems as if you are questioning your faith that’s my thought.
  • Me: I’m ALWAYS questioning my faith! In my understanding, that’s perhaps the key factor that keeps faith alive and prevents it from becoming rigid and inflexible. A favorite writer of mine says that the opposite of faith is certainty–doubt is an indispensable part of a vibrant faith.

In a quick succession of posts, the commenter then sought to set my crooked ideas straight:

  • Him: The word of God stands firm it is not flexible in no way form or fashion And to quote anything from a man’s corruptible heart against it is sin there’s no two ways about it . . . If you always question your faith you are lost and I feel for you you can’t ride the fence or change his word to suit your will . It is what it is period.

Well, now. Before I had the opportunity to say something snarky and self-righteous in response to this clearly misguided, conservative, evangelical, fundamentalist person, another commenter posted that she appreciates my posts because they help her “grow and learn,” suggesting to the first commenter that he should “find something more conservative.”

  • Him: I’m a progressive liberal in politics thank you but first and foremost I’m a true Christian to the best of my ability.
  • Me: I also am a progressive liberal in my politics and seek to be a true Christian to the best of my ability. The difference perhaps lies in our understanding of what “true Christian” means. I completely reject the idea that it requires inflexibility, rigidity, or being in service to a specific interpretation of texts that lend themselves to multiple interpretations.
  • Him (after some further pushback from others in the conversation thread): I’m not a conservative in no way but yes I am seeing this page for what it truly is I will see myself out. I will pray for you and those like you who can’t accept the truth of the Bible for what it is and maybe one day you will see your personal opinion on what you want the Bible to mean is in fact wrong. Good day.

I’ve been involved in this sort of conversation many times over the years, and they just about always end this way, with the conservative Christian promising to pray for the liberal “Christian” to see the truth and thereby escape hellfire and damnation, as the liberal immediately rehearses how he will judgmentally and condescendingly share this story with his fellow progressive friends at the first opportunity. But a half hour or so later, the commenter posted one more time, offering some well-intentioned and much appreciated scriptural advice.

  • Him: I leave you with one verse and I promise I will not persist here any further. Proverbs 3:5-6: Trust in the Lord with all your heart, and do not lean on your own understanding. In all your ways acknowledge him, and he will make straight your paths.
  • Me: Thanks–this is a favorite of mine as well. Except that I prefer the more accurate translation of the final clause: “And he will direct your paths.” Faith is not a straight line–it’s an adventure that takes a person in many unexpected directions.

When Immanuel Kant wrote that “from the crooked timber of humanity no straight thing was ever made,” he was observing, at the beginning of a discussion of his moral theory, just how great the challenge of getting human beings to morally straighten themselves out actually is. Perhaps it is reflective of my natural perversity when I say that I sort of like the crooked timber of humanity. The best moral theories take human beings as we are rather than as the theorist idealistically wants us to be. The same can be said for faith. My own faith is rooted in my embrace of the central, incarnational idea of Christianity: God became human—and still does. The Christian story is not about God straightening human beings out, but rather is about God using our natural human bends, twists, and turns.

Reading the gospel accounts of what Jesus said and did using this lens reveals the crooked timber that we all know to be definitive of being human. Christians love to focus on the loving, generous, eloquent, patient, courageous Son of God that we find on every page and tend to overlook other things we discover about Jesus. He got tired, could be curt and dismissive (even to his mother), and was occasionally sarcastic, impatient, and judgmental. He was a real human being, in other words, with all the lack-of-straightness that involves. And that’s good news, since it means that I don’t have to “straighten up” or “sit up straight,” as various authorities used to demand from me, in order to be a bearer of the divine in the world. God is often just around the next corner of our crooked paths.

Holding Off Socrates

As is often the case in June, several huge soccer tournaments currently are under way in various parts of the world; furthermore, both men’s and women’s soccer will be front and center at the upcoming Rio Summer Olympics. This reminds me of a post I wrote a year ago about the greatest soccer match ever . . . 

The United States national soccer team, after a strong performance, was eliminated last Tuesday from the World Cup. world cupMillions of typical American sports fans were stunned the following morning to find that the World Cup would continue, even though the only team that anyone cares about is no longer playing. But keep watching, because the World Cup every four years, along with the Olympics biannually, provides American sports fans with an opportunity to be just a little less parochial than usual and to challenge their innate superiority complex. It’s a tough sell, though, beginning with the fact that the rest of the world calls soccer “footballNFL,” while everyone with any sense knows that football, as in NFL, is the multi-billion dollar game played by millionaire gladiators in helmets and pads on gridirons.

There are many reasons American sports fans give to justify their lack of respect for the world’s favorite game. For instance,

It’s boring, says the couch potato who has no trouble watching several consecutive hours of hole-to-hole coverage of the Masters or US Open golf tournaments.

There’s not enough scoring, says the baseball purist who considers a 1-0 pitchers’ duel to be a work of art.

Ihockey soccer don’t understand the rules, says the hockey fanatic who is apparently unaware that hockey is essentially soccer on skates, played on a much smaller field covered with ice by gladiators with helmet and pads similar to American football.

It makes no sense that a team can lose (as the US did to Germany) and still advance to the elimination round (as the US did), says the fan who has no trouble understanding something like the following that happens for several teams at the end of every NFL season: Team A will make the playoffs if: Team A wins on Sunday OR Team A ties on Sunday and Team X loses OR Team A loses on Sunday but both Teams Y and Z lose OR Team X loses by more than 20 points OR the rapture occurs.

Don’t get me wrong—I am not a soccer fanatic. But I very well might be if world-class soccer got the same 24-7 air time in the US as baseball, American football, basketball or hockey. I have never played soccer, probably because its only appearance in the northern Vermont of my youth was a week during the late winter/early spring in Phys Ed when the instructor had run out of things with which to make our lives miserable. I grew up fifty years too early, apparently, since I am told that youth soccer is huge nowadays. There was no such thing in my youth.

Central AmericaThe first full World Cup game that I had the opportunity to watch this time around was Costa Rica vs. Greece. That’s one of the many cool things about the World Cup—countries that get very little face time in the news or anywhere else all of a sudden have their 90 minutes (or more) in the sun. I’m pretty good with my geography, but I would have had to take a moment to pick Costa Rica out of a Central America map lacking the names. I do know that it was the last of the Central American countries to visit my blog (after El Salvador, Guatemala, Honduras, Belize, Nicaragua and Panama).

europe-mapAside: I was appalled, but by no means surprised, when only one of five twenty-somethings interviewed in Chicago’s Soldier Field prior to the US-Belgium game could locate Belgium on a map of Europe. One might hope they would know where it is after Belgium beat us, but I doubt it. (It’s #7).

When watching the World Cup, I tend to favor the small, lesser known countries unless I have a vested interest, so I was pulling for Costa Rica. And sure enough, they won a nail-biter with a 5-3 advantage in penalty kicks after 90 minutes of regulation and 30 more minutes of extra time produced a tie. Soccer purists don’t like penalty kicks, but they provide a guarantee that the game won’t last twelve hours or more (something that baseball could use), and are very exciting. socatesThe best part of the Costa Rica-Greece contest, though, was this accolade tossed by the announcer to a Costa Rican defender: “He did a great job of holding off Socrates.

How to hold Socrates off is something Thrasymachus, Euthyphro, Glaucon, Adiemantus, Laches and any number of other Socrates-abused conversants in Plato’s dialogues would have loved to learn, I suspect. Athenians eventually decided that the only foolproof way to hold off Socrates was to kill him, which turned out to be a good career move for Socrates since he is now generally considered to be the godfather of Western philosophy. CompleteFlyingCircusDVDBut fans of Monty Python know where I am going with this. One of the greatest Monty Python skits from the seventies (my personal favorite) is the soccer match between German and Greek philosophers. The Greek squad, captained by Socrates, includes Aristotle, Empedocles, Sophocles, Heraclitus, Epictetus, Archimedes, Plotinus, Epicurus, Democritus, and Plato in goal. The German team is captained by Hegel, who is joined by Wittgenstein, Kant, Schopenhauer, Schelling, Beckenbauer (“bit of a surprise, there”), Jaspers, Schlegel, Nietzsche, and Leibniz in goal, with Marx coming off the bench in the second half for Wittgenstein. soccer-pythonThe Greeks play in togas, while the Germans are wearing various period costumes and wigs. The head referee is Confucius, who is keeping time with an hourglass. He is joined by Augustine and an appropriately portly Aquinas, both sporting halos.

2731250As one might expect, nothing happens at the opening whistle other than the twenty-two philosophers wandering around the field individually or in pairs thinking hard and/or explaining the fundamental precepts of their philosophies to anyone within earshot. The first half ends in a scoreless tie; early in the second half there is a bit of excitement when Nietzsche accuses head referee Confucius of having no free will and Confucius responds by giving Nietzsche a yellow card. Marx substitutes for Wittgenstein later in the half, but accomplishes little. hqdefaultThen in the eighty-ninth minute, Archimedes has one of his classic “Eureka!” moments and decides to do something with the ball. In quick succession, the ball is passed from Archimedes to Socrates back to Archimedes to Heraclitus to an obviously offside Empedocles on the wing to Socrates who sends a beautiful header past the helpless Leibniz into the net. While the elated Greeks run around in joyful celebration, the Germans are outraged. “Hegel is arguing that the reality is merely an a priori adjunct of non-naturalistic ethics, Kant via the categorical imperative is holding that ontologically it exists only in the imagination, and Marx is claiming it was offside.” But to no avail. The final grains of sand run through Confucius’ hourglass and the Greeks win. As they should—they are the fathers of Western philosophy, after all.

So enjoy the rest of the World Cup as well as the highlights of the historic match between the Greek and German philosophers. Had the German philosophers only been able to find a Costa Rican philosopher to play defense for them, they might have been able to hold off Socrates.

Greek vs. German philosophers soccer match

Barack Obama is an Elf, or More Things I Have Learned About Myself from Facebook

You beautiful, aloof creature. You’re one of the most revered and honored creatures . . . but you’re also very hard to pin down. You’re an interesting mix of empathetic politician and pragmatic dreamer. You believe in the power of justice, but you also believe in the power of protecting yourself. You’re always willing to lend a hand, but not to the point where it will negatively affect you.elrond

The message in a birthday card from my wife or one of my best friends? A text I sent to myself on a day when I needed cheering up and no one was cooperating? No—this is what followed “You are an Elf,” the result of the latest Buzzfeed quiz Which Mythical Creature Are You? You can’t beat these quizzes for putting a positive and uplifting spin on every possible result. I have a Facebook acquaintance who was fine with finding out from the Which One Of Jesus’s Disciples Are You? quiz that she is Judas Iscariot (I’m Thomas, of course), because the description affirmed that she is comfortable with being an outsider and dancing to the beat of her own drum. Each of these quizzes affirms something about me that others might not be happy to find out about themselves—being aloof and self-interested, for instance. GaladrielBig deal—I embrace it and my elfhood. And Elf-Queen Galadriel (known to mere mortals as Cate Blanchett) won this year’s Best Actress Academy Award. Elves are on a roll.

It has been a Buzzfeed quiz pretty much every other day for a while now. For instance, in the Which U.S. President Are You? quiz, I learned that You are Barack Obama! GWWell that’s not a surprise (although my cousin told me that my high school senior picture looked like George Washington on the dollar bill).

You are pure class and shy away from drama. You are very charismatic and eloquent, and you find it natural and easy to communicate your ideas and opinions to people. You’re a pioneer, a glass ceiling breaker in effect. Here’s to you.

Here’s to me indeed, especially since my son Justin got Ronald Reagan. I avoided that by not clicking on jellybeans as my favorite candy (although they are). I really don’t know where I went wrong with that kid. But the above description of my Barack Obama-ness was clearly written by a progressive liberal. If it had been written someone who attended the i4j0fdhR9C6IConservative Political Action Conference this week, the description would have read something like this:

You are evil incarnate and are on a temporary, eight-year leave from one of the lower circles of hell. You are a socialist, hate people who have made successes of themselves without government help, and are a socialist. You are responsible for everything bad that happens, from Benghazi to snow storms. You secretly wish you were the King of Kenya. You are both a tyrant and a wimp. And you are a socialist. Benghazi. Obamacare. Socialist.

Sometimes I get contrary information, such as when I find out from the Which Character From Shakespeare Are You? quiz thatindex

You are Hamlet! You are a tremendously complex character: thoughtful, complex, indecisive, impulsive, careless, melancholy, and more, all at once. So let’s hope you don’t die after being stabbed by a poisoned sword, while learning from the What Period of History Do You Really Belong In? quiz that

You got Revolutionary France: You don’t want to eat any cake, thank you very much, because that is too mainstream. You’re edgy, passionate, and outspoken. When you want something, you go out and get it. Now off with some heads! Hamlet during the French Revolution—I can’t see that working.

To guillotine, or not to guillotine–that is the question:

Whether ’tis nobler in the mind to suffer

The slings and arrows of outrageously overprivileged aristocrats

Or to take arms against a sea of peasants

And by opposing them let them eat cake.

Les MizI suspect that the creator of the historical period quiz needs to take my Development of Western Civilization course, since the background picture to “Revolutionary France” was a still shot from the recent Les Miserables movie. That was set during the 1832 revolution, while the one where they cut heads off began in 1789. Oh well—I’m sure the French were obnoxious in both of them.

Against all odds, the Who Were You In Your Past Life? test revealed that

You were an ancient philosopher! You are a quiet soul who enjoys reading and writing above all else. Yplatoandariou spend a lot of your time thinking about religion, philosophy and how to make the world a better place. Just like your past-self, you are likely to influence others around you.

Wow, who knew that I like to think about all of that stuff? Who knew that I like to read and write? I should start a blog! So when the Which Philosopher Are You? quiz came along the next week, I waited breathlessly for the result. Socrates? Thales? Plato? Anaxagoras? Aristotle? Epicurus? Lucretius? Heraclitus? Parmenides? Protagoras? Marcus Aurelius? Not exactly.

KantYou are Immanuel Kant! When making moral decisions, you try not to have double standards and always ask yourself whether you’d be happy for others to act in the same way as you do. You always try not to be selfish.

These quizzes need to coordinate their results. Not only is Immanuel Kant not an ancient philosopher, he’s not even in my top ten favorite philosophers—for the very reasons revealed in the description—although I’ve taught him many times. First of all, Kant’s philosophy is a monument to consistency and certainty at the expense of reality, but I have often suggested—even in this blog—that both certainty and consistency are vastly overrated. Kant_und_seine_Tischgenossen._Kolorierter_Holzstich_von_Klose_&_WollmerstaedtFurthermore, Kantian concerns for others conflict with my elvish concerns for my own self-interest. Finally, rumor has it that Kant was a wonderful host and threw great parties, hardly something that my elvish aloofness or my Hamlet-esque melancholy could tolerate.

I probably got Immanuel because he was Prussian, and according to the What European Country Do You Actually Belong In? quiz,

mgermanyYou got Germany! You’re incredibly hardworking, efficient, and disciplined. If you promise to get something done, you absolutely will. You can come across as a bit too serious, but deep down you’re great fun.

These people are truly plugging into my psyche. I’m currently team-teach1379556_10202284079242854_547898063_ning a colloquium that is spending a full semester in the middle of Nazi Germany, my daughter-in-law Alisha is from Germany, I have referred to Kevin, my personal trainer at the gym, as the “red-headed Nazi” on recent Saturdays after Friday morning torture sessions, and I was told by a previous quiz that I am Johann Sebastian Bach. Deutschland Über Alles.

Keep the quizzes coming—they are better than therapy (and a lot cheaper)! In a comment thread following a colleague’s report that the “mythical creature” quiz revealed he is a Phoenix, some humorless person wrote “You do know that these things are fraught with phishing scams, malware, and other hacking attempts, right?” Shut up—no one likes a Buzzfeed kill.