Posts Tagged ‘polemicisms’

Words, and the Spirits Beneath Them

20250930

In Remembrance of, and Inspired by, Charlie Kirk

 

 

I and an acquaintance are conversing pleasantly. Suddenly, and with seeming innocence, a new topic is introduced, a controversial subject about which we disagree. Imagine the sort of sentences that might trigger the change:

-Did you see [insert politician’s name here]'s speech last night?
-People need to think it through better when it comes to [insert controversial social issue here].
-You’re not really a [insert membership in a political party, religious tradition, offensive occupation, or activist cause here], are you?
- There's no way I’m attending that [reunion, wedding, funeral, family event, etc.
-The government needs to do something about [insert one of the innumerable possibilities here].

You get the idea.

Experience has taught me that, if allowed to continue according to the conventional pattern, this conversation will soon become unpleasant and unproductive at best. At worst, it will become a playground for the wicked spirits that delight in windbag fury among the humans, futile ego-wars of words (and eventually, bullets).

Why does this happen invariably? Because the words and language of such conversations are rarely if ever able to move the participants closer to their shared, wounded, defensive humanity. Such arguments are simply the brandishing of fragmentary shields and swords - protecting only the most shallow of hidden agendas.

We are treading water in a great ocean. The energies, biases, and vague inward conflicts behind and beneath human consciousness: they are an ocean - deep, dark, mysterious, and dangerous. Words are the constantly shifting shimmers of light that dance on the surface of that ocean. Most of the time, and even on the lips of a great orator, words can only dance and glimmer, only hinting at what is really beneath.

If we are to move toward the better world most of us say we want, words are necessary, but they are far from being enough. And that includes the words that we say to ourselves as our own thoughts and ideas bubble to the surface. How can we not believe them, as a fundamentalist believes hers book. Each of us is a fundamentalist in the presence of hers culturally reinforced orthodoxies. “You will be like God, knowing good and evil,” said the serpent when tempting Eve. And the fact is, we are made to be godly in many ways, and to be wise about what is needed in our sphere of influence. But see how the serpent speaks in a way that dances on the surface of the ocean like shimmers of light, and leads humanity into every manner of self-destruction – justified by sophisticated sounding arguments. "When the woman saw..."

< * >

Christ Jesus, I have wasted so much time and energy with words: adding them to my munitions, stockpiling them into ever changing combinations. And calling it learning. Or even wisdom. Then I bring them all into a battle that no one can win, except in delusional pretentiousness. Others might even praise me for the effectiveness of my word making. But it is mere word making nevertheless, impressive only at the shallow level at which conventional perception comfortably luxuriates.

Christ Jesus, may I please have some entrance into the resources that fueled Your way in awkward or dangerous interactions with others? You had a message, which was Yourself, and You had great wisdom to share. Your own presence and your way with people gave Your words true power. “The words I speak to you are spirit and truth.” I have spent too much time on the words, and far too little on belonging to The Word "that became flesh and dwelt among us." I want to partner with you now in beginning to correct that imbalance.

It seems that such a gift is unlikely to be misused. The very desire for it arises from a distaste for cheap personal triumphs. Please be increasingly the third – the Primary – participant in my conversations.

Words about Words (and humans)

20250624

"No statement is true in all contexts,
including this one.
Words are as hard as rock,
but as flexible as water.
If you feel the need to concur,
the words will feel firm beneath your feet.
If you feel the need to oppose,
the words will submit to your magic.

Meaning-makers are magicians.

“My Lived Experience” / “My Truth”

20250316






"My Lived Experience"

The phrase's current popularity is understandable, a representative component of the cultural spirit. Used in conversation, it is a summary form of:

"I am the only one who has had my unique set of experiences. Thus, any belief I express shall stand firm in the face of any disagreement as long as I wish it so.”

Note that this represents a certain attitude at least as much as a certain article of faith. More than simply “this is what I believe,” it implies (at least) something like, “any attempt to nuance or argue the matter further with me is likely to be met with a firm defense.”

There is at least one good reason for giving this approach a modicum of credibility. Unless all ideas and beliefs at all times are to be considered by all as merely theoretical or contingent, we must allow ourselves and others a degree of privilege to arrive at what we think of as “understanding” ...no matter how subjective another’s understanding of a thing may seem to be.

But why only a modicum of credibility? Why shall we not be as unquestioning of another's "lived experience" as s/he seems to wish us to be? The answer is: because we are considering here the realm of one person's subjectivity.

Subjectivity: One person's own unique experiences and the meanings assigned to those experiences, bound up in various ways with one’s individuality, unique awareness (“consciousness”), and giftedness, but which cannot but be in many ways inherited, unconsciously derived, unexamined, self-serving, and habitual.

If I am pursuing anything like adult functionality, or anything approaching wisdom for life, it seems best to give proper value and attention to my own unique experiences and the meanings assigned to those experiences.

It also seems vital to place such priorities not too high on the priority list, given the vast expanse if Reality about which I have little or no awareness, and the great value of all the "lived experiences" of the rest of humanity.

Caution: Right(eous)ness

20250110

Jesus reaches out to conservative Christians and invites them to transcend their defensiveness against the LGBT community.

Jesus reaches out to members of the LGBT community and invites them to transcend their defensiveness against conservative Christians.

In neither case is the primary issue one’s “beliefs.” The primary issues are (1) Our common Humanity, (2) Our common state of soul and culture sickness, and (3) Our common need to be rescued from #2.

For now, the greater burden of accountability is on those who claim Jesus Christ as Savior and Lord.

Dick Freehand on Facts. Data. Evidence.

20241218

The world is insane. Far too much unnecessary stupidity, leading to far too much destruction. And when I say “the world,” it is obvious that˙ I mean people, Anything else that might be included in “the world” is not so stupid or bad. I mean, the occasional hungry predator animal chows down on some lesser victim marginalized by the herd, but really that’s the exception to the generally peaceful rule-not unlike the native Americans before Columbus the Evil came and mauled them in the name of Christendom. So because of this world I live in-that is, other people-my life is a constant courageous search for truth.

Facts. Data. Evidence. That is why I trust only in science to inform me. There is nothing I believe that cannot be proven scientifically. Columbus of course was a scientific ignoramus. How could it have been otherwise? I mean, back in 1492, they did not know about evolution, or even washing your hands before you cut into someone for their own medical health. That’s what the sex-binary Christian conservatives want to take us back to, with all their capitalism and fascism and electing felons who lead their idiot followers to insurrection just because they lost the most fair election in history. Those are facts, all documented if you take the time to look them up. That’s what I do. I look things up. My beliefs have the backing of Facts. Data. Evidence. No “faith” needed.

If there was ever some new evidence that seemed contradictory to one of my facts, then I would modify my beliefs. But the previous belief, possibly corrected by new evidence, was not a matter of “faith.” It was Truth. My truth, because it was the Truth of all intelligent, educated, modern science-minded thinkers, which is, sadly, a very small minority of the world’s population. The rest are just wandering out there, enslaved to their capitalist overlords, putting their faith in their sky God that doesn’t exist, who sits up in a “heaven” no one has ever seen. Where’s the evidence? No thinking person has ever seen any. And so, with their hungry greed, their doctors cut into you with unwashed hands, then go home to their obedient wives and their two and a half kids in their home in suburbia, voting for people who are just like them but more skilled at manipulating the herd. Columbus, the Salem Witch Trials, the Crusades, Zionism, corporate greed, racism, sexism. How can they not see how it’s all connected?

Do you see? I haven’t heard any sound evidence to the contrary. Don’t interrupt me, I’m not finished yet. I’m just getting started…

Evolved?

20241216

Definition:
Evolve (verb): to develop gradually to a higher or more advanced state.

That is an accepted standard conventional definition of the word “evolve,” from which the noun “evolution” is derived.

Definition:
Evolution (noun): the gradual development to a higher or more advanced state.

Now, if one believes in evolution, then one believes that humanity is a product of such a gradual process. That is, in the very distant past, there was some kind of primordial soup of unaccounted-for origin that contained within it some kind of entity that was the only “living” thing that had ever existed. (We leave behind for the present discussion the issue of how any entity at that juncture can be described as “living.”)

Then that one-celled “living” thing evolved – developing gradually, over immeasurable time, by some seemingly feasible process, to the higher, more advanced state which we now think of as The Human Race.


Question:
By what standard do we humans now count our current state of development to be an improvement or “advancement” beyond that one-celled “living” thing that supposedly started out in the primordial soup? One might say it is obvious that any human being in the current epoch is clearly superior in every recognizable way to a mere primordial cell.

But…

Really?


By what rational standard is such an evaluation to be made? A “religious” one, the credibility of which we have already dismissed? A “scientific” one, based on supposedly objective data that has been gathered and evaluated by the very subjective mind that was formed by the process it is examining?
Using only tested, confirmed, objective criteria, can you prove beyond objective reasonable doubt that contemporary human cultures are more sophisticated, practical, or valuable than a convocation of “living” cells in a petri dish?

If you cannot do so, then you do not believe in evolution in its conventional sense. Rather, at a minimum, you believe in what is called “intelligent design,” a term typically used by those who want to retain credibility in both scientific and Christian settings. You believe, however feebly, in some sort of Will or Personality behind the whole thing.

How can I say with confidence that you do not believe in evolution in its conventional sense? Here’s how:

• You make an assumption, unproven by scientific methods, that contemporary human cultures are more sophisticated, practical, and valuable than a culture of “living” cells moving around in a petri dish.

• You make this assumption based only on comparisons of value that seem obvious to you, but which cannot be objectively demonstrated except to those who share your unproven subjective unscientific assumptions. Comparisons of inherent moral or ontological value are not within the purview of the scientific method.

• Outside of a biblical (or perhaps to a lesser degree, another (“religious”) viewpoint, compelling scientific arguments cannot be made in support of a proposition that a culture of “living” cells moving around in a petri dish is inferior in various ways to conventional human cultures. Science cannot prove the relative value of two entities using only the scientific method. Thus science demands reconsideration of biological evolve-olution.

An Invitation to Mercy

20241208

This text made musical for easier memorization:


In Western civilization in the 21st century,
there is a significant degree
of shallowness, foolishness, deception, denial,
among both the religious and the irreligious.

I recommend that you reconsider
the foundations upon which
your own life is built.
Do some courageous investigating
beneath your surface rhetoric.

Be certain that you are ready at any time
for a just God to give you your final examination
based on The One Man in history
that rose up out of His own grave
and is waiting now for you to seek Him.