Next Quarter

[o_joshua]

So I just received my teaching assignment for next quarter and it's English 367, the junior level composition class as opposed to 110 the freshman level (what I normally teach). I haven't qualified to do it yet, I was going to do that next week. I'm not sure how that's going to work out

Comments

A thought

[t_isfor_]

Not sure how this might fit in with the rest, but I just read an article in NewYorker about the friendship of Einstein and Goedel (sorry, no umlaud) that I found enlighting as to their personal lives and places in the development of both science and philosophy, especially their utter devotion to the god Physics and both the consistencies and inconsistencies of their lives with that faith.

I don't remember if it was last week or the week before, or whether you have access to an archive, but I'll check it out. It was a Critic at Large piece.

Re: A thought

[j_dizzle]

Also czech out bohr's antipathy with einstein. the two broke over heisenberg's uncertainty principle (see marxists.com for heisenberg's essay on philosophy and science). bohr believed physics pointed toward chaos (not gleickian chaos, but read him too) and einstein replied "I can't believe that God would play dice with the universe." Hawking's work is fantastic but essentially rooted in a scientific postivism--read him though. you can also read bohr and einstein's correspondence on marxists.com. for Godel, read hoffstader. also bring in some pirsig and kuhn. I say give wiener's intro to human use and possibly bring in some pynchon (LOT 49 is most accessible and deals extensively with entropy). a great reference (probably more for your students and their research papers than for you, but one you should mention) is asimov's biographical history of science. It connects every scientist from thales to...well asimov actually, in chronological order with crossreferences. taht's all i got off the top of my head. im sotked to

Re: A thought

[j_dizzle]

just thought i'd ad that "read" in the above paragraph is always imperative and never past tense.

Ideas

[rommel777]

You must use Wendell Berry. His agragrian approach to society is a refreshing alternative to the technology-laden norm. His essay on "not using a computer" in "Art of the Commonplace" is a good place to start. But honestly, every essay you read by him questions some of the deepest principles underlying our capitolistic, scientific society

[songoforpheus]

Are you anti-technology? Pro-agrarian? Do you feel guilty using a toaster, much less a gasoline-guzzling car?

More importantly, do you want your students to think that you are/do all of these things?

I'm not as widely read in this field, but may I suggest the first chapter of Zen and the Art of Motorcycle maintenance if it's possible? There are also innumerable science-gone-wrong movies, and some excellent Star Trek episodes to consider if your students have trouble with books. The trick is to give the message, not that "technology is bad," but that "neither technology, nor agrarianism, nor capitalism, nor socialism, nor moralism, nor libertarianism, nor any other -ism can save us." Not a task I envy you given human nature.

[annevp]

Hey Josh,

I'm glad. An opportunity like that is not easy to come by. But I will say this...maybe I was alone in feeling this way, but I could have wished that amidst the confusion of my naive paradigms being undermined, that I could have had some more--let's say--practical direction. It felt very "sink or swim," which, to an extent is necessary, but...I believe in people having to sort through the crap to really know what they believe but I'm not really a big fan of intellectual chaos, either.

I don't know if that helps, matters or makes a difference. But it was a thought.

And as far as Fish goes, THE TROUBLE WITH PRINCIPLE might be a good place to find material. You already like Fish and it's all about the 1st Amendment and affirmative action. Long, but you could easily pull selections.

[j_dizzle]

true, but in a secular institution all we can do is tear down. any edification will be to slap plaster on a sandy foundation. we must tear them down and show them the rock. the edification and demonstration of the rock cannot happen within the classroom or you'll get fired. at the same time, there are extracurricular opportunities.

[annevp]

yeah, but i'm not sure that intellectual chaos is healthy...emotionally, intellectually, spiritually or physically. i think that in a secular setting, you would probably have to be even more careful. you don't have ANYTHING you can give them. it's too hard. who knows...they might go throw themselves off a bridge after class.

if i hadn't been a christian, i very well might have.

[o_joshua]

Annie, my friend, what you have to understand is what a different animal the large secular university is from anything else. People are caught up so thoroughly in living too quickly to comprehend anything while having total faith in the fraying strands that support their existence. I am an avid fan of intellectual chaos because if I can induce a little insanity and bring their entire existence into question, then it's possible to reduce them to rock bottom. When they have nothing left on this earth to cling to, then we have the possibility for real change. Also, while it may sound callous, I don't see how one is any worse off for realizing their life is a lie and throwing themself off a bridge, than if they live their whole life and never realize their life is a lie, then die and go to hell anyways.
If I have a believer in my class, or I'm teaching at Masters, then I seek to show where the hope lies. Until then, I tear down and expose the heresies.

[o_joshua]

Thank you all for expressing your concern, but it seems we are at an impasse. I am afraid that I am simply persuaded by what Suzuki has taught, like Jason is. We are all trying to do what it is that we do as biblically as possible and could probably all produce Scripture to justify it, and rightfully so. My own would be "A broken spirit and a contrite heart, O God, the parable of the wise man who built his house upon the rock, taking every thought captive to Christ, and probably others. Suffice it to say, you are just going to have to trust that I am doing things the most biblical way I know how. Not having worked in the newspaper industry with Titus or with Annie at what she does, neither at the bookstore and the theatre with Evan or with Fox in his various tasks, I don't know much about being a Christian in those industries. But like Suzuki and Horner, I do know something about being a Christian at an incredibly large, and very secular academic institution. Yes, I do know about that. Suzuki has persuaded me of what I believe

O Joshua,

[t_isfor_]

I meant no remonstration.
I was only discussing the topics at hand.
I have never doubted that you are pursuing your calling in the most diligent and biblical way that you know how. We, each of us, continue striving toward that end, on each of our individual paths.
Along the way, we bump our thoughts and ideas off the minds that we respect, hopefully we come out better for the discussion. There is, it seems to me, no need of wins or losses or impasses in that.
As for large and very secular academic institutions, my path may yet lead me that way. I'm sure I'll have lots of questions for you when it does.
I am very proud of all you have accomplished and continue to accomplish.

Strive on, my friend. Strive on.

T

Dear Joshie...

[annevp]

I didn't mean to attack you (if you got that impression).

I suppose I'm all worked up because there have been so many people that I love that dove headlong into the chaos for the sake of being honest or finding Truth or whatever and almost chucked Christianity altogether or walked away from it very shattered.

I don't know; it's just a very hard place to be.

Maybe the rest of you didn't struggle with it as much as I did, maybe I'm really not cut out for that sort of thing.

But I couldn't wish that on anyone else. Especially, perhaps, those who don't have any real hope in the first place.

However, I suppose I don't know what it's like and this all may have been completely irrelevant.

It's--it's--I suppose it's simply dismaying.

there's more

[ofthedawn]

*sorry i posted this twice