The False Assumption in the Either/Or Dichotomy
The following is an excerpt from an incisive comment Dr. Charlton added to a recent post of mine:
People are absolutely stuck in their assumptions that either reality is objective and out-there and to which we ought (both expediently and rationally to conform): or else (the only other option allowed) reality is subjective, something somebody feels and claims at this moment.
But BOTH of these alternatives are *incoherent* nonsense.
Instead of looking hard to find something that is (at least!) not-incoherent; people choose between the two species of nonsense - but in practice flip back and forth between them, whenever things get inconvenient.
Insofar as Christianity chooses to yoke itself to "reality is objective, out there, I do not contribute substantively to it, I must conform to it - then Christianity renders itself unfixably incoherent and irrelevant.
When this attitude is dogmatically (in the literal sense) combined with an ignorant insistence that this irrelevant incoherent metaphysics is the Only possibility - we get (inter alia) the lifestyle-level affectations and macho-posturings of trad/ orthodox Christianity.
What is so frustrating is that the false metaphysics has really nothing substantive to do with what Jesus said and did according to the IV Gospel and most of the others!
Two points.
First, assumptions asserting that reality is purely external (objective) or purely internal (subjective) are indeed incoherent. Christianity is not an either/or dichotomy. When I criticize traditional Christians for their externality, I do not assume that they or Christianity exist purely as externalities.
Christians of all stripes agree that there is more to reality than the external. Nevertheless, the vast majority of Christians tend to heavily favor externals over internals, often at a heavy cost to internal/subjective aspects of what it means to be a Christian. I suspect much of this arises from overemphasizing the sociopolitical aspects of Christianity (and faulty, incoherent metaphysics and theology, but I won’t go there in this post). That is where the bulk of my criticism originates, particularly as it pertains to obedience to questionable external “authorities,” be they religious or secular.
Second, my critical stance on externals in this time and place does not imply that I reject all externals since the dawn of Creation and live purely within my mind, in some sort of mental/spiritual pod or bubble, completely detached from everything and everyone, relying on nothing but my own feelings for guidance as to what is real and what is not.
I mention this only because this is the most common and most ridiculous criticism others tend to lob at me. “Hey, look at Francis. He rejects math! Hardy-har-har.”
So, reality is neither purely external nor purely internal for the simple reason that both alternatives, on their own, lead to incoherence, implying that coherence requires another way to “realize” something that, as Bruce puts it, “is at least not-incoherent.” The above should rank among a Christian’s primary motivations in this time and place.
If God wanted us to exist in solipsistic bubbles, he would have created us to exist in solipsistic bubbles, utterly unaware of anything external to us. Since we do not exist in such bubbles during mortal life, there must be something significant about "the world out there." However, this does not imply that only the world out there is significant but that you, essentially, do not count for much.
Simply stating that one must have intellectual humility and let tradition or some other external force judge what is best because one does not possess the internal resources required to discover “the (at least) not incoherent” is to state that God provides us with no reliable internal guidance whatsoever and instead forces us to be entirely dependent on the “authority” of the external, via elders, institutions, and so forth.
People are absolutely stuck in their assumptions that either reality is objective and out-there and to which we ought (both expediently and rationally to conform): or else (the only other option allowed) reality is subjective, something somebody feels and claims at this moment.
But BOTH of these alternatives are *incoherent* nonsense.
Instead of looking hard to find something that is (at least!) not-incoherent; people choose between the two species of nonsense - but in practice flip back and forth between them, whenever things get inconvenient.
Insofar as Christianity chooses to yoke itself to "reality is objective, out there, I do not contribute substantively to it, I must conform to it - then Christianity renders itself unfixably incoherent and irrelevant.
When this attitude is dogmatically (in the literal sense) combined with an ignorant insistence that this irrelevant incoherent metaphysics is the Only possibility - we get (inter alia) the lifestyle-level affectations and macho-posturings of trad/ orthodox Christianity.
What is so frustrating is that the false metaphysics has really nothing substantive to do with what Jesus said and did according to the IV Gospel and most of the others!
Two points.
First, assumptions asserting that reality is purely external (objective) or purely internal (subjective) are indeed incoherent. Christianity is not an either/or dichotomy. When I criticize traditional Christians for their externality, I do not assume that they or Christianity exist purely as externalities.
Christians of all stripes agree that there is more to reality than the external. Nevertheless, the vast majority of Christians tend to heavily favor externals over internals, often at a heavy cost to internal/subjective aspects of what it means to be a Christian. I suspect much of this arises from overemphasizing the sociopolitical aspects of Christianity (and faulty, incoherent metaphysics and theology, but I won’t go there in this post). That is where the bulk of my criticism originates, particularly as it pertains to obedience to questionable external “authorities,” be they religious or secular.
Second, my critical stance on externals in this time and place does not imply that I reject all externals since the dawn of Creation and live purely within my mind, in some sort of mental/spiritual pod or bubble, completely detached from everything and everyone, relying on nothing but my own feelings for guidance as to what is real and what is not.
I mention this only because this is the most common and most ridiculous criticism others tend to lob at me. “Hey, look at Francis. He rejects math! Hardy-har-har.”
So, reality is neither purely external nor purely internal for the simple reason that both alternatives, on their own, lead to incoherence, implying that coherence requires another way to “realize” something that, as Bruce puts it, “is at least not-incoherent.” The above should rank among a Christian’s primary motivations in this time and place.
If God wanted us to exist in solipsistic bubbles, he would have created us to exist in solipsistic bubbles, utterly unaware of anything external to us. Since we do not exist in such bubbles during mortal life, there must be something significant about "the world out there." However, this does not imply that only the world out there is significant but that you, essentially, do not count for much.
Simply stating that one must have intellectual humility and let tradition or some other external force judge what is best because one does not possess the internal resources required to discover “the (at least) not incoherent” is to state that God provides us with no reliable internal guidance whatsoever and instead forces us to be entirely dependent on the “authority” of the external, via elders, institutions, and so forth.
No comments have been added yet.
