Reflections on Miracles

Alright, full confession time. I would much rather be showering than blogging right now. Stupid greasy hair...BUT! The blog is due soon, and it must be done. :) And as it's late and I'm slightly temperamental, this is not going to be nicely organized! It's going to be my reflections of two passages from Lewis' Miracles, the book we're reading this week. No promises of common threads, anywhere.

Passage One! Throughout this book (or at least the beginning of it), Lewis is pitting Naturalism (the belief that that which is in the world/universe is all there is) against Supernaturalism (the belief that things exist that are apart from the world as we perceive it). As is characteristic of Lewis' style, in chapter one of Miracles Lewis anticipates the arguments made against Supernaturalism. One such argument is that Supernaturalism, being a more monarchical structure than Naturalism (one supreme being, subjects, that sort of thing)  is really just a holdover from a monarchical age. He counters that, however, the same thing can be said about Naturalism in regards to democracy, that it is a more democratic idea (all being roughly equal in Naturalism), and has been more widely accepted in democratic societies. However, this is the part I really like:

In regards to the societal sources of Supernaturalism and Naturalism, "The do indeed remind us that Supernaturalism is the characteristic philosophy of a monarchical age and Naturalism of a democratic, in the sense that Supernaturalism, even if false, would have been believed by the great mass of unthinking people four hundred years ago, just as Naturalism, even if false will be believed by the great mass of unthinking people today" (10).

I thought that this was really cool, and made a lot of sense. Ideologies do find more popularity depending on the social climate of the time. However, as Lewis so brilliantly explains here, the popularity of an idea is not relevant to an idea's actual truthfulness. Naturalists wouldn't want us believing Supernaturalist dogma just because it was popular in the monarchical age, and similarly, we shouldn't be expected or to believe Naturalism just because it's the ideology currently in vogue. Real understanding of truth must not come from what those around us expect us to believe, or even what modern thinkers are pushing as truth. A better understanding comes in Lewis' challenge to not be swayed by your environment, but partake from all sources and reason it out for yourself.

Now quickly, my second quote. In chapter 5, Lewis discusses what sacrifices you have to make if you truly believe the Naturalist's philosophy that man's mind is a random byproduct of natural process. Lewis insists that you cannot sacrifice Rationalism, for then goes the entire basis of your argument. He does say, however that "you (the Naturalist) can if you wish regard all human ideals as illusions and all human loves as biological by-products"(54). He then continues, "Whether you can do so without extreme unplausibility--without accepting a picture of things which no one really believes--is another matter."

The need for a shower is getting more and more desperate, so with this one I'll be brief. I've contemplated a view where life has no purpose, where dreams and people mean nothing, and all will one day go to dust, where ideals are simply past-times until we expire, where we die and forget that we ever wanted to be remembered for the progresses we made on earth. I've thought about it, I've considered it even, but have found that any flirtation with accepting it deadens me. It removes all passions, all charitable thoughts, all loves, robs me of hope and saps my motivation. Considering biological process to be the base of all around me tempts me towards a smartly cynical two-dimensional view of the world that brings me no joy or reason to continue. Why work at all if nothing matters? Why help when the helpee is just going to dissipate into ash someday anyway? Lewis is right that hardly anyone really takes this view very seriously, at least as far as carrying it out in their day to day life. However, for those who do (and there are some), I salute your search for meaning in what to me was a meaningless pursuit.