Saturday, August 14, 2010

E-books and Blogger Next Blog


Trees, Versailles, France (trekearth.com)

E-books

As many of you will realize, with my four academic degrees (my PhD pass is promised to arrive soon in the mail) and two theological blogs, I have spent a lot of time on Christian/religious studies for free.

At times it was 30+ hours on thesis and 20-30 hours on blogging, weekly.

But in reality this is both ministry and business.

I will soon look for work as a professor with my upgraded Curriculum Vitae.

I have started an e-book (or ebook) business.

My first e-book is done and now I am just finalizing the new website, payment plans and related.

I will market the e-books on thekingpin68 and satire and theology as well.

The first e-book is concerning the philosophical, political, aspects of writing a successful PhD thesis, especially in a semi-hostile department and via distance learning. It will present a non-politically correct way of looking at the topic.

It will not be like materials written by employees of Universities/Colleges where one is instructed how to write a thesis. Although, I do provide some technical advice.

My second e-book will probably concern the problem of evil.

Big surprise to my readers...

Blogger Next Blog

I have stated on this blog previously:

'Theology is not to be done at the expense of the Scripture, but within a correct study of that Scripture. Shedd reasons that ‘methods of investigation are continually undergoing correction and modification’ and this can lead to better organization of the subject. Shedd (1874-1890)(1980: 4 Volume 1). Theology is always considered in the light of cultural and historical setting of the day, the implication being that a culture will influence theology and therefore theology needs to be scrutinized with this concept always in mind. This however, should never alter essential Biblical doctrines found by studying Scripture in context.'

'Erickson explains that although Scripture presents objective truth, the application of Scripture may be different for each person. Even if one reasons that objective truth exists, each person subjectively with his/her own mindset deals with data and knowledge in an individualistic way. There needs to be solid church teachings that adequately explain Biblical doctrines within their original context, staying true to Biblical theology, and yet teaching should be flexible enough to provide explanations that vary at times in order to be relatable to differing modern groups and individuals.'

I use Blogger Next Blog and web searches to help find Christian bloggers.

I reason:

Christian theological blogging can include various types of bloggers which can be found via web seaching. As one can see from my links lists on thekingpin68 and satire and theology, I link with a variety of people, mostly Christians, from various countries and of various ages, both male and female.

As a result various theological perspectives are provided when persons comment.

To me, this constitutes a cultural development of theology.

ERICKSON, MILLARD (1994) Christian Theology, Grand Rapids, Baker Book House.

SHEDD, WILLIAM G.T. (1874-1890)(1980) Dogmatic Theology, Volumes 1 and 2, Nashville, Thomas Nelson Publishers.

In this post I will feature ten of my favourite desktop photos I have collected.


I picked this up off of StumbleUpon. I have never seen or touched in person light blue water like that.


South Wales, United Kingdom (trekearth.com)

I would love that as my backyard.


Campo Del Moro, Madrid, Spain (trekearth.com)

This seems like such a cool place to take in a lecture, or teach one. Either in the building or even better out on the grass on a sunny day.


Conwy Gardens, Wales, 2001 (thekingpin68)


Conway overview, Wales 2001 (thekingpin68)

I am in no way a profession photographer but I like a few of my photos. They are not the best technically in my collection, but a few of mine have the scenes I want.




Grand Canyon, Australia


Princeton University

Seems like a very scenic place.


Maple Ridge, BC (thekingpin68)

A photo I took here at my complex. I have no plans at staying here long term, but it is a reminder that despite all my troubles from situations and people there is beauty where I am at.

Sunday, August 01, 2010

Consciousness and soul/spirit (PhD edit)


Alfonso XII monument, Madrid (photo from trekearth.com)

Please note, the post is actually fairly short if one just reads the main body and not the footnotes.

As part of my post-viva PhD revisions I was required to do some psychological and scientific research on consciousness, that was to work in concert with my already theological and philosophical approach. I presented a bit of this information back on May 13, 2009 with the article 'Consciousness, universalism, and Dos Equis'.

This new post will provide more material on consciousness.

How is this relevant to theology, philosophy of religion and Biblical Studies and more particular in my case, theodicy and the problem of evil? Well, I must admit I wondered why I was digging through secular psychology and science journals for my PhD revisions, but actually the findings do not, in my opinion, work against the Biblical idea of a human immaterial soul/spirit.

Sir John Houghton (1995) defines consciousness as ‘a quality possessed by human beings’ and the extent that it may be possessed by higher animals is the subject of debate.[1] Although the human brain is sometimes compared to a computer,[2] the human brain seems different as it thinks, feels, and demonstrates the property of self-awareness and consciousness.[3] Rocco J. Gennaro (2006) of Indiana State University documents grammatically that the main term under review, consciousness is derived from the Latin con (with)[4] and scire (know).[5]

Michael Winkelman (2004) of the American Anthropological Association writes that common understanding of a model of consciousness includes attention-awareness, phenomenal experiences, self-referencing, learning and the use of information, interpreting meanings, having goals, and systems of social reference.[6] It is suggested that consciousness manifests itself through the physical properties of the brain.[7] John Perry (1998) within ‘Circumstantial Attitudes and Benevolent Cognition’ suggests desires, beliefs and other cognitive aspects of persons are associated with mental states.[8] These mental states[9] relate by implication to human consciousness. There are strands of thought that desires and related functions may be found within human consciousness.[10]

David M. Rosenthal (2007) in ‘Philosophy, and the Study of Consciousness’ states that a person or creature is conscious when it can be awake and respond to ‘sensory stimulation.’[11] Being conscious also relates to a creature that senses and perceives about a thing or has a thought about that thing being present.[12] It is also defined as the state of being aware in contrast to being unaware.[13] Wade Novin (2004) in his journal article on quantum physics and consciousness explains consciousness is a ‘unique problem for the sciences’.[14] Cognitive science has recently made advances in understanding the structures and process of sensory input leading to bodily functions, but still little is known about consciousness.[15] It is noted that presently it is difficult to explain the need for consciousness within physical organisms within a physical, natural world.[16] Consciousness is considered as part of natural phenomenon because it is reasoned to exist, but not because any scientific theory can predict or explain its emergence.[17]

Peter Carruthers (2001)(2007) documents that modern higher-order theories[18] concerning consciousness attempts to reason out the distinctive properties of consciousness in regard to higher-order representation of sorts as in the ‘subjective dimensions’ of feelings.[19] Within the International Journal of Philosophy, Isabel Gois (2001) suggests that in written work consciousness is often viewed as a mystery.[20] She seeks to make consciousness less mysterious through the use of scientific inquiry.[21] Some philosophers and many scientists are skeptical concerning human ability to explain how the brain works in regard to the shape of events, thoughts and feelings.[22] There is a common view that no matter how detailed and complete a scientific theory of consciousness may be it will not be able to explain why the human ‘conscious experiences alone have an apparent quality to their occurrences’ while unconscious processes do not.[23]

Gois thinks this is a mistaken perspective[24] and instead reasons that science should ‘either provide physical evidence for the truth of those introspective impressions, or bow to the conclusion that it can never know our minds as well as they know themselves’.[25] She suggests that most reason that the second option is the more likely one, although she disagrees and reasons science can one day empirically understand consciousness.[26] Sir John Houghton writes that we should not expect to find extra material as part of the brain called ‘consciousness or self-awareness’ which ‘pervades the brain without being a part of it,[27] and I accept this is as a sound statement.

There is no clear understanding despite the fact consciousness, desires and related are studied within philosophy, religion, psychology and psychiatry.[28] The term and concept of consciousness has not been developed with enough clarity from scientists and others with related expertise.[29] It can be reasoned that possibly consciousness is the starting point where the human being has self-awareness and an understanding that they are an individual apart from any other entity.[30] Consciousness is a difficult subject,[31] but psychologist and philosopher William James (1904) states that if the idea of consciousness in understanding human thought is eliminated there is not an explanation for brain function.[32] If human consciousness is rejected because it is not completely understood,[33] then other ideas need to be invented which probably are not as intellectually satisfying.

[1] Houghton (1995: 219).

[2] Houghton (1995: 92).

[3] Houghton (1995: 92).

[4] Gennaro (2006: 1).

[5] Gennaro (2006: 1).

[6] Winkelman (2004: 1).

[7] Winkelman (2004: 1).

[8] Perry (1998: 1).

[9] Perry (1998: 1).

[10] Biologist Alfred Gierer from Tubingen suggests that consciousness appears as ‘a system’s feature of our brain with neural processes strictly following the laws of physics’. Gierer (2003: 1). Gierer explains that there is not however, a general and exhaustive theory of human consciousness. Gierer (2003: 1). E. Ordunez, I. Badillo, and E Peon state the basic conjecture is that matter, energy and related information within the universe activates brain function and the nervous system and the human experiences of ‘memory, logic, sentiments, awareness, perception, cognition’, and other processes. Ordunez, Badillo, and Peon (2008: 1).

[11] Rosenthal (2007: 1).

[12] Rosenthal (2007: 1). This would include an imagination of something possible.

[13] Rosenthal (2007: 1).

[14] Novin (2004: 1).

[15] Novin (2004: 1-2).

[16] Novin (2004: 2).

[17] Novin (2004: 2). Neil C. Manson writes that there is unlikely to be a simple, direct way to connect mental discourse to ultimate conclusions concerning the nature of consciousness. Manson (2002: 1).

[18] Carruthers (2001)(2007: 1). Higher-order thought will allow one to be conscious of his/her own state. Rosenthal (2007: 9-11). See also Ned Block of New York University. Block (2008: 1-2) and Gennaro (2006: 1-2).

[19] Carruthers (2001)(2007: 1).

[20] Gois (2001: 3). However, Gierer notes that most scientists reason mental states are clearly linked to the empirical physical states of the human brain. Gierer (2003: 6).

[21] Gois (2001: 3-4).

[22] Gois (2001: 4). Many philosophers and scientists are sceptical that human consciousness can be properly explained. Houghton admits it is difficult for many observers to accept that consciousness can be defined in a meaningful way or to describe it in terms of other things. Houghton (1995: 92-93).

[23] Gois (2001: 4).

[24] Gois (2001: 4).

[25] Gois (2001: 4). Gierer reasons one of the difficulties with the problem of understanding human consciousness and understanding humanity is the question of human free will. Gierer (2003: 13). Consciousness allows a person to have knowledge and understanding of self and environment and, therefore to have a perception of both good and evil. Ordunez, Badillo, and Peon (2008: 2).

[26] Gois (2001: 4). Marco Biagini, an Italian scientist with a PhD in Solid State Physics that operates the Center of Scientific Divulgation of Consciousness comments consciousness is ‘directly observable phenomena.’ Biagini (2009: 1-4). He takes a more optimistic approach to the idea of coming to scientific conclusions concerning consciousness. Houghton admits that consciousness will require new scientific theories and insights. Houghton (1995: 210).

[27] Houghton (1995: 70).

[28] Ordunez, Badillo, and Peon (2008: 2).

[29] Ordunez, Badillo, and Peon (2008: 2). Houghton (1995: 210).

[30] Descartes in Lormand (1648)(1996: Volume 3: 335). Hume (1739-1740)(1973: 185). Gierer (2003: 9).

[31] Gierer (2003: 9). Gois (2001: 4).

[32] James (1904: 477-491).

[33] James (1904: 477-491).

BIAGINI, MARCO (2009) ‘Mind and brain: A scientific discussion leading to the existence of the soul’, CSDC, Italy, Center of Scientific Divulgation about Consciousness.

BLACKBURN, SIMON (1996) Oxford Dictionary of Philosophy, Oxford, Oxford University Press.

BLOCK, NED (2008) ‘Comparing the Major Theories of Consciousness’, in The Cognitive Neurosciences IV, V.M. Gazzaniga (ed.), Cambridge, Massachusetts, MIT Press.

CARRUTHERS, PETER (2001)(2007) ‘Higher-Order Theories of Consciousness’, in Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, Palo Alto, California, Stanford University Press.

DESCARTES, RENE (1648)(1996) ‘Conversation with Burman’, in Eric Lormand: University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, The University of Michigan.

DARROW, CLARENCE (1928)(1973) ‘The Myth of the Soul’, in The Forum, October, in Paul Edwards and Arthur Pap (eds.), A Modern Introduction To Philosophy, New York, The Free Press.

ERICKSON, MILLARD (1994) Christian Theology, Grand Rapids, Baker Book House.

FEINBERG, JOHN.S. (1994) The Many Faces of Evil, Grand Rapids, Zondervan Publishing House.

GENNARO, ROCCO, J. (2006) ‘Consciousness’, in The Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy, Martin, Tennessee, The Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy.

GIERER, ALFRED (2003) ‘Brain, mind, and limitations of a scientific theory of human consciousness’, Preprint of a contribution to the symposium: Proteus im Spiegel-Kritische Theorie des Subjekts im 20, Tubingen, Max-Planck-Institute Biology, Tubingen.

GOIS, ISABEL (2001) ‘Understanding Consciousness’, in Disputaitio: International Journal of Philosophy, Lisbon, The Philosophy Centre of the University of Lisbon.

GRENZ, STANLEY J. AND ROGER E. OLSON (1992) Twentieth Century Theology, Downers Grove, Illinois, InterVarsity Press.

HOUGHTON, JOHN (1995) The Search for God, Can Science Help?, Lion Publishing, Oxford.

HUME, DAVID (1739-1740)(1973) ‘A Treatise of Human Nature’, in Paul Edwards and Arthur Pap (eds.), A Modern Introduction To Philosophy, New York, The Free Press.

JAMES, WILLIAM (1904) ‘Does ‘Consciousness’ Exist?’, in Journal of Philosophy, Psychology, and Scientific Methods, Volume 1, pages 477-491. New York, Columbia University.

MANSON, NEIL C. (2002) ‘What does language tell us about consciousness? First-person mental discourse and higher-order thought theories of consciousness’, in Philosophical Psychology, La Jolla, California, University of California, San Diego.

NOVIN, WADE (2004) ‘Can Quantum Physics Explain Consciousness? A report on the Quantum Mind conference’, in Skeptic, Spring, London, Goldsmiths, University of London.

ORDUNEZ, E., I. BADILLO, AND E. PEON (2008) ‘Toward the Concept of the Consciousness Field-Some Reflections’, Ordunez, Badillo, Peon, Mexico City. Ordunez, Badillo, Peon.

PERRY, JOHN (1998) ‘Circumstantial Attitudes and Benevolent Cognition’, in Language, Mind and Logic, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press.

POJMAN, LOUIS P. (1996) Philosophy: The Quest for Truth, New York, Wadsworth Publishing Company.

ROSENTHAL, DAVID M. (2007) ‘Philosophy and the Study of Consciousness’, Oxford Companion to Consciousness, Timothy Bayne (ed.), Oxford, Oxford University Press.

WINKELMAN, MICHAEL (2004) ‘Understanding Consciousness Using Systems Approaches and Lexical Universal’, American Anthropological Association, Arlington, Virginia, American Anthropological Association.

Saturday, July 10, 2010

Evolving theology in a sense


Campo Del Moro, Madrid (photo from trekearth.com)

I have been discussing with my good friend from Florida, Documentary Man, some of the evolution (pardon that term) from my approach with my MPhil thesis (Wales, 2003), to my PhD thesis (Wales, 2010). He is reading the PhD thesis.

Here in this example, we can see how the terms 'in a sense' are relevant to theological and philosophical concepts as what I wrote in my MPhil thesis was more so from a practical theological perspective looking at philosophy of religion, whereas as my PhD thesis has a more developed philosophy of religion perspective.

From MPhil

Within this thesis it will be obvious that my view on God and the problem of evil has been somewhat influenced by the theology of John Calvin. This will be explained throughout the thesis; however, he held that God willed evil for the greater good without being a sinful contradictory being as God’s motives were pure, whereas those that sinned had impure motives. Some would object to this view stating that it is determinism, believing God must be coercing human beings to sin and commit evil actions within this system. Simon Blackburn defines determinism as follows:

The doctrine that every event has a cause. The usual explanation of this is that for every event, there is some antecedent state, related in such a way that it would break a law of nature for this antecedent state to exist yet the event not to happen. Blackburn (1996: 102).

In the case of human sin, John Calvin did not believe that God determined that people sin, and nor do I. God was not the antecedent for sin. I agree that God can use human sin for the greater good, yet human beings have free will and freely sin by choice within a sinful nature. Calvin stated concerning free will:

If freedom is opposed to coercion, I both acknowledge and consistently maintain that choice is free and I hold anyone who thinks otherwise to be a heretic. If, I say, it were called free in this sense of not being coerced nor forcibly moved by an external impulse, but moving of its own accord, I have no objection. Calvin (1543)(1996: 68).

Human beings in Calvin’s thinking were not forced by God to sin, but God as an infinite being had and used the power to use their sin for the greater good. So to say that God willed evil for the greater good means that God could use sinful actions of others in order to accomplish his divine purpose. Calvin stated:

For we do not say that the wicked sin of necessity in such a way as to imply that they sin without wilful and deliberate evil intent. The necessity comes from the fact that God accomplishes his work, which is sure and steadfast, through them. At the same time, however, the will and purpose to do evil which dwells within them makes them liable to censure. But, it is said, they are driven and forced to this by God. Indeed, but in such a way that in a single deed the action of God is one thing and their own action is another. For they gratify their evil and wicked desires, but God turns this wickedness so as to bring his judgements (judgments) to execution. Calvin (1543)(1996: 37).

God could set up events in such a way that someone would freely choose to sin, but this is not done in such a way that God is forcing or determining one to do so. Within this thesis I want to make it clear that I believe the problem of evil is, in large measure, a human problem. I believe in a human fall through sinful choice. God can still will, in a sense, that these sinful actions work for the greater good, but I do not believe in a Universe where God forces and predetermines people to commit individual sin. People are sinful in nature as they are descendants of Adam. This inherited and sinful nature means people will freely choose to sin and God does not coerce them into doing so. He may provide situations where he knows that certain individuals will sin, but his motives in this are for the greater good. This is not the most satisfying doctrine I suppose, but Biblically and philosophically valid nonetheless. This concept will be discussed throughout my thesis.

End of MPhil quote

PhD amendment

The MPhil argument

God wills evil for the greater good.

God does not cause, as in force or coerce significantly free human thoughts and actions.

A practical theological and less philosophical use of the term cause is provided.

Persons cause significantly free human actions.

Therefore:

Hard determinism is not used by God when persons sin.

I wrote my MPhil in 2003, and since then my understanding of compatibilism has increased. Plus, I need to point out that my advisor wanted me to clearly point out that God was not in practical theological terms the antecedent cause of sin, as in making persons sin. I still agree with the statement that God does not determine that people sin in the sense that I do not believe God uses compulsion or force. God was not the antecedent (preceding cause) of sin in the sense of God coercing or forcing people to commit sinful acts.

The point I was making was that God does not use hard determinism to cause people to sin as if they were sinning by compulsion and not freely.

However, it should be pointed out that in another more strictly philosophical sense, as God is sovereign over all events, he is the primary cause of evil and sin and he determines and allows human beings to freely sin as the secondary cause. In that sense God is the antecedent of sin.

However, God's motives remain pure in all that he wills. The statement was denying hard determinism, but not soft determinism.

With my PhD I now approach the topic more from the perspective of philosophy of religion and less from a practical theological perspective as with the MPhil. This is more so the case than a changing of my mind with the topic.

The PhD argument

God wills evil for the greater good.

God is the cause of all things.

A technical, philosophical use of the term cause is used.

God has the power to prohibit evil, and therefore what he does not prohibit he sanctions/causes.

Persons are a secondary cause of significantly free human actions.

Therefore:

Hard determinism is not used by God when persons sin.

BLACKBURN, SIMON (1996) Oxford Dictionary of Philosophy, Oxford, Oxford University Press.

CALVIN, JOHN (1543)(1996) The Bondage and Liberation of the Will, Translated by G.I. Davies, Grand Rapids, Baker Book House.
---

Photos from the Skypark in Marina Bay Sands Hotel, Singapore

Thanks, Mom.




Thursday, July 01, 2010

Practical theology and social justice (PhD edit)


Thanks, Mom, for photos sent by email.

Practical theology and social justice (PhD edit)

Practical theology is sociopolitically committed.[1] Persons from ‘below’ are a focus of practical theology, these being people who experience institutionalized injustice and oppression.[2] The Church should not simply attempt to raise itself to heaven in a sense,[3] but needs to focus on working within the world.[4] Robert McAfee Brown (1984) comments that in the Bible, in places such as Exodus, God takes a position against those who promote oppression and injustice.[5] God at times does take sides in human struggles,[6] and God does side with the oppressed.[7] Christians are sometimes in the delicate and tricky position of staying true to Biblical standards and yet standing with those who are oppressed and within the world system,[8] even if they are not believers and live outside of Christian morality. Those in power who call themselves Christians need to be respectfully challenged if they are perceived with a significant deal of evidence, to be involved in abusive practice.[10] Western Christians need to examine the side they are on in many of the world’s social struggles, particularly in regard to the third world.[11]

In my mind there is a danger that Christianity, whether conservative or liberal, becomes overly influenced by cultures where it exists.

Any historical corruption of the Christian Church is, in the end, a poor witness of Christ and the gospel and weakens the credibility of Christian ministry in the minds of many critics.

[1] Pattison and Woodward (2000)(2007: 14-15).

[2] Pattison and Woodward (2000)(2007: 15).

[3] Anderson (2001:181).

[4] Anderson (2001:181). The Church must work within the world without being worldly at the expense of being true to the Holy Spirit. This is no easy task for a large institution such as the Church.

[5] Brown (1984: 34).

[6] Brown (1984: 34).

[7] Brown (1984: 41).

[8] Anderson (2001:181).

[9] Brown (1984: 160-161).

[10] Brown (1984: 160-161). The third world is also known as the developing world.

[11] Anderson reasons the Church needs to repent for wrong doing in its existence. Anderson (2001: 180-181).

ANDERSON, RAY S. (2001) The Shape of Practical Theology, Downers Grove, Illinois, InterVarsity Press.

BROWN, ROBERT MCAFEE (1984) Unexpected News, Philadelphia, The Westminster Press.

WOODWARD, JAMES AND STEPHEN PATTISON (2000)(2007)(eds.), The Blackwell Reader in Pastoral and Practical Theology, Oxford, Blackwell Publishing.