Friday State of the Blog!

My apologies for a lack of posting this week; I’ve been rather busy with non-reading activities, unfortunately.

Someone finally died in Death On The Nile! It is therefore now interesting, and I will be continuing to read it.

Added: what is this thing called love by Kim Addonizio. This came as a gift from a friend of mine, and I picked it up out of a desire to read a little poetry, even though I never got around to reading How to Read a Poem by Edward Hirsch.

Other than that, I’ve scrapped Collected Essays by James Baldwin and Critique of Pure Reason by Immanuel Kant. Part of this decision comes from frustration with Kant and distraction from Baldwin, but I’ve also decided to put aside nonfiction in the interest of research and development of a church service I’m assisting in planning. Therefore, all my nonfiction energies will be directed there until further notice. I don’t think it’ll be an overly long time, but it will be as long as it has to be.

Have a good weekend, guys!

Outside Help: Kant in 90 Minutes

Mortimer Adler’s How to Read a Book warns against using outside sources to help you read most texts, save, perhaps, dictionaries. Doing so can actually harm your ability to form your own opinion, and I get where he’s coming from.

However, if you ever read Immanuel Kant, you might need a little outside help.

This is not, in any way, a comment on your intellect.  I’m sure it’s sharp as a tack.  The only problem is that Kant’s intellect was sharper than, well, the majority of human beings at his time, and probably 95% of the human race that lives today.  Normally, this wouldn’t be an issue, because most intellectuals actually have a capacity to bring what they’re saying down to the reading level of mere mortals, but not Kant.  I’ve had to RESTART the introduction in an effort to try to grasp what he’s saying!

I will confess, however, that I’ve had a little help from a book known as Kant in 90 Minutes by Paul Strathern, a British writer who looked at some of the philosophers he taught about at Kingston University and said, “I shall make this all more accessible for people who might think that philosophers are blowhards with dictionaries for brains!” As a result, he produced the Philosophers in 90 Minutes series, which, as you can guess, gives a 90-minute summary of the life and thought of a given philosopher (in this case, Immanuel Kant).

Now, this kind of sounds like cheating, and perhaps in a way it is, because I’m taking Paul Strathern’s interpretation of Kant to be what Kant really meant.  However, I’m OK with doing this (and probably making Adler turn over in his grave) for two reasons:

1) Though I’m a little smarter than the average bear, that’s like being 6’1″ and standing next to someone who is 6′ even. It really doesn’t make a difference, and that’s not me trying to be humble; people are smarter than they want to give themselves credit for, and this stuff isn’t as inaccessible as you’d think.  What Kant in 90 Minutes does is give a leg up for those not necessarily familiar with this subject (and my knowledge is limited) and helps them form an opinion.

2) Kant is obnoxiously verbose and confusing. Rather than sit here with a dictionary (which I’m going to have to do), I can have someone bring it down to layman’s terms and show me what he’s talking about.  I’ll have to do a good portion of it on my own anyway, but this gives me a frame of reference to look at.  For example, it helps to know that Critique of Pure Reason was written as a response to David Hume’s Concerning Human Understanding. Without that frame of reference, and perhaps brushing up on Hume a little, much of Critique of Pure Reason wouldn’t make sense.

There is a reason to be cautious: we mustn’t let others influence our thoughts of what we’re reading, especially with nonfiction books of any subject.  Part of reading nonfiction involves forming an opinion about the author’s writings, and if we’ve listened to someone else’s interpretation of a particular text, we can miss seeing everything the original author is trying to say. Viewpoints are a dime a dozen, and, in this case, the best viewpoint is your own.

Overall, commentaries and summaries aren’t evil in and of themselves; we just have to remember what they’re for: perspective.  They’re not the gospel truth, and we shouldn’t treat them like that. As far as the Philosophers in 90 Minutes series, I recommend them for those getting their feet wet in philosophy. They’re great summaries written at a level we common folk can grasp, and then springboard into actual philosophical texts and form our own perspective.

Have a good one, guys!  Got a double today, so if I’m not TOTALLY wiped out, I’ll have a post for tomorrow!

Friday State of the Blog!

Not as much reading this week as I would have expected. The wife’s been out to Pittsburgh with her dad and sister, so you’d think that I would have gotten some reading done. Instead, I sat around and watched documentaries and substituted those for books.

First: Luther’s Small Catechism got shelved. I’ve actually begun to consider a Westminster confessing Presbyterian church in Harrisburg, and while Luther certainly has some great insights, it seems a little unnecessary at the time to go through his catechism. I’ll probably return to it in the future, though, at the very least for research.

To replace Luther, I added a collection of essays from African-American author James Baldwin. I have heard so many people tell me I need to read his works, and I can see why, even though I’m only ten pages in. He’s articulate, insightful, and poetic. Love reading this so far!

Still kind of working my way through Death on the Nile, albeit slowly. I’m still thinking about shelving it too; it’s honestly just plain boring to me. Of course, it’s written about a different time from an author who didn’t see the need for explosions in her plots, and my ADD-addled mind is probably turned off for that reason.

Finally, there’s Critique of Pure Reason. Oh, Kant. I am ten pages into your book and have no idea whatsoever as to what you’ve actually said, other than that mathematics are synthetical in their origin and are things we learn a priori. For all that I thought I knew of philosophy, I clearly don’t know jack. This is going to take quite some time to read, apparently.

Anyway, I’ll be seeing you all on Monday!

Friday State of the Blog!

I started into a new book! I am now reading Death on the Nile by Agathe Christie. I’ve wanted to read this ever since I saw her play The Mouse Trap, and I’m excited to see where this one goes!

In the very near future(like, the next week or so), my friend Angelo and I are going to partner up to read Critique of Pure Reason by Immanuel Kant. This is a cornerstone for all philosophers to read/have read, and I’m excited to read it. It’s going to be a heck of a fight, though. I’ve been attempting a superficial read (check out How to Read A Book to know what that is) and I can’t even make it halfway down the page without getting completely lost! However, I shall soldier through this and have fun with it all the same!

Not much else in my life going on right now.  I’m off now to trade in those books I got earlier this week. You guys have an awesome weekend!

Frustrations With Reading (And How To Beat Them)

You dropped your marker and lost your spot. You put it down for too long. You’ve been reading it, but not absorbing it enough to know what the heck the author is talking about at the halfway point where you are. You’re getting an awful headache. These, and many other reasons, I’m sure, are why people put down books and revisit them.

Several of these reasons are why I restarted, and am now further considering shelving, NT Wright’s Justification.

This might sound really dumb to you. “Pat,” you may say, “Your blog is barely entertaining as it is! Why rant about why you feel bad for not finishing some stupid book?” Well, I say to you, if you think my blog is so boring, go read some celebrity gossip and feel good about yourself then! There are reasons that some of us don’t like to shelve a book when it’s incomplete.

1) The Molasses Swamp Conundrum.  You feel as though soldiering on might get you back on track. You realize, however, how untrue this is when you read a couple more pages and find yourself further stuck in the Molasses Swamp.  No hope of moving forward at all.

2) Sephiroth Syndrome. Defeat tastes rather bitter, even when it comes to books. You SHOULD have finished it, but it got the better of you in the end, like that time you tried to take on Sephiroth way too soon while playing Finaly Fantasy VII and got your butt handed to you. There are multiple books on my shelf that might do this to me, and I cringe at the thought of reading them without being “smart” enough.

3) The Condescension Strain.  They pissed you off. This only ever happened with one book: Richard Dawkins’ The God Delusion. Hear me on this: I do intend to read it and other books like it over the course of this journey. Dawkins’ voice deserves to be heard just as much as the theologians I love to read. However, when I made my first attempt at it, I couldn’t help but just feel genuinely pissed off at the guy as he sat there ripping my faith a new one. His condescending tone and belief in my own foolishness as a reader for believing in God proved to be a bit much.

4) The Gibberish Mystery. You picked up something in a field you have no experience in, and the whole thing is pure gibberish to you.  Case in point for me: The Mismeasure of Man by Stephen Jay Gould.  No.  Freakin’. Clue.

So, what do we do when we’ve met certain defeat?  Well, there’s a few options…

1) Start over.  This is usually a good remedy to the Molasses Swamp Conundrum. If you’re not too far in, just back track to what looks familiar, and SLOWLY work your way forward.  Good books make you take your time with them, chewing and digesting slowly, rather than speeding your way along.

2) Put it back. You need to let it go and come back at a time when you’re ready to read it, ready to understand what’s really going on.  This is where I’m at with  Justification.  I just don’t feel ready enough to continue and fully absorb what Wright is saying here. Hopefully, in a month or two, I’ll be able to come back and try again.

3). Chill out.  Most people get mad at books that make them feel inferior.  However, no matter what the author says, or how he says it, you DO have a right to an opinion, and you CAN judge the book favorably or not.  Believe it or not, the power rests with you, the reader, not the author.   Though it’s supposed to be about dialogue, about discussion, when the author throws those rules out the window, then play by the one’s he sets, and then beat him at his own game.

4.  Research!  Don’t understand at all what a particular text is about?  Look it up!  Try to find an introduction to the subject (Wikipedia works wonders here, believe it or not), or, if it really interests you, despite your lack of understanding, audit a class on it!  Who knows; it could lead you to a new path of life you didn’t expect!

5.  Read with a friend.  This goes for all reading problems. Friends help us understand things from new perspective, and invite us to dialogue in three way conversation with the author in question.  When I tackle Critique of Pure Reason this summer, I intend to do it with a good friend, at the very least so we can both understand it.  Should be fun!

This post was originally just supposed to be about my irritation with giving up on a book.  Now it’s here for you so you can find your way through that book that keeps getting the best of you.  Reading isn’t always easy, and it’s not nice to pretend that it is, to you or to others.  Hopefully, you got something from this so you feel encouraged to keep reading, no matter what books are on your shelf.   Use it well!

Books That Make My Head Hurt

You know what I’m talking about.  These books walk around, lifting things up and putting them down. These books will get into your head and go all MMA on your brain.  These books are the boxers that look at the featherweight entering the ring to fight, scoff, and walk away, noting the unworthiness of the fighter.  They take your lunch money. They give you atomic wedgies, and they come in all shapes, sizes, and subjects.

These are intimidating books.

Philosophy. Theology. Linguistics. Henry James novels. There’s a whole list of books that literally scare people, unless, of course, you have at least a masters degree in the field, and are at least worked out enough to beast these buggers that try to bring us down. Perhaps you’re working toward a masters, and you’re encountering book after book that you feel is just flying over your head.  Perhaps you’re taking a college course purely for self-betterment, and the professor is assigning books designed to discuss the ontological meaning of the Hindu God Krishna as understood through the Upanishads (and it’s freakin’ cooking class!). Either way, they’re out there, and they’re mean buggers.

I can think of at least ten books on my shelves, read and unread, that scare the crap out of me.

1. Critique of Pure Reason by Immanuel Kant.  Considered one of the cornerstones to modern philosophy, this book helped shape a lot of how we view the world today, and from what I understand, it bends your mind into Twizzlers.

2. Jean Paul Sartre’s Being and Nothingness. It’s dense, it’s thick, and it’s a complete REJECTION of modernism and everything that men like Kant worked for!

3. The Hauerwas Reader by Stanley Hauerwas.  Hauerwas is  a theologian from Duke University who specializes in ethics. I actually talked to him over the phone once, and basically underused him for the paper I was writing (I asked him for sources when I was talking to a spectacular source; talk about poor thinking). Anyway, he’s brilliant, and he writes brilliantly.

4. Why I Am Not A Christian by Bertrand Russell. This guy is a legend amongst atheists, and extremely critical of all religions, considering them dangerous and destructive.  Being the Christian that I am, you can imagine why this might leave me a little nervous in reading. It’s important to read your critics, and to hear them out, but a man as good as Russell is more than a critic, he’s practically a judge.

5. The Parallax View by Slavoj Zizek. Here’s his Wikipedia page. You tell me.

6. The Universe Next Door by James Sire.  This was much easier the second time around, but the first time was really hard (I was 18 and just out of high school).  Excellent survey of current philosophical traditions, but way over your head sometimes if you’ve never read a word of philosophy.

7. Albion’s Seed by David Hackett Fischer. I don’t even know what it’s about! The tagline is  ”four british folkways in America.”

8. New Seeds of Contemplation by Thomas Merton. Merton was a 20th-Century monk and Christian mystic who really brought attention back to contemplation with this and many other, books he wrote. The language is very high, and sometimes I have no idea how to fathom what the heck he’s talking about, but suddenly my walk with God felt horribly inadequate by comparison.

9.  Anything, and I mean anything, by Soren Kierkegaard.  I think he deliberately tried to be confusing (and he very well might have, according to a professor I talked with at Lancaster Theological Seminary). I know there’s good stuff there; I just wish I knew what it was.

10. The Bible. Never has a book pushed me, challenged me, and confused me more. Seriously.

So, what do we do with these books?  We read them anyway! The fact that they’re over our heads is precisely WHY we read them! If you’re reading books you understand all the time, you’re not really learning, are you?

That’s it for today.  If you’d care to comment, what books have made YOUR head hurt?

 

Friday State of the Blog: Upcoming Projects

So, I’ve managed to come through on the other side of several books now. I finished  Pilgrim’s Progress, Escape From Reason, So You’re Thinking About Going To Seminary…, and The Sailor Who Fell From Grace With The Sea all within the last three weeks!  What a huge accomplishment!

So, here’s what’s left to do:

1) Finish reading Defending the Faith. Cornelius Van Til is going down!

2) Finish The Future of Justification: A Response to NT Wright, followed by Justification: God’s Plan, Paul’s Vision in order to get clarification from Wright himself on the matter.

The only thing that troubles me a little is that I’m not currently reading anything from on my shelves: all of it’s on the Kindle.  Piper’s book serves the purpose of understanding, but Van Til was kind of thrown in there by accident, so I feel as though I’ve gotten slightly deterred from my goals.  Not to worry, we shall be on track again soon!

Upcoming projects:

1) Finishing out the Piper/Wright debate on justification by faith alone.

2) The weekend after Easter, my wife and I are going up to Boston to support her dad in the Boston marathon.  We’re taking the train up (about an 8-hour ride) and back, so that’s 16 hours where I can get some reading done! Therefore, my weekend in Boston is going to be “short book weekend.” I’m going to pick out some of the shorter books I have (probably about five or six), and take them along and see how I do! Whatever I start, I have to finish, so this should be fun!

3) Partnering with a friend of mine to read Immanuel Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason, something I’ve been meaning to do ever since I found out I actually enjoy philosophy.  Kant’s a pretty intimidating guy, so having a buddy to go along with is going to help.  Hey, you might even get to see some guest posts from my friend (if I can talk him into it)!

4) Study of Islam. I only have a couple books surround the topic, and two of them are in relation to Sufism specifically, but I shall do my best.  I have a couple reference books that give some overviews of the religion itself, but the ultimate goal is a full reading of the Q’uran.  Hoo-rah!

5)  Well…I don’t know! Anyone got a good idea for a reading project for me?

Just so everyone knows, after my twelve-hour shift today, I start up on nights for an entire week.  I’ll do my best to keep this going, but it’s not going to be easy.  I don’t handle nights well.  I’ll schedule a few posts here and there, and if anyone wants to guest post, let me know! See you Monday!

Review: Escape From Reason by Francis Schaeffer

As I hoped, this didn’t take me too long to read, and I won’t lie, much of it wasn’t exactly new material for me, but that’s okay. Schaeffer’s not writing to the theology student, but to the masses.

So, Escape From Reason can be considered a heavy book with rather simple writing.  The entire text functions as an explanation of man’s deviation from the thought patterns of the Reformation, beginning with Aquinas in what the author calls an allowance of the autonomy of Man’s thought, flourishing in the determinism and loss of freedom in Kant and Hegel, and ending with the philosophy of the sixties, dominated by men and women rebelling against Enlightenment thinking and its broken promises.  Schaeffer also levels his critical eye at modern and liberal theology, the likes of whom he sees (to some extent, rightly so) as forsaking foundational truths in favor of a god more compatible with the philosophies of the Enlightenment and Existentialism. He demonstrates rather well the failure of such systems to supply answers to the cosmos, and how their rejection of Scripture as the tipping point to tumble downhill into despair.

For 94 pages, there are LOTS that could be discussed from within this book, and I would love to someday do that, but that is not for today.  This is a day for review.  First, what I liked:

1) Schaeffer’s command of secular philosophy and thought is amazing.  He demonstrates himself as a man well educated, yet rooted in strong Reformed traditions. He does not follow the church with blind authority, but defends it with rigorous critical analysis and unflinching boldness that could only come from a man who has examined all his options and found all but one wanting.  He sets an example for Christians to do the same.

2) He has a respect for things that aren’t “Christian” in nature (secular), and demonstrates this when he says things like, “Man is fallen, but he is still man, made in the image of God.” This view is not held well amongst Christians even today (though it gets better as the years go by).  The need to see beauty even in things that do not praise God explicitly is a necessity.

Things I didn’t like so much…

1) His blatant contempt for Catholic writers.  It seems like whether it was Thomas Aquinas, author of the great Summa Theologicae, or Pierre Teilhard de Chardin, Jesuit Priest, author of The Phenomenon of Man and paleontologist who aided in the discovery of the Peking Man, Schaeffer places the root of modern thinking (and thus despair) in their very minds, as if their thinking was a symbol of defiance of God.  While I do think that many in the Catholic Church have softened Jesus into a symbol, made him some guy on a cross that you might see hanging in cathedrals or in homes, these two men in particular (and others, for that matter) are NOT those kinds of Catholics.  Their writings demonstrate an devout love for the creator, and an ability to see and understand His ways in all of Creation in a very real and personal way.  I do see perhaps where Schaeffer comes from with this, but I think it is ill-founded.

2) On a similar note, Schaeffer seems to disregard everything that happened in the church from the end of the Bible to the Reformation, missing out on centuries of great teaching and philosophy that could easily supplement his Reformed thinking, rather than antagonizing it.  This is common, however, amongst evangelicals even today, so I can’t exactly blame him for being a product of his own generation, even if he doesn’t know what he’s missing.

3) Not so much an objection as a wariness of his dependence of presuppositional apologetics.  As I said two days ago, I know little of this school of thought and aim to learn more about it, but I am wary of things that claim to be so absolute in how to understand God so clearly, though Schaeffer doesn’t fully fit this bill.  One of my favorite quotes from this book was, “God does not speak exhaustively about himself, but he does speak truly.” The willingness to abandon rationalism in favor of rationality (as he puts it) is something I can welcome, but most pre-suppers scare me with their certainty.  Again, I have much to learn on this thinking.

So, another book’s checked off as read. Stil in Pilgrim’s Progress right now, and I’ve put off  Piper for awhile. I’ll be coming back to him soon, perhaps, though a friend of mine wants to  delve into Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason together in the near future, something I am very grateful for, as Kant is one of those intimidating writers for me.  Anyway, see you Friday!

Julie, Julia, and Patrick: The Challenge of Books

Have you ever seen Julie and Julia? Are you mildly concerned that a dude is talking about this movie? Well, if you are, get over it, and if you have, you may or may not have liked it. It’s a good movie to watch, and the book is on my shelf waiting for my reading. It’s not exactly something everyone’s going to like, but being a blogger, I enjoyed it quite a bit. I get excited when I see I have a comment like the protagonist. I’d love to somehow have this turn into a career or a book like any consistent blogger does.

If you haven’t seen it, though, let me give you a rundown: basically, this woman lives in Queens and works in what sounds like a customer service job for some company in Manhattan. She starts cooking out of Julia Childs cookbook Mastering The Art of French Cooking to do something she enjoys, and writes about her experiences online. Out of this, she makes a challenge for herself to do all 524 recipes in a year. This leads to all kinds of experiences, including interviews and a book deal.

There’s one thing about the blog that we find toward the end of the movie: Julia Childs hates the blog. Apparently, she sees the whole thing as some kind of stunt and doesn’t appreciate what it’s done for Julie.

What’s this got to do with books? Well, it’s like this: sometimes this thing I’m doing here looks like a challenge, like some kind of game to me (I do have a whole page called “The Game Plan”). Sometimes I think, “Am I just looking to show off how many books I’ve read, show how smart I am?” The whole situation can make me look rather pretentious sometimes.

Hear me on this: knowledge isn’t a race, no matter how much I want to believe it is sometimes. Even if you don’t start educating yourself until you’re 80, it’s never too late, and their’s no reason to hurry. I can honestly say I’ve read more books than some people will ever be interested in reading, and while I want everyone to love reading, I understand that not everyone will. The prospect of one day reading Immanuel Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason doesn’t excite everyone, and I’m coming to terms with this. It’s not required of everyone, and it shouldn’t be.

However, there is a challenge to reading. Some of the books I own are thick, and the writing and subjects are dense. I haven’t read them yet because, to some extent, they are daunting. One day, I’m going to man up and tackle them, but right now isn’t the time. When you do finish a book like that, one you thought was way over your head, there’s a sense of accomplishment in just having read it. I remember the first academic text I ever read: The Universe Next Door by James Sire. Definitely more of an introductory work, I was only 18 at the time, and there were lots of new terms concepts I never even knew existed (though I knew what nihilism was because of a Rancid song). Anyway, when I was done, I felt awesome, like I just climbed a mountain or something.

Reading is a challenge, and so is learning. That’s why it takes so long. Grasping true knowledge isn’t a race, it’s a slow, slow climb up a steep rock face that threatens us, intimidates us into thinking we’re not worthy. When we get our gear on and tackle the mountain, and we get to the summit, we SHOULD feel like we accomplished something, because we did! We just beat the tar out of that book, and we actually understood it!

So, next time you finish a book, one that’s called you a sissy before, feel good that you did! It’s a true accomplishment!