The preamble: I have this awful habit of starting books and not finishing them. I don't really read literature or fiction so this habit of mine can be pretty maddening sometimes. That's my disclaimer in saying that I will say, from time to time, that I read a particular book but I want to be clear that I may not have actually finished it. With all that being said:
The case: I read this book called "Blue Like Jazz: Nonreligious Thoughts on Christian Spirituality" by a guy named Donald Miller. At some point in this book Don points out two very interesting ideas which provoke two very unsavory questions.
1. Human selfishness (or ego-centrism) is the root of all iniquity. It is this unchecked self-love that sits at the core of all human suffering and evil.
2. This human selfishness, the core of evil and suffering, is what produces ideologies which individuals integrate into their identities. These ideologies are indicative of the mental derangement existing in all of us.
As mentioned in the sidebar, ideologies are an "integrated belief system" that defines values, moderates behavior, and helps formulate the identity of the believer. If you thought about it for a while you might begin to consider an ideology as a pair of colored sunglasses. These glasses block certain effects of the Sun that are inconvenient and inconducive to our desires, but in turn ends up distorting the vision of reality. The shape and form of the world doesn’t much change under ideology, but it becomes tinted, shaded, and colored. Some aspects are harder to see, and are flushed out by the overwhelming tint of the ideology. Some aspects become impossible to see or distinguish. Ideology filters out those aspects of reality that are inconvenient or potentially “harmful” to the agenda of one’s self – but at the expense of truth.
An ideology can come in many forms but shows up most especially in political, social, and religious manifestations. These forms – often made taboo in sensitive environments (such as the workplace) due to the disruptive and potentially explosive nature of discussions based around them – are values-oriented and form a symbiotic-circle with one another. What I mean by that is this: a person's values will lead one to a particular ideology and will fuel the ideology until, at a particular turning point, the ideology begins to turn on the believer and takes an active role defining values, creating conformity and acting as an intrapersonal enforcement mechanism. Once an ideology begins to set the values-structure of a person, the ideology becomes part of the person’s identity and cannot become un-rooted without challenging (in the very least) or re-creating (in the most extreme and eventual cases) that person’s identity.
Most ideological systems are easily identified with the "ism". An "ism" is defined as a "system, doctrine, or theory" that is built around the joined ideology. You see it everywhere. Conservatism, communism, patriotism, Calvinism, racism, Catholicism, pacifism, terrorism, atheism, etc. Ideologies are the frameworks of beliefs and the gatekeepers of values. Of course, not all ideologies have an "ism" (such as "Christianity") and not all "isms" are ideological in nature (such as "autism"). But these ideologies and their isms are dangerous to anyone dedicated to truth.
Ideologies are dangerous because they do have a tendency to become dogmatic – allowing for no critical self-examination. In a sense they’re something of a developing neurosis where they begin to take over the mind’s ability to perceive reality objectively and, once securely in place, will begin to identify (or fabricate) deviant or enemy thought processes outside of the structure. Once the ideology has identified sufficient threats, it then spends all critical energies outward and builds a shield against any challenges to itself. Ascribing to any particular ideology makes it incredibly difficult to be intellectually honest about the reality in which we all live. Because it is inherently self-centric, ideology has a particularly misanthropic aspect to it, preferring to define and label – a divisive process creating a very “us and them” mindset. Even ideologies that have their roots in benign or philanthropic activities (such as pacifism or the abolitionism of the nineteenth century) can over time become incredibly divisive, mean-spirited, antagonistic and dogmatic.
The questions: What ideology or ism have you ascribed to? When did it happen? How have you changed since then? If provided with sufficient proof or evidence that this ideology was damaging you and hindering your search for the truth, would you feel comfortable abandoning the values structure that you've derived from your ideology? Could you cast it off easily? Or would you have to reshape your entire worldview and identity?
No easy answers... just hard questions.
The Unvarnished Doctrine
14 years ago
6 comments:
As with one of my last comments on your previous blog, I wonder what has changed in your tidy little world to warrant such questions...
A falling out perhaps?
Could the path one had chosen led to the place you never thought it would?
This inquiring mind wants to know Mr. Prince.
And would love to engage you in conversation once again, even though at times your....zealotry....was infuriating. Perhaps things have changed ;-)
I don't necessarily agree with what you are saying.
@terry
Care to elaborate?
Well, first I believe that as a person you must have something that shapes your world view. You can call that an ideology, or an ism if you want, but there has to be some kind of lens there that you look at the world through. The absence of a world view leads to person personal apathy and or anarchy. An ideology/ism is what motivates you to act. The issue isn't whether you have ascribed to an ideology or an ism, but which one you ascribe to. Which one moves you in the path of virtue (righteousness.) The inherent depravity in man is the element that distorts the ideology/ism and sends it down the path of evil. That's my thoughts
I think you are making to many assumptions here.
1.) Assuming that without an ism/ideology you cannot have a worldview. And if you don't have a worldview you become apathetic and anarchistic. I do not subscribe to a particular 'ism', and at the same time I understand that apathy is useless and anarchy is abhorrent to me. Needing an 'ism/ideology' to motivate you to act leaves you with a 'walking stick' to depend on. And what if that crutch is infested with termites?
2.) Tell me, how is your 'virtue and righteousness' different from that of the young downtrodden man who has decided to strap explosives to himself and blow up himself and others? He sees it the same as you do, that he is doing something for the 'virtue and righteousness' that he believes in. Too many people throw those words around without truly understanding the abyss for which they lead into.
3.) Inherent depravity of man? Another crutch which is used way to often. Assuming that everyone needs to be saved, and that only certain people can shepard the way. No one needs to be saved. If people stopped settling themselves down for the here-after and focused on the here and now I think we as a species could overcome anything at all.
I don't really care what anyone believes in as long as they do not become counter productive to moving forward.
I like what you said Terry, and as you can see I do not wholly agree with you. But I do think that this discourse is a good think that will help all parties involved. I look forward to more of it. And please, if you, or anyone else that reads, think that I am way off track, by all means tell me. ;-)
For the most part, I'd like to hear Jeremy out, although I still don't think he has truly grasped what he is attempting to do.
Ah... dialogue.
William Charles - I've certainly had what you could call a "change of heart" regarding my previous ideologies. I'm sure I don't need to re-iterate much of what I've said about ideology and truth, but I will say this: I've come to a place where I can safely say that I only value objective and empirically factual truth when it comes to my understanding of reality. I'm not saying that "I've found the truth" in all things or that I've got a corner on the market when it comes to truth. Far from it. What I do know is that the "isms" are out for good... wholly unacceptable. Feel free to ask any questions you've got. You can do it via this medium or just email me if you want to take any of it "offline".
Terry - God knows that the argument you're making has been around since the dawn of the first ideology. There's no question that what you're saying is a much more comfortable worldview than what I'm proposing. What we have to remember - and really keep it in mind - is that no one jumps into an ideology (except for the mentally deranged) with the express purpose of embracing "evil". Everyone thinks their ideology is a good one. Everyone believes their philosophical construct leads to virtue and righteousness.
This is where we all get tripped up. You argue that ideology are the lenses which brings reality into focus. My analogy was that these lenses are tinted... shaded. They only bring into focus what you want them to and block out what you don't want to see. But, perhaps, my analogy to sunglasses was inadequate. Allow me to contrast and try again:
Ideologies are psychological, emotional, and spiritual parasites. Just like a parasite, ideologies will introduce themselves to a susceptible host, find a comfortable place to gestate, latch themselves into the psyche and begin to bleed the host dry. From there they begin to slowly warp the soul of the "believer" and rot away the identity.
This may seem like one of those infuriating "catch 22" syllogisms or some kind of maddening circular logic (believe me, I know...), but to insist that there are "good" ideologies and that you or I have found "the one" only goes to prove how incredibly dangerous and invasive they are. It also goes to show how ingrained these parasites have already become in us - how frighteningly conformed we've already become to them.
It's a terrifying prospect to deconstruct your entire worldview via the abandonment of your ideology... especially if/when you didn't even realize you had one. The first and most important rule of being dedicated to the truth (and if you or anyone else claims to be dedicated to Jesus, then they are de facto dedicated to the truth) is keeping an open mind. You have to keep your mind open and you must begin to ask questions that challenge yourself and your entire belief structure.
Remember what Dallas said - "Jesus is on the side of truth, and if you don't believe that then you don't believe in Jesus."
Post a Comment