WadeFiled under: Christianity, Philosophy, Religion | Tags: Apologetics, Christianity, Religion, Unreasonable Faith
The thing I miss the most about college, other than Saturdays in the fall, is the intellectual atmosphere. The word university is very easy to break down. Essentially, it means unity in diversity, hence uni-versity. I loved living in a college town filled with people, students, and professors each with their own ideas and eager to share and hear new ones. Conversations about religion, politics, philosophy, economics, and life were always happening; in classrooms, coffee shops, libraries, and even bars. Then I did a very reasonable thing. I graduated, got a job, and moved to suburbia. In suburbia, the “why” questions are traded for “how” questions. No one ever discusses why they need more money, or if they need more money, just how to get more money. The same goes with status, and kids, and debt, and retirement. Its never a question of why, but how. While in suburbia, (or Generica, as my friend Jon calls it) I felt like Saint Exupery, walking around with my picture of boa constrictor digesting an elephant. Everyone kept telling me how nice of a hat I had drawn. Life is tough for a philosopher in the suburbs. Soccer moms and NASCAR dads know little of Kant and Kierkegaard.
One day, while still longing for an intellectual outlet, I came across the atheist blog, Unreasonable Faith. Unreasonable faith is hosted by a guy named Daniel Florien. Daniel seems to be a very nice and respectable guy, as far as our email correspondence has shown. He describes himself as an ex-Christian. His blog is frequented by a group of fellow atheists and the occasional Christian. Posting comments on Daniel’s Blog has lifted a little bit of my feeling of “intellectual repression”. It has been good to dialogue with the posters on his site, and I recommend it to all. One thing I have noticed is that many of the posters on Daniel’s blog don’t seem to know much philosophy. This isn’t a knock, they’re just a more right-brained lot. However, it is difficult for me sometimes having been trained in syllogistic logic, ethics, and metaphysics to deal with people who are strict materialist and empiricists. I feel that most of the discourse devolves into trying to jam square pegs into round holes.
I believe it was G.S. Street who said of G.K. Chesterton, “I will begin to worry of my own philosophy when Mr. Chesterton gives us his,” to which Chesterton replied, “Even a bad shot is dignified in accepting a duel.” I have not been challenged to any duels, literally or metaphorically. But, I would like to try to dignify myself with my own “bad shot” by giving my counter to Daniel’s claim that faith is unreasonable. So, if the honest, genuine and hospitable athiests from Unreasonable Faith will permit me, I’ll take a shot in my next post.
Leave a Comment so far
Leave a comment
