Seeing so well we are all blind....

In the age of scientific discovery we have become blind.  We do not have a religious problem, we have a thinking problem.

Chesterton, in critiquing the religious - or rather, skeptical view of religion - of Dickens, once said that Dickens accepted the religious ethos of his day, which was one of anti-dogmatism.  Chesterton said, what anti-dogmatism actually is is unexamined dogma, which brings me to the topic for today - the thinking problem the West has found itself in.  Sure, we are pragmatic. Sure, we have technology that is so profound it often frightens us (think of the myriad of movies designated to the topic of technology ultimately exceeding our control - Wall-e or the Matrix Trilogy come immediately to mind); even with such marvelous acheivements, we are seeing so well we are blind. 

Pragmatic without prudence, the summation of our culture. I once heard a biology professor, in speaking about the status of a human embryo, state that he didn't put value into whether the thing he was experimenting with was human or not. He said he was not a philosopher or priest and didn't operate in the realm of pure speculation, but in the realm of pure data.  He said he didn't represent an ethic, but rather "allowed the science to lead the way without speculating about the status of the embryo. I do not introduce morality into my subject, but rather let the science do the talking."  I paraphrase here as the exact words escape me.  The point was, he was a scientist and not a philosopher, and therefore in his eyes he was eschewing morality and dealing purely with science.  No wonder we fear our technology!  If science dictates the ends, science dominates us like the worst of tyrants.  At any rate, this is the 20/20 scientific vision that has blinded us all.  Morality is about theories of actions, it is a speculative endeavor that seeks to understand how we ought to behave.  This unphilosophical scientist, because he had little or no philosophy training, actually put forward a morality while denying morality. This is the Western thinking problem in a nutshell.

His theory of action was to let science lead the way.  Seeing so well with instrumentation he forgot to look without it. It's akin to using a telescope to walk down the street, sure you can learn a lot about the stars with it, but it's not a good guide to walking down the street. If you don't get run over, you'll certainly run into things along the way.

This is the moral landscape we find ourselves in today.  We hear talk of science vs. religion, and how they are incompatible.  We hear of certain religious nuts, following their own wills to carnal or destructive ends, and we decide it is better to not examine dogma than actually see what motivates such people.  Of course, the shepherds of the slave morality want us to think religion is for the unsophisticated or the crazy.  Our groupthinking professors, all with existentialist Nietzschean ends (more on this later), have convinced us that religion is the problem.  They tend to gloss or not even cover the institutionalized versions of their very own ethic.  We shant look at the scars of atheism because alas, it is "scientific" and "sophisticated."  Let's just prima facie take a glimpse at institutionalized atheism.  Communist Russia -- how many millions was Stalin alone responsible for taking, 10?  Nazi Germany -- 6 million Jews, and the propagation of World War II.   How about modern China, where women are forcibly taken from their homes, their children murdered, all for a false understanding of overpopulation?  Atheism is nihilism in a very real sense; not an imagined or hated weakness of a Christian nihilism as Nietzche envisioned, but a real nihilism, spattered in blood; carved out in blood of the innocents.  Of course, our existentialist groupthinkers in academia do not shed light on this. Instead, they point to Galileo, or the executions for heresy in the Middle Ages, which amount to maybe tens of thousands of deaths.  This is no justification for the murders over dogma in the Middle Ages, but to show you that the hands of our groupthinking shepherds (academics, media, secular politicians) are not as clean as they pretend. Indeed, their laundry is much dirtier.

American politics has long been an arena of competing wills; of will to power politics.  Unfortunately, lately it has taken a turn for the worse, because it has instantiated the dictatorship of relativism.  Our president and his ilk all portray a love of freedom, brotherhood, and equality, but they define them on their own terms.  Freedom is accepting their view.  Freedom of speech is now hindered because we are threatened with "bigotry" if we even question their morality.  Governments, without a barometer of truth, detach themselves very quickly from recognition of human dignity and the natural law, and quickly descend into tyranny. We are witnessing this in American politics today.  According to our leaders, the truth is there is no moral truth, but our politicians have a truth. Their moral neutrality is the key that unlocks the gate and lets the wolves and leopards in.  It goes like this, "We are open minded, but do not contradict our openmindedness.  You think gay marriage is problematic, you are a bigot. Do not bother to speculate about it or question our truth. If you do you are a bigot.  Do not ask if homosexuals are happy, if you do so you are a bigot.  Bigot, bigot, bigot!" 

Or, "Do not ask about the status of an embryo. Embryonic stem cell research is for the good of humanity.  If you think it's a human being, it is religious standpoint and therefore unreasonable.  Do not question us and our sophisticated moral neutrality. If you do, you are opposed to science and freedom.  You are opposed to discovery. You are an ignoramus or bigot. Yes, bigot!"

Or, "You are opposed to abortion. That is based on your religion and therefore not reasonable. We believe in a woman's freedom. Do not ask if the tissue inside her womb is human. Do not question us or you are opposed to women's rights. You are a freedom hater if you question us. You are a bigot!"

See how moral neutrality works?  Christian morality cannot take a dogmatic approach - in the shadow of Kant - to issues because our culture says that no one knows what is truly moral.  Our shepherds tell us that Christian morality is archaic, outdated, and unreasonable.  They tell us it is based on blind fideism, (we will deal with the philosophical arguments stemming from the Christian perspective later - we do not need to allow them this debate silencer any longer). It is very open minded, of course, to silence opposition by not even hearing the reasons they have for their ethics.

So Christian morality makes you a bigot. Secular morality makes me open minded.  No need to inquire.  The wolves are shepherding us with relativism, and they will soon feast on us.  With Obama holding the keys, it is only a matter of time before their "truth" silences any and all inquiry in the name of moral and scientific sophistication - all the while silencing true inquiry and destroying sophisticiation!  The spiritually minded are all clued into this. We can no longer ask questions because the morally neutral are dictating to us our morality by means of intimidation!

It would do us all good to examine more closely, to ruminate about the dogma's we are so adament to hate. We do not examine dogma and fear dogma because if there is Truth, there may be demands on our wills.  Do we fear Truth?  Do you fear Truth?  If you must examine your own behavior, will there be skeletons?  In the dictum of Aristotle, we ought to love truth more than our friends.  To see that we naturally fear truth, because ultimately we by nature realize how dirty we are, one needs to just look at even our whitest of lies.  Someone asks you if you saw them walking down the street, when indeed you did, but avoided them because you didn't want to stop to talk.  You tell them you did not see them to avoid the discomfort of explaining that you didn't want to stop to talk.  A fear of the truth.

In this blog I plan to unmask the dogmatism of our agnostic society.  Agnosticism is practical atheism, and it realizes itself in this way.  All it takes for evil to triumph is for the good to do nothing; the good will do nothing if they recognize nothing as good. This is precisely where agnosticism and religious skepticism have placed us.  Because we as a culture have accepted that there is no truth, we find nothing good worth fighting for, but then the wolves spoon feed us the slave morality of childesh pleasure, which individually enslaves us, and ultimately corporately enslaves us. 

In this blog I plan to inspire thought. I will question the unchallenged dogma of existentialist liberalism. It's genius stroke was to play itself off as neutral and antidogmatic. But it is dogma.

It is right to question everything, so let's together inquire and disallow the "morally neutral" to dominate and intimidate us into non thinking.  Forget tolerance. We should question all!  (I can use the imperative "should" because our foundation is the natrual law, but we will argue for it in the coming posts.  We won't simply assert it and then intimidate all those who question it by calling them bigots.)

So let us question Catholicism. Let us question Islam. Let us question Atheism.  Let us question Judaism, Buddhism, pantheism, polytheism, etc. Let us question existence!  In other words, let us wonder....let us inquire.

We are dogmatic creatures. If we must be dogmatic, then what dogma?

It's time to remove the masks.