Francis Berger's Blog, page 148

Western Cities - Don't Hold Your Breath

I find blog posts about how bleak and untenable life in Western cities has become extremely interesting. Having spent the better part of my adult life working in two major urban centers in the West - Toronto and New York - I can easily relate to and have personally experienced many of the problems and plights bloggers bring to our attention in their criticism of Western cities, problems that include replacement migration, high taxes, road congestion, perpetual traffic, increased crime, failing schools, social disintegration, the high cost of living, low wages, astronomical real estate prices, diminishing employment prospects, and so forth. As much as these problems plaguing Western cities interest me, I have come to understand that they will never be solved, and that it is essentially pointless to hold out any hope that they ever will be solved. 

Though the problems mentioned above are materialistic in nature - social, economic, demographic - they are all firmly rooted in the West's spiritual malaise; hence, these problems cannot and will not be solved unless the root of the problem is acknowledged first. Of course it goes without saying that there is zero motivation to acknowledge the spiritual underpinnings of the many quandaries infecting Western cities. On the contrary, Western cities have been purposefully engineered to become massive spirit-denying and soul-crushing mechanisms whose primary aims include inciting hedonism, inducing despair, and, consequently, damning souls. In my more cheerful moments, I tend to think of cities like New York and London as enormous open-air concentration camps that slowly, but surely, suck the life and sanity (and soul) out of each and every one of its inhabitants.

I understand that living in cities is a necessity (or a conscious choice) for many. Unfortunately, I can offer no advice about how to go about making life in a Western city more tenable and palatable. I tried to make urban living more tenable and palatable myself for over two decades. In the end, I threw in the towel, abandoned cities, and moved to a small rural village instead. Naturally, this option is not open to all, nor would it be a good or viable choice for all. Living in the countryside provides some distance from the epicenters of despair, but it offers no immunity to the spiritual death spiral the West is currently locked into.

In the end, people will have to figure out how they can confront and survive the many challenges modern Western cities thrust upon them. Solutions and coping mechanisms will vary from individual to individual, especially among the religious. The first step in dealing effectively with anything is to understand it for what it truly is. Christians living in Western cities must abandon any delusions they may harbor about living in them and begin to see them for what they have become. A big part of this delusion-abandonment is the understanding that life in Western cities will not improve in any meaningful way in the foreseeable future. The cause of our cities' ills, which is the same cause behind the suicide of our entire civilization, has not and will likely never be acknowledged or addressed. Becoming aware of and discussing the problems found in Western cities is prudent, but holding out hope for improvement when the people running our cities (and countries) actively work against the spiritual seems misguided. 

Bumper Berry Crop This Year

Our raspberry and blackberry bushes provide good yields every year, but the quantity and quality of both has been exceptionally high this summer. The wetter than normal May and June we experienced this spring probably has much to do with it. The extra precipitation appears to have been a blessing for all fruits in this region of the world. For example, the branches of my wild plum trees are so laden they are on the verge of snapping. My neighbor's apricot tree appeared more yellow than green this year. The only fruit that did not seem to do well this summer were watermelons, which have been smaller and less sweet than they normally are. In any case, the abundance of fruit this season guarantees ample jams and preserves, which help smuggle the scents and flavors of summertime into the darkest winter days. 

Beauty is an Invitation - How We Respond Makes All the Difference

At its core, Beauty is an invitation extended by the Divine. Beauty beckons us to recognize and appreciate the Divine by connecting it with the Divine within ourselves. Beauty reveals the Truth and Goodness of Creation and propels us to align ourselves with this Truth and Goodness through love. Beauty calls upon us to actively join Creation; to become co-creators inspired by Truth and Goodness. If the invitation Beauty extends is accepted in this manner, then Beauty can indeed save the world.

On the surface, Beauty appears to be entirely positive, yet in Dostoevsky’s The Brothers Karamazov, Dmitri refers to Beauty as a “terrible and awful thing” and goes on to state that “God and the devil are fighting there and the battlefield is the heart of man.” What does this mean? How can the Divine’s invitation to grace, awe, and reverence be a “terrible and awful thing” and how can the Devil utilize Beauty as a battlefield in the heart of man? Much depends on how the invitation the Divine extends through Beauty is approached. In other words, Beauty’s potential to save the world depends entirely on how the invitation is accepted. Many simply ignore the invitation through sheer apathy. Others react to the invitation with hostility. Others interpret Beauty’s invitation as an incitement to selfishness, lust, and evil.

The invitation Divine extends through Beauty is often repudiated and rejected. Not all who perceive Beauty appreciate the Truth and Goodness it contains. On the contrary, some vehemently reject and scorn Beauty, Truth, and Goodness altogether because they contradict the central beliefs of the modern world - determinism, materialism, atheism, relativism, and hedonism. People of this type have rejected any notion of God and exist in a world where “everything is permitted.”

In this regard, the Divine’s invitation to Beauty becomes an affront, something to be mocked and spurned. Rather than inspire love in the Divine Self, Beauty’s invitation provokes only selfish lust. Instead of motivating the Divine Self, Beauty inadvertently activates the Demonic Self, which rejects the recognition of Divine Creation and the call for co-creation in favor of nihilism and the call for destruction.

Those who approach Beauty with lust only see opportunities for pleasure and power. Divine Creation is reduced to a world of predators and prey. Beings are regarded as Things. Subjects become objects. Beauty, a means for selfish gratification. Pleasure is derived from the dismantling of the Sacred and the promulgation of the Profane. Nihilism is equated with ultimate freedom – meaninglessness becomes life’s only meaning. The abyss opens, and the desire to have it consume everything takes control.

Whether Beauty saves the world or destroys it hinges on how we respond to the invitation Beauty extends. Beauty is indeed a battlefield in the hearts of men. Whether God or the Devil prevails on this battlefield depends entirely on us. The connection between in the Divine and Divine Self is only possible if Beauty is accepted with love, for only love can perceive the essence of Divine Creation and understand the Heaven it offers. Love recognizes the Resurrection after the Crucifixion without denying the necessity of the Crucifixion.

​Conversely, the connection between the Divine and Divine Self becomes impossible if Beauty is interpreted as to incitement to lust – as an open invitation to evil – because lust rejects the essence of Divine Creation and the Heaven it offers. Lust openly scorns and denies the reality of the Resurrection. When lust perceives Beauty, it sees only the Crucifixion and the profane pleasure it can derive from cruelty, suffering, destruction, and death.   

Taking Note of Beauty

We expend far too much energy focusing on evil in the world, and by the world I mean this, dare I say it, fallen world we inhabit during our mortal lives. Of course, we must take stock of evil – recognize it; comprehend it;  condemn it – but all too often we end up doing this at the expense of Goodness, that is at the expense of seeing, understanding, and praising the Good in the world. Focusing exclusively evil in the world – on what is bad, negative, destructive, and inverted – is a deadening activity, one that can lead to spiritual poisoning and atrophy, which in turn leads to alienation, a sense of detachment and disenchantment, passivity and apathy, and, ultimately, meaningless and nihilism.

Alienation is the modern world’s disease, and the only cure is involvement and re-enchantment, activity and enthusiasm, and, ultimately, meaningfulness and belief. One of the best ways to become re-enchanted with the world is through Beauty. Through identifying, recognizing, understanding, and appreciating Beauty, one immediately comes into contact with the other transcendentals, Truth and Goodness. Beauty is a glimpse of and a gateway to Heaven and the Divine. In this sense, Dostoevsky’s assertion that Beauty can save the world begins to fall into place because it aligns us with Truth and Goodness and, thereby, offers illumination, hope, faith, redemption, and salvation. Beauty allows us to appreciate Creation and utilize the potential of our own creativity.

The assertion that beauty will save the world is a monumental, sweeping declaration. When one encounters it, one cannot help but feel overwhelmed. On the surface, the statement seems overly optimistic and grandiose. One cannot help but think that if Beauty was all it took to save the world, then the world, in its entirety, would already be saved. As such, it is best to approach Beauty from the perspective of one’s own individual life. Consider Beauty from the perspective of your microcosm, rather than from the perspective of the macrocosm. The idea of Beauty saving the macrocosm is overwhelming indeed, but the notion of Beauty saving the microcosm of your own individual life is far more approachable and tenable.

I have started to think of Beauty as a meeting point between two aspects of the Divine. Beauty marks a connection between the Divine Within and Divine Without. In this sense, recognizing and appreciating Beauty is an active rather than passive process. Perceiving Beauty in the world is more than mere passive observation. Perceiving Beauty requires engagement and activity. When we encounter Beauty, we do not merely absorb and consume, we also project and produce. As such, perceiving and understanding Beauty is a creative act of the imagination, one inspired by love.

So how does one go about saving the world through Beauty? One way might be to begin taking note of Beauty. I have never been good at maintaining journals or diaries, but I recently began what I would call, for lack of a better term, a Beauty Notebook in which I record my perceptions of Beauty in the world. My perceptions of Beauty mainly encompass landscapes, nature, architecture, art, poetry, people, Scripture, music, and the night sky. At the end of the day, I take some time to reflect upon the beauty I experienced. For example, if I perceived Beauty in a landscape earlier in the day, I briefly describe the landscape in my notebook. Once I have described the landscape as best as I can, I ask myself what was beautiful about it and explore what moved me about the experience – what caused me to engage with it in an imaginative way.

My notes thus far have revealed that perceiving Beauty is an experience, more specifically, an active, creative experience. Initially, Beauty transfixes me with wonder and awe. It impacts me, floods over me, and saturates me. It captivates me, in the true sense of the word. For a time, I am literally its captive, but after a few moments, it loosens its grip, beckons me forth, and invites me to seize and captivate it. As Beauty reveals its power to move me, it demands I reveal my power to move it. Perceiving something beautiful also entails Beauty perceiving something beautiful within me. Whenever I perceive Beauty, I catch a glimpse of the Divine, and I feel as if the Divine catches a glimpse of the Beauty within me. This moment harmonizes Beauty with Truth and Goodness, and draws attention to the unity that is always there and always must be there. At that moment, the world becomes with rich with meaning and purpose.

Once I have experienced Beauty, I feel compelled to share the experience with others. This sharing of Beauty strikes me as an act of evangelization. I want to convey the hows and whats and whys of the beauty that moved me in the hope that others might be moved, that others might perceive the meaning and purpose I have glimpsed. Beauty draws me out of myself, inspires me to transform the world by offering my experiences to others.

My notes on Beauty have also revealed that Beauty is not a feel-good panacea. Beauty offers a solution to alienation and disengagement, but this solution is not based on pleasure-seeking distraction and amusement. Though Beauty offers contentment and delight, it can only do so if it is unified with Truth and Goodness. Being unified with Truth and Goodness necessitates an acceptance and understanding of Reality. Accepting and understanding Reality involves accepting and understanding our mortality in this world – and the suffering mortality ultimately includes.

Beauty does not sugarcoat. Beauty offers a glimpse at perfection, verifies the existence of perfection, and inspires us toward perfection, but Beauty also reveals that we cannot be perfect in this world, that pain and suffering prevent perfection in this world. Beauty offers a glimpse of Heaven, but warns against misguided notions of establishing Heaven on Earth. Beauty also reveals that denial is no solution to pain and suffering. I once read that Beauty is not confined solely to the Resurrection, but also includes the Crucifixion. This sheds light on the enigmatic nature of Beauty, but it also helps draw me closer to understanding how Beauty can indeed save the world.

Can Beauty Save the World?

I have been thinking a great deal about Dostoevsky's The Idiot, more specifically, Prince Myskin's uplifting but ultimately enigmatic claim that "beauty can save the world." This quote popped into my mind after I began thinking about how utterly necessary Beauty - as one of the transcendentals, with a capital 'B' - is for us to appreciate, comprehend, and aspire toward the Divine in this mortal world.

In another of his novels, Demons (also translated as Devils or The Possessed), Dostoevsky has a character proclaim that beauty is the one thing humans could not live without. Of course, Dostoevsky would include God under the banner of Beauty, which implies that Beauty is an impossibility without God. This draws forth an intriguing connection - the connection between the Divine and Beauty. It also suggests that the recognition and celebration of Beauty in this world can, to some extent, help to save it.

Now, I do not believe this can applied to the world in general (at least not yet), but I do believe that we can save the world through Beauty at the individual level - that we can redeem the world from evil in our own individual lives through Beauty. I plan to explore this idea in more detail in future posts. In the meantime, I have included an excerpt from Alexander Solzhenitsyn's Nobel Lecture in which he addresses the enigma and latent possibilities in Dostoevsky's conviction that 'beauty can save the world."

One day Dostoevsky threw out the enigmatic remark: “Beauty will save the world”. What sort of a statement is that? For a long time I considered it mere words. How could that be possible? When in bloodthirsty history did beauty ever save anyone from anything? Ennobled, uplifted, yes – but whom has it saved?

There is, however, a certain peculiarity in the essence of beauty, a peculiarity in the status of art: namely, the convincingness of a true work of art is completely irrefutable and it forces even an opposing heart to surrender. It is possible to compose an outwardly smooth and elegant political speech, a headstrong article, a social program, or a philosophical system on the basis of both a mistake and a lie. What is hidden, what distorted, will not immediately become obvious.

Then a contradictory speech, article, program, a differently constructed philosophy rallies in opposition – and all just as elegant and smooth, and once again it works. Which is why such things are both trusted and mistrusted.

In vain to reiterate what does not reach the heart.

But a work of art bears within itself its own verification: conceptions which are devised or stretched do not stand being portrayed in images, they all come crashing down, appear sickly and pale, convince no one. But those works of art which have scooped up the truth and presented it to us as a living force – they take hold of us, compel us, and nobody ever, not even in ages to come, will appear to refute them.

So perhaps that ancient trinity of Truth, Goodness and Beauty is not simply an empty, faded formula as we thought in the days of our self-confident, materialistic youth? If the tops of these three trees converge, as the scholars maintained, but the too blatant, too direct stems of Truth and Goodness are crushed, cut down, not allowed through – then perhaps the fantastic, unpredictable, unexpected stems of Beauty will push through and soar TO THAT VERY SAME PLACE, and in so doing will fulfil the work of all three?
​
In that case Dostoevsky’s remark, “Beauty will save the world”, was not a careless phrase but a prophecy? After all HE was granted to see much, a man of fantastic illumination.
And in that case art, literature might really be able to help the world today?

High School is a Deliberate Waste of Time

When I was a high school student, I found myself constantly questioning the usefulness of high school. I had looked forward to secondary school while I was still in primary school, but my enthusiasm for high school and all it encompassed quickly faded in grade nine and disappeared altogether by the time I began grade ten. My experience of secondary school education can be summed up in one simple sentence – it was a monumental waste of time. Oddly enough, the decade I later spent working as a high school teacher only confirmed my earlier and rather bleak observation. Despite some benefits, the four years students spend in high school is generally, and quite deliberately, a waste of time.

Now, before I venture any further into this topic, allow me to stress that the opinions I shall express here are not based on pedagogical or psychological research of any kind. Nor are they supported or inspired by any education or learning theory. In addition, my convictions do not take sociological theories or frameworks into mind. I must add that I do not hold most theories and research in high regard. My assertion that high school is a tremendous waste of time is based almost exclusively on my experiences as a student and as a teacher and an intuitive sense that secondary education is a broken paradigm, one in need of a long overdue transformation, but that is currently being utilized for the overall purpose of time-wasting during an individual's formative years.

My first problem with secondary education is its curriculum. Though it may have served a useful societal function in the past, secondary school is little more than an unnecessary extension of primary school, and as such delivers limited returns on investment. With the exception of a few specialized science subjects and more advanced concepts in mathematics, high school students continue learning the same sorts of things they spend eight years of their lives learning in primary school. It’s no wonder most students check out altogether sometime in grade ten.

Much of what is taught in high schools could easily be shifted down to the primary school level, especially in years seven and eight, and yes, this includes more advanced skills such as algebra and calculus. We spend too much time babying kids in primary school, and this babying continues in high school where students are often fed challenging concepts and subjects too late. Though I am sure most would disagree, I believe primary school students are capable of learning a great deal more than what the primary curriculum currently offers. 

Nearly all high school curricula also lean heavily toward indoctrination. Rather than teaching students solid, tangible skills, most high school subjects concentrate on discovering how students “feel” about things. Hence, a high school English class reading Romeo and Juliet will spend more time discussing how students feel about patriarchal oppression or the lack of women’s rights or diversity in Romeo and Juliet’s Verona than it will analyzing Shakespeare’s ingenious use of language.

Whether it is based in humanism or pragmatism or post-colonial anti-racism-pro-diversity-it’s a small-world-after-all–ism, secondary education is far more focused on getting students to think and feel “correctly” about things than it is about getting students to think. Though not many observers or critics make the explicit connection, the safe-space/snowflake culture dominating most university campuses in the West today bleeds into contemporary secondary school curriculums.

Another problem with high school curricula is high and low-achieving students – high achieving students often stagnant and become bored, while low achieving students become apathetic. Some high schools attempt to address this issue by including AP and other advanced courses for the higher achievers and technical and vocational training for the non-academically inclined students. I believe this is a good strategy overall, but then again the inclusion of AP courses and vocational training high school undermines the validity of high school to a certain extent. For example, what if high-achieving students were offered bona fide university courses instead of Advanced Placement courses? Conversely, what it non-academically inclined students were placed in long-term apprenticeship programs instead of being mandated to attend high school to read Audre Lorde poems?

One way to achieve this would be to extend primary school to include grade nine and scrap grades ten, eleven, and twelve altogether. If this were done, all students would stay in school until grade nine, or until they were roughly fourteen years old. After that, academically-inclined and gifted students would have the opportunity to enroll in university while those with more practical interests could pursue technical, vocational, or on the job training to learn skills and begin careers.

This kind of system would allow students to finish a BA or have useful job skills by the time they were seventeen/eighteen. This would instill a sense of responsibility in students and present them with meaningful challenges at a time in life when most hunger for meaningful challenges. It could also eliminate much of the apathy, indifference, and passivity high school education tends to breed by shortening or eliminating the perpetual state of adolescence, which extends well into adulthood for most people today. It would also allow students to get an earlier jump on life, by getting married at a younger age, entering work at a younger age, and having children at a younger . . . well, we certainly cannot have any of that can we? 

Of course, the main problem with the kind of criticism I am indulging in here is the assumption from which one starts. My notion that high school is tremendous waste of time does not imply that I believe the rest of our education system is admirable or wonderful; nor am I suggesting that eliminating or reorganizing secondary education alone will lead to anything net-positive in the West. The West is corrupt to the core, and Western education plays a massive role in this terminal corruption. Reforming education would require a complete dismantling of the system, not just the elimination or restructuring of one of its components.

Regardless, in my opinion the chief purpose of secondary education in our contemporary system appears to be time-wasting and extending adolescence into perpetuity, and there is no evidence that this approach to secondary education will change in the future, especially when our contemporary obsession with "lifelong learning" is added into the mix. 

Is Personal Branding a Harmful Practice?

Many people advised me to build, launch, and maintain a personal brand after I completed and self-published my novel back in 2012. Though I had some inkling of what the term personal branding meant, I did not know what to make of the whole concept. Residing firmly in the realm of the old-fashioned, my original marketing plan was to emphasize my book rather than myself. After all, the book was the product I wished to sell, not myself.

Yet when I explained this approach to others, especially those who were hip to all the latest marketing trends, my explanations were often met with rolling eyes and deep sighs. The product, I was informed, is of secondary importance. What counts today is the producer. The creator is more important than the creation; therefore, marketing should be skewed toward building and maintaining a “package” that defines and gives an impression of the creator. “What you have to do above all else,” one individual told me, “is create a ‘Francis Berger feeling and experience.’ When people hear your name, they will associate your name with certain emotions and thoughts. This in turn will carry over into your products, which consumers will buy solely based on your personal brand rather than for any merit of the products themselves.”

Though I understood how personal branding could and does work, I more or less rejected the endeavor. I just could not get into the whole idea of manufacturing a ‘Francis Berger feeling and experience’, nor did I have any solid notion of what the Francis Berger feeling and experience could be. In my mind, personal branding was just a fancy (and misleading) substitute for good, old-fashioned reputation, with one distinct difference: Reputations are also built upon what others think and feel about us, but these opinions are formed directly as a result of our actions, our character, and our integrity. Reputations may not always be accurate, but they tend to originate from a place of authenticity, and they allow for interpretation. Personal branding, on the other hand, is a far more synthetic process. We are essentially telling the world what we want it to feel and think about us in lieu of our actions, character, and integrity. Personal branding seeks to persuade and manipulate through presentation, packaging, and positioning. A personal brand is a show onto itself, and as such is often less authentic than reputation.

Though I understand it may lead to success in the marketplace, personal branding, as a concept, does not appeal to me, and I have avoided presenting myself as a brand on this blog and elsewhere (at least I hope I have). Nevertheless, personal branding is extremely popular. Unfortunately, it also seems to have become a prerequisite for success in most fields and endeavors, especially since the advent of social media, which is saturated with personal branding of all kinds. Yes, this is what the world has become – a vast marketplace in which selling oneself takes precedence over any service or product one may wish to sell.

Personal branding does not appeal to me because it renders subjects into objects. In many ways, it is a reversal of the trick corporations and organizations play when they, as objects, try to pass themselves off as subjects. Personal branding does the opposite. It takes a subject – a human person – and purposefully transforms this subject into an object. In this regard, personal branding is an objectifying force. It transforms people into things. Relationships with personal brands of people are not the same as relationships with the people themselves. The latter is based on a subject-subject dynamic, while the former becomes a subject-object relationship. Relationships formed from contact with personal brands are impersonal and unfree because personal brands lack an authentic existential center. A personal brand is a commodity – something to be hyped, bought, and sold.

In addition, a personal brand is, in essence, a false self. True spiritual development and learning entails attempts to uncover and become aligned with the Real Self in order to discover one’s purpose, realize one’s destiny, and establish a dynamic relationship with God. Personal branding is a purely materialistic concept and as such acts to draw people further away from their Real Selves. Rather than help us become more attuned to who we really are, constructing personal brands likely only build illusions of who we really ARE NOT. Personal brands are basically persuasive fantasies – they are manufactured, inauthentic representations of who we wish we were or who we feel we have to be to win acceptance in the marketplace of impressions and ideas. It does not take much thought to realize that personal branding has the potential to be spiritual harmful. In light of this, I suggest those who embark on any personal branding quest be particularly wary of the choices they make.

Ultimately, I believe it is probably best to forgo personal branding altogether and merely go into the world as person. As far as I know, Jesus paid no heed to notions of personal branding, so why should you?  

Voltaire Missed the Big Point In His Criticism of Leibnizian Optimism

At its most basic level, Voltaire's Candide is an open assault against Leibniz's philosophical optimism encapsulated in the phrase "this is the best of all possible worlds." Though Voltaire's satirical rejection of the notion that all is for the best draws attention to some of the dangers inherent in an optimistic philosophy, I cannot help but believe Voltaire's missed the big point Leibniz had made when he declared the world to be "the best of all possible worlds."

If we believe the world to be divinely created by a loving parent (or parents), and if we believe we are souls that, with the help of God, chose to incarnate into the world for the purpose of spiritual development and learning, then Leibniz's "best of all possible worlds" declaration begins to sound less and less outlandish. We chose to come into the world at a specific time as incarnated individuals, under unique circumstances, and with the potential of unique experiences tailored specifically for us and our spiritual development, experiences that include suffering and evil.

Though Voltaire saw no redeeming qualities in the evil and suffering his characters encountered in the novella, evil and suffering can, in fact, have redeeming qualities for us as individuals if we view these negatives through the lens of our spiritual development. Of course, we cannot always consciously know what these redeeming qualities are, nor should become Panglosses and make attempts to find the good behind every cause in this world because there may not actually be any residual good that comes from a specific episode of suffering or evil in this world. The 'good' an episode of evil and suffering contains may reside entirely outside of our world. 

​Voltaire does not consider these possibilities at all in Candide, which is why his criticism of Leibnizian optimism, though overwhelmingly convincing and entertaining at the surface level, becomes increasingly strained when deeper metaphysical considerations are included in the mix. 

Facetiousness is Not Wit, Nor Is It a Virtue

Most people define wit as the natural aptitude for employing words and ideas in a quick and inventive manner for humorous effect. Though accurate, this is only a partial definition of wit because it omits the nature of the humor created, which is crucial to understanding the difference between wit and facetiousness, a distinction that has all but disappeared in our contemporary world.

Aristotle considered wit a virtue, but took great pains delineating the boundaries of wit, which he separated from what he termed buffoonery and boorishness. In his Nichomachean Ethics, Aristotle noted wit arises from a state of relaxation and leisure – which he considered necessary elements of life – and that its chief aim was to provide tasteful amusement. Adhering to his overall philosophy of remaining within the golden mean, Aristotle defined the ideal form of wit as that which avoids vulgar buffoonery (carrying humor to excess and striving at humor at all costs) and boorishness (the inability to create or accept humor). In Aristotle’s mind, true wit was a matter of good-breeding, self-control, and taste.

My notion of wit aligns with Aristotle’s idea for the most part. For me, true wit is humor that brings joy. It is light and sweet; it reveals, exposes, or expands a simple truth, thereby expanding our understanding of the world and ourselves. It is a clever play on words, but more than that, it is a clever play on words that makes us pause with delight and say, “Hey, I never thought of that before” or “I never looked at it that way before.” Also, in the most ideal sense, true wit rests upon solid metaphysical assumptions about Reality and Creation, assumptions that instantly and intuitively mark the boundaries of what Aristotle defined as the limits of taste and tact. In my opinion, the best kind of wit draws its inspiration from love, more specifically Christian love.

Having written the above, I believe Aristotle’s concept of the employing the golden mean to wit – of being tactful and ready-witted – has been rendered practically impossible in our contemporary world, and if it has not been rendered impossible, being tactful and ready witted today means something altogether different from what Aristotle intended. Most of this stems from the contemporary West’s flawed, dying, or non-existent metaphysical assumptions, though much could also be attributed to what is current notions of being “well-bred”, to use Aristotle’s phrase. Encountering true wit – wit that exudes intelligence, shrewdness, insight, and understanding, wit that brings delight and joy, wit based in love and faith –is increasingly rare today. What we tend to encounter instead are the extremes Aristotle mentions – buffoonery and boorishness. Today, the former is passed as off as wit, while the latter functions to exclude true wit from the public sphere altogether.

Contemporary vulgar buffoonery resides primarily in facetiousness, which is erroneously equated with wittiness. In my mind the key difference between wittiness and facetiousness is motivation. One displays wit when one treats a serious issue in a deliberately appropriate way through humor or clever remark. Facetiousness, on the other hand, treats serious issues in a deliberately inappropriate way through humor and clever remarks. In other words, a witty person can be genuinely funny or insightful about a serious topic while a facetious person can only be inappropriately funny and, usually, rather witless about a serious topic.
​
In my opinion, the chief cause of this may be rooted in metaphysics. Facetiousness has effectively replaced wit in the West because the West has turned its back on meaning, logic, sense, reason, and Reality and has instead embraced illogic, nonsense, un-reason, and Absurdity (or Virtuality). Such conditions lead to relativism and meaninglessness, both of which challenge the seriousness of any issue. Ultimately, this state of mind demands serious issues be treated inappropriately. Facetiousness is the hallmark of those for whom life is nothing more than a massive cosmic joke. Very little can be taken seriously when this perspective is adopted, and everything must, by default, be approached with flippancy and frivolity. Wit is reduced to jeers and sneers rarely rising above hostile sarcasm, vitriolic irony, or open contempt at the ridiculousness of veritably serious issues. In the end, this is all supported by a solid foundation of scorn and derision, perhaps even hatred.

Contemporary boorishness tends to appreciate and encourage vulgar buffoonery, but it mostly challenges and restricts real wit, which is regarded as offensive and in bad taste. The simple truths real wit reveals and expands are anathema to the boorish. Unlike buffoons, boors are incapable of making jokes, and even more incapable of taking them. Contemporary boors rarely experience relaxation or leisure. They are forever tense and wound-up. In keeping with the inversion inherent in the West, contemporary boors support attacks against real serious issues, but will not tolerate any jests against their own inverted “serious” issues. Within this framework, meaning, logic, and reason are open targets, while absurdity, nonsense, and stupidity are heavily protected.

To sum up, much of what accounts for wit today is really nothing more than facetiousness. The best kind of wit displays intelligence, shrewdness, insight and understanding all emanating from an honest recognition of Reality. True wit provides joy and delight, but more than that it reveals and expands truth in a playful and amusing way and helps increase our understanding of the world and ourselves. Conversely, facetiousness strives to ridicule and mock truth. Facetiousness also works to support lies. Facetious people refuse to treat serious issues appropriately because they cannot accept the truths serious issues contain. At its core, facetiousness is a thin veil for nihilism – the outright rejection of all moral and religious principles and the belief that life is essentially meaningless.

Aristotle’s advice to be tactful and maintain the golden mean in matters of wit are essentially meaningless within the context of our contemporary milieu because most attempts to do so would immediately be regarded as offensive or in bad taste. In light of this, Aristotle’s notions about the golden mean must be discarded and replaced instead wit based on proper metaphysical assumptions. Though this will be considered untactful and ill-bred by most contemporary people, to do otherwise would be to render oneself a buffoon or a boor.

​It goes without saying that true wit will be mocked, ridiculed, and misunderstood if employed in the wrong circles. Nevertheless, I believe true wit is needed in life. It serves a valuable purpose. Thus, facetiousness should be avoided and the sharing of true wit must be restricted to certain individuals and groups of people, more specifically, those whose metaphysical assumptions align with Reality. To do otherwise is pointless today – not only would it dispel any sense of leisure and amusement, but the act would be akin to casting pearls before swine. 

The Obligatory Cat Post

Our seven-month-old cat, Rebecca, posing with the fifth mouse she has nabbed in the past month. Though I have resisted the temptation for years, I am finally caving in to the old internet cliché about cat videos and photos by posting a photo of the family cat. My son had been pestering me about getting a pet over the past two or three years. At first he wanted a dog, but I was adamantly against the idea knowing the amount of attention and care a dog requires. When canines were off the table, my boy began badgering me about getting a feline.

We live in a small village in the countryside and mice are everywhere. Last summer I noticed dozens of holes in my yard, and I also caught occasional glimpses of mice scurrying about near and inside the unused barn, so when my wife announced her coworker had kittens to give away, I finally gave into my son's pleas for a pet -  with the condition that the cat we brought home had to catch mice - otherwise . . . 

My boy picked the little black kitten out the litter himself and we brought it home in April. Once the kitten was in the house, I told him to find a name for it. I expected him to rattle off something like Fluffy or Whiskers, but after a few minutes of contemplation my boy named the kitten Rebecca. Yes, Rebecca. He quickly added that we could call also call refer to it by the name's abbreviated form, Becky. This made me laugh because the words "be" (pronounced "beh") and ki (pronounced "key") mean "in" and "out" respectively in Hungarian. Thus, my son's choice of the name Becky reminded me of an old joke from childhood - the one about a poor confused dog named "Come here - Go away."

In any case, Becky quickly made herself at home and to my absolute delight, has proven herself to be an exceptional hunter. She began hunting mice about a month ago and has managed to bag five already. Not bad for a seven-month-old cat. The photo above shows her proudly posing with her fifth mouse (and yes I do feel a little sorry for the poor mouse, but pests are pests). I imagine Becky's already impressive hunting skills will only improve with time, which increases the chances of having a mousehole free yard next summer. When all is said and done, I am happy I capitulated to my son's demands for a pet, not just because Becky has proven herself useful around the house, but also because she is somewhat of a character and adds considerable fun and happiness to our days. 

There . . . obligatory cat post complete.