Blog Archives
Comenius’ Three-Legged Stool of Education
Jan Amos Comenius (1592-1670), arguably the father of Western education, argued in his work, The Great Didactic, that there must be three aspects to any successful model of education: Erudition, Virtue, and Piety. Erudition refers to the knowledge and comprehension of facts and principles. Virtue consumes itself with the proper application of those facts and principles to life in community. Piety concerns how learning is applied toward our relationship to God. For Comenius, all three components were integral to the education of men and women so that they might be useful to their families and to society.
Brute facts in and of themselves may seem valuable, but without virtue, how are we to apply the things we learn from said information? How are we to set boundaries on the studies that produce said brute facts? Over the generations, scientists, when unguided by virtue, have committed all sorts of cruelties toward mankind in the pursuit of said information. Examples abound, but eugenic experiments amongst the peoples of Appalachia and Vivisection were practices championed in science during the 20th century as tools intended to advance mankind and improve medical techniques. Sadly, the result of these experiments largely brought harm to those who were the subject of said techniques, with whole swaths of the community sterilized in the former and many animals harmed in the latter.
Virtue is the tool that constrains science within the bounds where it may benefit society. That does not mean erudition, as a principle, is immoral. In contrast, erudition in and of itself is morally neutral. The usage of said information establishes its morality at least on the most basic level. Another way of understanding this is to distinguish between Aristotle’s Material Cause (what it is) and his Final Cause (what it is for). We might even take liberties here and suggest that we include a Moral Cause to constrain how the Final Cause is applied.
Yet, virtue alone is not sufficient. Like a stool with two legs, one may balance upon it for a short spell, but it will collapse over time. The third leg to this stool is piety. For virtue to be sensible, virtue must be grounded in a principle that is outside of the individual. In fact, it must be grounded in something that is outside of all humanity, something that is true at all times and in all places. While virtues are largely consistent across cultures due to natural law, some values change from generation to generation. I grew up in a generation and culture where men were expected to wear suits and ties to church, and, depending on their job, in the workplace. My grandfather never owned anything but suits; when they wore out and were replaced, the old suits were used for gardening and yardwork. Today, there is a much wider range of clothing that is considered acceptable for men to wear, whether at church or at work.
The aspect of Comenius’ stool that governs virtue is piety. Ultimately, for an act to be virtuous, it must conform to God’s Law. God’s Law provides a fixed and immutable guide by which all virtue can be measured, and that again constrains erudition. When you lose God’s law, virtue becomes subjective, and in the end, erudition will run unbounded and free. While vivisection is a debate that seems to have largely passed out of the cultural conversation, Artificial Intelligence has not, and we are starting to see the effects of allowing AI models to act without the governance of virtuous and pietous constraints.
One might suggest that programmers provide such constraints. Yet, if we can learn one thing from history, it is that human beings are fallen and flawed, bent toward pursuing their own interests. Certainly, there are scientists and developers who strive to be virtuous and pious, but not all.
Unity, Hegel, and the Universe
If everything is in conflict, unity is impossible.
For decades, Cosmologists have been seeking to proffer a “Grand Unified Theories (GUT)” of all things as a way to explain all of the phenomena that are observable in the universe around us. Theologians write systematic theologies with the same intention, hoping to set forth a “Grand Unified Theology (GUT)” of all things to explain all that God has revealed in His Word and in His world. More narrowly, sociologists talk about unified theories of learning, social change, and behavior. Yet, as one might suspect, there are many competing “unified” theories, and often these competing systems are mutually exclusive rather than being complementary to one another.
Enter the influence of G.W.F. Hegel (1770-1831). In his lifetime, Hegel introduced the philosophical paradigm known better today as “Hegel’s Dialectic.” For Hegel, all systems were in a constant state of evolutionary flux. Established ideas (known as Theses) were always seen in a state of tension with competing views (known as Antitheses). Out of that tension would arise a Synthesis which, in principle, united the best elements of the thesis and antithesis into a better system of thought. Then, the synthesis would in turn become the new thesis, and a new antithesis would later emerge. This way of thinking has shaped much of the modern Western world, and in many (if not most) fields, it has become the standard paradigm by which knowledge is advanced.
The problem with the Hegelian model is that it presents all things as being in a state of conflict. Further, it presents that conflict as ongoing and indefinite, that as long as there is the possibility of an antithesis, one has never truly arrived at a “Grand Unified Theory of Anything.” The problem, then, lies with the definition. Unity, derived from the Latin word unitas, meaning “one.” It speaks to the notion of an indivisible whole that is fully and completely at harmony within itself, and if one thing were added or taken away from it, the unity would be obliterated. The difficulty with the Hegelian model is that it is limited to human knowledge and experience and makes instruction from the divine an almost irrelevant matter.
From a Christian perspective, human knowledge is indeed limited, but Divine knowledge is not. Divine knowledge is infinite in its depth, breadth, and substance and it is absolute. Further, God has given us a Grand Unified Theory in the 66 books of the Bible. It is perfect and God the Holy Spirit has preserved it not just through the ages, but also across the cultures and languages. Indeed, some err, but their error always is a result of their own human limitations, not any limitation in the Divine.
As one might expect, the word “universe” also has its derivation from the word unitas. It comes from the combination of the word unitas and versus. Literally, the word means, “one thing that turns together.” It is applied to our universe based on two presumptions. First, that the universe as a whole, is a whole that is interconnected on some level. Second, while we do not yet understand it, there is a Grand Unified Theory that explains the whole. For example, while the speed of light is considered a standard of measurement, it is also recognized that the speed of light varies. These variations, though, can be explained within the system of the whole (for example, the medium that light passes through affects its speed).
As a side note, lately it has become popular to speak about a “multiverse.” In other words, people suggest that there are parallel universes that are not connected. Yet, if unconnected, it is impossible for us to know anything about these “other” universes or even if they exist. Further, if it were possible to know or observe said “parallel” universe, or if a bridge were to somehow interconnect these separate universes (as is popular in science fiction stories), then the “multiverse” ceases to be “multi.” It is simply a universe that has many branches but is still explainable through the same Grand Unified Theory.
In the end, though, the only way a Grand Unified Theory can be established is if we draw from that which has been revealed by the Divine who created the universe and has perfect knowledge over his creation. And that means leaving Hegel’s Dialectic behind. The best that Hegel’s dialectic can give us is pure humanism. God’s Law — God’s Word gives us truth. It gives us a truth that makes any synthesis with outside ideas impossible because syntheses are at best, compromises. It is only in light of the Scriptures that unity can be had.
Destructions and Treachery
“Destructions are planned by your tongue;
As a sharpened razor, you work treachery.”
(Psalm 52:4 [verse 2 in English translations])
Normally, we are not used to seeing the word “destruction in the plural.” Destruction is more or less total and the idea of repeating a destruction over and over seems rather redundant. At the same time, as David writes these words, he is communicating a great and deep truth when dealing with wicked people: wickedness feeds on itself. The wicked do not simply find their satisfaction in tearing you down once, but repeatedly they delight in kicking you down as you try and stand up. The question does not so much lie in whether they will be there with a boot to kick you in the head, but whether you are going to continue trying to stand as they continue trying to beat you down. Jesus said:
If the world hates you, know that it hated me before you. If you were from the world, the world would love as one in the same. But because you are not from the world—rather I chose you from the world—for this, the world hates you. Remember the word which I spoke to you—a slave is not greater than his lord. If they drove me out, they will also drive you out. If they treasure my word, they will also treasure yours.
(John 15:18-20)
To drive the word-picture home, David continues by speaking of the tongue’s work of planning destruction as being like a sharpened razor, slicing away all that it touches and being the tool of treachery. The word that we render as “treachery” comes from the Hebrew root hAm∂r (ramah), which means “to abandon” or “to betray.” Of course, the ultimate betrayal of all time is that of Judas betraying our Lord Jesus Christ. At the same time, how often the actions of the world are marked by betrayal when dealing with believers in Christ Jesus.
More importantly, the contrast between the world’s oppression and the faithfulness of God should be made. While the world seeks destruction and betrayal, God builds up his own and promises never to leave or abandon us. It is sad that so often when people desire to be nurtured and treasured they turn only to those places that will betray and destroy. Of course, it is also sad that often the Christian church follows the world’s lead and betrays its own rather than demonstrating the love and faithfulness of Christ even when such things are difficult. Jesus said that the world will know that we are his disciples on the basis of our love for one another (John 13:35) — when we choose not to live out that love in fellowship, what does it say about the quality of our witness?
The Preacher's Study 