Glad to have sparked some of this discussion. A lot of interesting comments and a lot to think about. At the risk of causing more mental pain, I'd like to suggest a couple of other related rabbit holes that you might risk venturing into, if you dare.
First, I'd like to recommend that you look into the Philosophy of Organism of Alfred North Whitehead. Whitehead was a mathematical physicist and the chief protagonist of Einstein's special relativity in the 1920's. Whitehead's ideas, also called Process Philosophy, are difficult to fathom primarily because of the way he redefines some common English words with new meanings. As I currently understand it, Whitehead sees each moment of time experienced by a living consciousness as a connected network of all previous memories of events as the basis of a free will decision on the creation of the next moment of time. But Whitehead was a theist and he felt that the distillation of past moments was not enough. He saw the need for some divine input in the form of suggestions or biases from a higher entity (i.e., God) to provide what he called creativity or novelty to inform the free will decision of the consciousness to create the next moment of time. All of this was to occur at the speed of human brain processing, approximately 100 milliseconds for each moment of consciousness. As you can see, this is a very deep rabbit hole and there is a lot of current research on Whitehead's ideas. If so inclined, a good place to start from a theological viewpoint is the work of David Ray Griffin, viz. “Whitehead's Radically Different Postmodern Philosophy”.
If you'll indulge me in one more suggestion, I recommend the “Process Physics” of Reginald Cahill of Flinders University in Adelaide. Cahill is a quantum physicist and his novel contribution is a reinterpretation of one of the most important experiments at the foundation of modern physics, the Michelson-Morley light speed anisotropy experiment in 1887. Einstein used the supposed null result of this experiment as the fundamental axiom of his special theory of relativity and all that follows from that in the modern physics interpretation. Cahill has shown that this experiment was misunderstood and incorrectly interpreted to give a null result whereas in actuality M_M detected a small positive effect. Cahill goes on to describe the much better experiments of Miller in the 1920's and other modern experiments of different types that all give a consistent result that space consists of a dynamical (i.e., flowing) 3-space (NOT an “Either”) that requires a new formulation of fundamental physics. Obviously, I can't go into the details here and the math can be daunting for non-specialists, but the description of the experiments is approachable for most. I believe that Cahill's theory of a dynamical 3-space is deeply connected to Whitehead's philosophical approach, and that these rabbit holes are connected. As far as I can tell, Cahill's work is being totally ignored by mainstream physics, but if you want to tiptoe into this bottomless rabbit hole you can start with https://www.academia.edu/29837457/Guide_to_Dynamical_Space_and_Emergent_Quantum_Gravity_Experiments_and_Theory .
So many very deep rabbit holes. What's a consciousness on an obscure planet to do? Some divine intervention would be helpful. But Whitehead would say that you get that with every moment of your conscious existence, so dive in!
Jim, in a fundamental way Ehret has one aspect backwards:
"The defining character of this global movement was characterized by 1) technological progress, 2) leaping over the limits to growth by encouraging new discoveries and 3) recognizing all people as creatures made in the image of a living reasonable Creator."
In fact, it was the belief in a living, reasonable Creator that led to the explosion of scientific progress in the Middle Ages and beyond. The destruction of Christianity led to breaking that connection and unlinking morality from science.
For example:
The Victory of Reason: How Christianity Led to Freedom, Capitalism, and Western Success
"Many books have been written about the success of the West, analyzing why Europe was able to pull ahead of the rest of the world by the end of the Middle Ages. The most common explanations cite the West’s superior geography, commerce, and technology. Completely overlooked is the fact that faith in reason, rooted in Christianity’s commitment to rational theology, made all these developments possible. Simply put, the conventional wisdom that Western success depended upon overcoming religious barriers to progress is utter nonsense.
"In The Victory of Reason, Rodney Stark advances a revolutionary, controversial, and long overdue idea: that Christianity and its related institutions are, in fact, directly responsible for the most significant intellectual, political, scientific, and economic breakthroughs of the past millennium. In Stark’s view, what has propelled the West is not the tension between secular and nonsecular society, nor the pitting of science and the humanities against religious belief.
"Christian theology, Stark asserts, is the very font of reason: While the world’s other great belief systems emphasized mystery, obedience, or introspection, Christianity alone embraced logic and reason as the path toward enlightenment, freedom, and progress. That is what made all the difference.In explaining the West’s dominance, Stark convincingly debunks long-accepted “truths.”
"For instance, by contending that capitalism thrived centuries before there was a Protestant work ethic–or even Protestants–he counters the notion that the Protestant work ethic was responsible for kicking capitalism into overdrive. In the fifth century, Stark notes, Saint Augustine celebrated theological and material progress and the institution of “exuberant invention.” By contrast, long before Augustine, Aristotle had condemned commercial trade as “inconsistent with human virtue”–which helps further underscore that Augustine’s times were not the Dark Ages but the incubator for the West’s future glories.
"This is a sweeping, multifaceted survey that takes readers from the Old World to the New, from the past to the present, overturning along the way not only centuries of prejudiced scholarship but the antireligious bias of our own time. The Victory of Reason proves that what we most admire about our world–scientific progress, democratic rule, free commerce–is largely due to Christianity, through which we are all inheritors of this grand tradition."
Now, how does this work with my contention that Platonism is the dominant tradition of the West? Platonism is the font of the heresies that broke with the belief in "a living, reasonable Creator" and it is also the the source of reductionist scientism. Think of Western history as containing two strands: 1) orthodox Christian faith rooted in the reasonable belief in a created order, and 2) the Platonic tradition that contained within it the seeds of radical skepticism and the urge to self create human reality. Augustine's authority led to accepting Platonic elements into Christian thought that contained the seeds of destruction, leading to nominalism, voluntarism, radical skepticism and pessimism, and the destruction--not the reform--of Christianity.
Very thought provoking post, Mark. Libraries would be consumed with writings covering, expanding, clarifying and then there'd be more analysis of the analysis... Hard to do this topic broad justice in a 'stack post. However, there is much here worth some time for us to consider.
My 2 cents simply is to point a basic partition of Protestant understanding in Martin Luther's Reformation versus a 2nd reformation (Calvinism/Dutch Reformation). Calvin, in eventual conflict with Luther, did what all good debaters shouldn't do when their arguments are failing, resorted to name calling/debasement of Luther, deeming him too mentally ill to continue with.
Well, let me go for 5 cents worth - it is east to broadly paint American ideals as now failing due to Protestantism terminating (short-form descriptor for brevity here) when, as you (Mark) mentioned about some of the writers references, USG leadership and it's anti-God practices wasn't separated out of most of the US's populace's beliefs and really are symptomatic and functionary of the post-Reformation enlightenment era 'Anything-But-God' determinate ideals. Man is susceptible and satan is wily - I only can offer one pretty reliable guide, that is keep God 1st in all things... Thanks to all for enduring my diatribe - Blessings (WrH)
The radical Protestants are the genesis of the modern progressive. I’ve referred to them as Neo- puritans. Highly intolerant were these radical Protestants and they’ve only become more so and cruel.
"A key to civil disobedience (as Socrates and King would demonstrate) is that once we refuse to obey unjust laws, we must graciously accept the punishment, regardless of what is fair."
Being Ungovernable can play out as an anarchist/libertarian.
Or, it can play out through radical love, like Dr. King. This is how the West will be rebuilt.
There is a quiet renaissance going on in classical education today. As a homeschooling parent, I see us as gearing up for the next dark age.
1) The doctrine that nothing actually exists or that existence or values are meaningless.
2) Relentless negativity or cynicism suggesting an absence of values or beliefs.
"nihilism in postwar art."
3) Political belief or action that advocates or commits violence or terrorism without discernible constructive goals.
But I don’t believe our so called rulers are totally nihilistic. Sure, they reject God as I or you may believe in Him, and advocate violence upon others without discernible goals, but they surely believe themselves to be the gods who they’ve been waiting for among us mere mortals.
I'm not really understanding the definition of Protestantism here. Since the 1600s there have been many variants. Some have been heretical some orthodox. Some reformed others not. Some have widely different eschatological views. Some are theonomic in their view of case laws others not. Some covenantal others not. Some adhere to creeds others not. Augustine to Kant. That's a stretch I'm sure the likes of VanTil, Rusdoony, Dooyeweerd, Bahnsen, Kuyper would disagree. Remember Kant was a reaction to Hume's skepticism. The only connection I see between Kant and reformed Christianity is the use of a transcendental argument for the necessity of God to supply the preconditions for intelligibility. Todd's article has so many mischaracterizations of reformed Christianity it would take too long to critique.
Which schism? As far as I know the Creator/creature distinction has never not been a major tenet of orthodox Christianity. Protestantism arose out of the debate between sola fide & sola scriptura.
“The disappearance of religion: Americans don’t go to church anymore, they don’t believe in God anymore."
Even if you do go to a liberal, American protestant church on any given Sunday you will have a hard time finding God in the building. Wokery aplenty. God not so much.
Sad thought, Cassander. However, I believe there's much more than just a remnant here. I think those of Faith kinda make up a 21st century 'Silent Majority'. Best @ you! (WrH)
Glad to have sparked some of this discussion. A lot of interesting comments and a lot to think about. At the risk of causing more mental pain, I'd like to suggest a couple of other related rabbit holes that you might risk venturing into, if you dare.
First, I'd like to recommend that you look into the Philosophy of Organism of Alfred North Whitehead. Whitehead was a mathematical physicist and the chief protagonist of Einstein's special relativity in the 1920's. Whitehead's ideas, also called Process Philosophy, are difficult to fathom primarily because of the way he redefines some common English words with new meanings. As I currently understand it, Whitehead sees each moment of time experienced by a living consciousness as a connected network of all previous memories of events as the basis of a free will decision on the creation of the next moment of time. But Whitehead was a theist and he felt that the distillation of past moments was not enough. He saw the need for some divine input in the form of suggestions or biases from a higher entity (i.e., God) to provide what he called creativity or novelty to inform the free will decision of the consciousness to create the next moment of time. All of this was to occur at the speed of human brain processing, approximately 100 milliseconds for each moment of consciousness. As you can see, this is a very deep rabbit hole and there is a lot of current research on Whitehead's ideas. If so inclined, a good place to start from a theological viewpoint is the work of David Ray Griffin, viz. “Whitehead's Radically Different Postmodern Philosophy”.
If you'll indulge me in one more suggestion, I recommend the “Process Physics” of Reginald Cahill of Flinders University in Adelaide. Cahill is a quantum physicist and his novel contribution is a reinterpretation of one of the most important experiments at the foundation of modern physics, the Michelson-Morley light speed anisotropy experiment in 1887. Einstein used the supposed null result of this experiment as the fundamental axiom of his special theory of relativity and all that follows from that in the modern physics interpretation. Cahill has shown that this experiment was misunderstood and incorrectly interpreted to give a null result whereas in actuality M_M detected a small positive effect. Cahill goes on to describe the much better experiments of Miller in the 1920's and other modern experiments of different types that all give a consistent result that space consists of a dynamical (i.e., flowing) 3-space (NOT an “Either”) that requires a new formulation of fundamental physics. Obviously, I can't go into the details here and the math can be daunting for non-specialists, but the description of the experiments is approachable for most. I believe that Cahill's theory of a dynamical 3-space is deeply connected to Whitehead's philosophical approach, and that these rabbit holes are connected. As far as I can tell, Cahill's work is being totally ignored by mainstream physics, but if you want to tiptoe into this bottomless rabbit hole you can start with https://www.academia.edu/29837457/Guide_to_Dynamical_Space_and_Emergent_Quantum_Gravity_Experiments_and_Theory .
So many very deep rabbit holes. What's a consciousness on an obscure planet to do? Some divine intervention would be helpful. But Whitehead would say that you get that with every moment of your conscious existence, so dive in!
I should explain that I thought the closing video made a sort of bookend with Neil Oliver. :-)
Speaking of new world religions, here's a feel good story:
https://www.foxbusiness.com/technology/chicago-area-tesla-charging-stations-lined-with-dead-cars-in-freezing-cold-a-bunch-of-dead-robots-out-here
Mark and others: You may find this of interest https://theduran.com/the-british-empires-gnostic-revival-of-scientific-paganism-and-a-new-world-religion/
Overall, nice intro to the lunatics who are running the asylum.
Jim, in a fundamental way Ehret has one aspect backwards:
"The defining character of this global movement was characterized by 1) technological progress, 2) leaping over the limits to growth by encouraging new discoveries and 3) recognizing all people as creatures made in the image of a living reasonable Creator."
In fact, it was the belief in a living, reasonable Creator that led to the explosion of scientific progress in the Middle Ages and beyond. The destruction of Christianity led to breaking that connection and unlinking morality from science.
For example:
The Victory of Reason: How Christianity Led to Freedom, Capitalism, and Western Success
https://www.amazon.com/Victory-Reason-Christianity-Freedom-Capitalism/dp/0812972333/ref=sr_1_6
"Many books have been written about the success of the West, analyzing why Europe was able to pull ahead of the rest of the world by the end of the Middle Ages. The most common explanations cite the West’s superior geography, commerce, and technology. Completely overlooked is the fact that faith in reason, rooted in Christianity’s commitment to rational theology, made all these developments possible. Simply put, the conventional wisdom that Western success depended upon overcoming religious barriers to progress is utter nonsense.
"In The Victory of Reason, Rodney Stark advances a revolutionary, controversial, and long overdue idea: that Christianity and its related institutions are, in fact, directly responsible for the most significant intellectual, political, scientific, and economic breakthroughs of the past millennium. In Stark’s view, what has propelled the West is not the tension between secular and nonsecular society, nor the pitting of science and the humanities against religious belief.
"Christian theology, Stark asserts, is the very font of reason: While the world’s other great belief systems emphasized mystery, obedience, or introspection, Christianity alone embraced logic and reason as the path toward enlightenment, freedom, and progress. That is what made all the difference.In explaining the West’s dominance, Stark convincingly debunks long-accepted “truths.”
"For instance, by contending that capitalism thrived centuries before there was a Protestant work ethic–or even Protestants–he counters the notion that the Protestant work ethic was responsible for kicking capitalism into overdrive. In the fifth century, Stark notes, Saint Augustine celebrated theological and material progress and the institution of “exuberant invention.” By contrast, long before Augustine, Aristotle had condemned commercial trade as “inconsistent with human virtue”–which helps further underscore that Augustine’s times were not the Dark Ages but the incubator for the West’s future glories.
"This is a sweeping, multifaceted survey that takes readers from the Old World to the New, from the past to the present, overturning along the way not only centuries of prejudiced scholarship but the antireligious bias of our own time. The Victory of Reason proves that what we most admire about our world–scientific progress, democratic rule, free commerce–is largely due to Christianity, through which we are all inheritors of this grand tradition."
Now, how does this work with my contention that Platonism is the dominant tradition of the West? Platonism is the font of the heresies that broke with the belief in "a living, reasonable Creator" and it is also the the source of reductionist scientism. Think of Western history as containing two strands: 1) orthodox Christian faith rooted in the reasonable belief in a created order, and 2) the Platonic tradition that contained within it the seeds of radical skepticism and the urge to self create human reality. Augustine's authority led to accepting Platonic elements into Christian thought that contained the seeds of destruction, leading to nominalism, voluntarism, radical skepticism and pessimism, and the destruction--not the reform--of Christianity.
Thanks! Most people reflexively assume that these crazy ideas have no "real world" influence. Not so.
Very thought provoking post, Mark. Libraries would be consumed with writings covering, expanding, clarifying and then there'd be more analysis of the analysis... Hard to do this topic broad justice in a 'stack post. However, there is much here worth some time for us to consider.
My 2 cents simply is to point a basic partition of Protestant understanding in Martin Luther's Reformation versus a 2nd reformation (Calvinism/Dutch Reformation). Calvin, in eventual conflict with Luther, did what all good debaters shouldn't do when their arguments are failing, resorted to name calling/debasement of Luther, deeming him too mentally ill to continue with.
Well, let me go for 5 cents worth - it is east to broadly paint American ideals as now failing due to Protestantism terminating (short-form descriptor for brevity here) when, as you (Mark) mentioned about some of the writers references, USG leadership and it's anti-God practices wasn't separated out of most of the US's populace's beliefs and really are symptomatic and functionary of the post-Reformation enlightenment era 'Anything-But-God' determinate ideals. Man is susceptible and satan is wily - I only can offer one pretty reliable guide, that is keep God 1st in all things... Thanks to all for enduring my diatribe - Blessings (WrH)
It’s a bit like Julian the Apostate complaining about the lack of charity amongst the pagans, they want the Christian virtues without the Christ.
Michael E. Jones’s tome Revolutionary Spirit showed just how radical the original Protestants were, it was baked in the cake from the beginning.
The radical Protestants are the genesis of the modern progressive. I’ve referred to them as Neo- puritans. Highly intolerant were these radical Protestants and they’ve only become more so and cruel.
Joel Bowman had a great essay today that talked about Plato; but from the perspective of a life well lived (Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King Jr.'s in particular). https://classicalwisdom.substack.com/p/celebrate-mlk-with-agape
"A key to civil disobedience (as Socrates and King would demonstrate) is that once we refuse to obey unjust laws, we must graciously accept the punishment, regardless of what is fair."
Being Ungovernable can play out as an anarchist/libertarian.
Or, it can play out through radical love, like Dr. King. This is how the West will be rebuilt.
There is a quiet renaissance going on in classical education today. As a homeschooling parent, I see us as gearing up for the next dark age.
nihilism
/nī′ə-lĭz″əm, nē′-/
noun
1) The doctrine that nothing actually exists or that existence or values are meaningless.
2) Relentless negativity or cynicism suggesting an absence of values or beliefs.
"nihilism in postwar art."
3) Political belief or action that advocates or commits violence or terrorism without discernible constructive goals.
But I don’t believe our so called rulers are totally nihilistic. Sure, they reject God as I or you may believe in Him, and advocate violence upon others without discernible goals, but they surely believe themselves to be the gods who they’ve been waiting for among us mere mortals.
A ruling class of Caligula’s and Nero’s who are selfish, cruel and uncaring.
Love Neil Oliver , thank you for this !
Yes that was marvellous, such fluency. The image evoked of Rishi Sunak embracing "fellow humunculus Vladimir Zelensky" had me in stitches.
I'm not really understanding the definition of Protestantism here. Since the 1600s there have been many variants. Some have been heretical some orthodox. Some reformed others not. Some have widely different eschatological views. Some are theonomic in their view of case laws others not. Some covenantal others not. Some adhere to creeds others not. Augustine to Kant. That's a stretch I'm sure the likes of VanTil, Rusdoony, Dooyeweerd, Bahnsen, Kuyper would disagree. Remember Kant was a reaction to Hume's skepticism. The only connection I see between Kant and reformed Christianity is the use of a transcendental argument for the necessity of God to supply the preconditions for intelligibility. Todd's article has so many mischaracterizations of reformed Christianity it would take too long to critique.
Articulated much better than I could, thank you.
Hilary Beloc writes about the 4 schisms of the early church. Protestantism is the 4th. It has to do with Man as man or Man as Divine.
Which schism? As far as I know the Creator/creature distinction has never not been a major tenet of orthodox Christianity. Protestantism arose out of the debate between sola fide & sola scriptura.
I'm it's fascinating material
Google Hilare Beloc. Original early church=Jesus is Divine. Later, Man only, thus the problem.
All heresies resurface from time to time, but that is not a feature of protestantism.
This explains why Mary McCord is a heathen.
“The disappearance of religion: Americans don’t go to church anymore, they don’t believe in God anymore."
Even if you do go to a liberal, American protestant church on any given Sunday you will have a hard time finding God in the building. Wokery aplenty. God not so much.
Those liberal protestant churches are dying on the vine. They're not just dead in their teaching, but in many cases their numbers are dwindling.
The conservative churches remain strong.
Sad thought, Cassander. However, I believe there's much more than just a remnant here. I think those of Faith kinda make up a 21st century 'Silent Majority'. Best @ you! (WrH)
Fascinating stuff, Mark. Thanks.