Out of the Ashes: Rebuilding American Culture - Anthony Esolen Audiobook

This post has 33 comments with rating of 5/533

• 
  howlafist
  September 10th, 2022
  

  Christianity is a stumbling block on the road to morality.

  Out of the Ashes: Rebuilding American Culture - Anthony Esolen
• 
  bookwormmama
  September 10th, 2022
  

  This kind of propaganda is why Christianity is in such decline. What a pathetic view of the world.

  Out of the Ashes: Rebuilding American Culture - Anthony Esolen
• 
  caesar963
  September 10th, 2022
  

  

  Difficult to address many of these problems due to the continuing decline of community & the glorification of vacuous materialism; including the material objectification of the human person.

  Out of the Ashes: Rebuilding American Culture - Anthony Esolen
• 
  apollo60
  September 10th, 2022
  

  

  Excellent book.
  America is in decline because of the Democrats, RINOS, Big Tech and the Lame Stream Media. All 4 are a Cancer on humanity

  Out of the Ashes: Rebuilding American Culture - Anthony Esolen
• 
  apollo60
  September 10th, 2022
  

  Hey,
  bookwormmama and howlafist. What’s your opinion on the Muslim “religion of peace”?

  Out of the Ashes: Rebuilding American Culture - Anthony Esolen
• 
  howlafist
  September 10th, 2022
  

  Islam and christianity, in their uninhibited forms, are essentially the same (women-as-property, murder of outgroups, child genital mutilation etc.)

  The difference in a modern setting is that christianity is more prevalent in “the west”, where it is somewhat restrained by government interventions (e.g. mutilation in but murders mostly out), while islam has successfully imposed unrestricted religious rule on many major world countries.

  Out of the Ashes: Rebuilding American Culture - Anthony Esolen
• 
  caesar963
  September 10th, 2022
  

  “women-as-property, murder of outgroups, child genital mutilation” - where is any of that in Christian doctrine?

  Out of the Ashes: Rebuilding American Culture - Anthony Esolen
• 
  howlafist
  September 11th, 2022
  

  The bible itself (like the quran) can be read both to support and to reject most anything, but in practice doctrinal religions largely ignore their sacred texts, cherry-picking only those bits which support their cultural traditions when they feel threatened. Women in historically christian settings have been treated as non-citizens akin to children, unable to consent as an adult, to initiate divorce, expected to endure physical abuse without recourse, married away for money and unable to hold property etc. And, when necessary, religious leaders back this up with quotes like “Wives, submit to your husbands” or “A woman must learn in quietness and full submissiveness. I do not permit a woman to teach or to exercise authority over a man; she is to remain quiet.”.

  Similar goes for the abuse and murder of people with outgroup skin colours, sexual expressions, etc. For the latter, relevant quotes are still spread so openly and often i hardly need to repeat them here. And though somewhat rarer in other places, in the united states at least child genital mutilation is so common a practice it’s hardly ever questioned. See Exodus 4:25.

  Confronted with these facts, certain people who see themselves as the enlightened, “true” christians will clutch their Mere Christianity and disavow the perversion of the faith. But this overlooks two important points:

  - These practices were natural to the christian church for thousands of years, and, church unchecked, they would quickly return. Indeed, many of them never even left!
  - C.S. Lewis himself was an unapologetic bigot.

  Out of the Ashes: Rebuilding American Culture - Anthony Esolen
• 
  Gweilo
  September 11th, 2022
  

  So , here we have the manifesto of the Republic of Gilead.

  Out of the Ashes: Rebuilding American Culture - Anthony Esolen
• 
  caesar963
  September 11th, 2022
  

  I still don’t see the central Christian doctrines to finance the assertions. That circumcision is required in Islam & Judaism, & that Christians have always been expressly exempt from circumcision (male & female, of course) & Mosaic Law generally (due to being Christian) argues directly against your point. That’s just actual Christian doctrine.

  The fact that circumcision became widespread practice in US & Canada is, in my view, wrongheaded medical procedure. It’s essentially a cure in search of a disease, due to disproportionate concerns over hygiene. It’s not necessary in the majority of cases, & doesn’t occur in such a manner in other Western countries - or the Christian context, if you like.

  “The bible (like quran) can be read both to support & reject most anything, doctrinal religions largely ignore sacred texts, cherry-pick only bits which support cultural trads when threatened.” - Well, no. Christianity has central doctrinal tenets, which is the point at issue. No circumcision explicitly being one; valuing human life at all stages being another.

  Treatment of women is an important consideration in historical context. All cultures appear to have been found wanting in this regard. The most civilised pre-Christian (pagan) regime was, for a myriad of reasons, the Athenian culture. Its treatment of women, foreigners & slaves was indeed abominable. Did Christianity represent an improvement, by any conceivable metric?

  On doctrine, we have St. Paul declaring “There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither slave nor free, there is neither male nor female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus.” This notion of equality was unknown to the ancient world, and it has indeed taken a long time to turn that tanker.

  On marital doctrine, Christianity implemented the tradition of formal, witnessed, free & uncoerced consent to marriage (based on doctrine of free will). Prior to this, the consent of the woman was irrelevant & immaterial. The Church was the only institution to educate women. It created the university & women taught in these & its other educational institutions. On sexuality, the Church my family was a part of said that gay people are “beloved of God.”

  On the issue of murdering people: Christian reformers abolished the murder & torture of people as mass entertainment spectacle (the “games”); abolished human sacrifice, child sacrifice, infanticide, exposure of children (often with disabilities) to the elements, etc.

  The first mass peace movements in history were created & led by the Church (The Peace of God & Truce of God movements). The first international peace treaty was sponsored & driven by the Church. Both the concept & doctrine of human rights are derived from Christian Canon Law & Imago Dei. Christians were the first prison reformers & created the hospital. Christians formulated Just War theory. The first Christian countries/kingdoms were African & Asian. Christianity’s greatest philosopher & theologian was an African. The first condemnation of & organised opposition to imperial abuses in the Americas came from the Dominican Order.

  That we don’t live up to these sublime ideals is illustrative of our flawed nature. We still haven’t caught up to the principles of the New Testament. On war & murder of outgroups generally, the most murderous & genocidal institution in human history is, of course, the state. Wars are fought for reasons of power, resources, territory, fear of attack, etc. Same as it ever was. These material motives & base drivers do not change.

  If you look to people of the past & the opinions they held, don’t be surprised to be shocked. A writer I’ve admired since I was a kid, George Orwell (not a Christian) was an unapologetic bigot. Is there anything we can salvage of Orwell, Lewis, Plato, Aristotle, etc.? Because surely they were not unmitigated villains; they certainly seem to be worth the effort. Can we even cast stones at them?

  Simply on the principle of knowing your “enemy” -
  opponents of Christianity ought to be conversant with the factual historical record.

  Out of the Ashes: Rebuilding American Culture - Anthony Esolen
• 
  howlafist
  September 11th, 2022
  

  Genital mutilation in the us was introduced for the same reason as in mali: as a “masturbation cure”, decreasing sexual pleasure, which is considered an evil because of religious teaching.

  Like most anything else, the christian holy book both supports and rejects child genital mutilation in different places. Your personal quibbling over which of these ought to be preferred is irrelevant when the practice has been and still is being inflicted on hundreds of millions of unconsenting people as an unquestioned part of religious practice.

  The same goes for everything else you’ve mentioned here, with the added note that anyone who historically disagreed with usual christian practices dared not self-label as non-christian, as to do so meant death.

  Also, the notion of gender equality briefly espoused in early christianity (then immediately refuted according to pauline teachinr) was borrowed from zoroastrianism and similar, and it has anyways never been broadly implemented. Instead extreme inequality was spread in christian guise to colonised places where it was often less severe. There was far more world than athens and rome, and christian practice has infected it all. South korea has fallen behind japan and thailand in acceptance of “lgbt” people specifically because of its greater christian population objecting to such people existing. And infanticide was not ended by christians; it only significantly decreased once reliable abortion practices became available.

  And there is nothing to be salvaged at least from people like plato and aristotle, who popularised the pythagorean stance of platonism/dualism that became a central tennet of the christian church and that has inhibited scientific progress for thousands of years. Nor from condescending apologists like lewis who do their best to paper over past atrocities while secretly approving of them. Like i implied in the beginning, people can do good in spite of christian (or other religious) teachings, and can do bad without them (though escaping those religious teachings is near impossible in countries structured around and suffused by them), but christian (etc) teachings are always an impediment to the development of moral character. Even someone like tolkien, who had experienced suffering and tried very hard to be good, was only able to make it halfway or so to lewis’ none.

  Out of the Ashes: Rebuilding American Culture - Anthony Esolen
• 
  AndyBook
  September 12th, 2022
  

  

  Thank you very much Sir.

  Out of the Ashes: Rebuilding American Culture - Anthony Esolen
• 
  caesar963
  September 12th, 2022
  

  Test…

  Out of the Ashes: Rebuilding American Culture - Anthony Esolen
• 
  caesar963
  September 12th, 2022
  

  “same goes for everything else you’ve mention here, w added note that anyone who historically disagreed w usu christian practices dared not self-label as non-christian, as to do so meant death.” - ???

  “notion of gend equality briefly espoused early christianity (then immed refuted accord to paul teachinr)” - Please refer to Paul’s actual words quoted above.

  “was borrowed fr zoroast & similar” - Please offer definitive support.

  “& it has anyways never been broadly implement” - My point exactly on failing to live up to New Testament principles.

  “Instead extreme inequal was spread christian guise to colonised places” - Please refer to my points on history, the state & imperialism.

  “There was far more world than athens & rome” - Of course. But rather than go through an exhaustive (& exhausting) list of everything everywhere ever, it’s helpful to adduce an instance which is generally regarded as civilisation’s greatest moment, prior to Christianity; & one of which we have certain knowledge, rather than unwieldy conjecture. Utopia is not available, unfortunately.

  “Christian population objecting to such people existing” - Christian populations object to gay peop existing? Where? The objection, as I understand it, is not to the existence of other human beings (every human is imperfect), or refusing to allow them draw breath - that’s characteristic of other ideologies, as we know.

  “And infanticide not ended by christians” - The practice & custom (like exposure & sacrifice) was abolished by Christian decrees. This does not mean that, like all murder, crimes do not continue to occur.
  “Infanticide…only significantly decreased once reliable abortion practices became available.” - Please refer to this sentence, and to actual semantic strangeness.
  The killing of children happened - and continues to happen - at all stages of life, and in all kinds of conditions. It’s all evil, of course.

  “nothing to be salvaged fr peop like plato & arist” - Really?! Not their epistemology, metaphysics, ethics, incomparable political writings, aesthetics, poetics, insights on rhetoric, empiricism, music? Two of the greatest geniuses in human hx? Far from being disposable, they are utterly seminal, in point of fact. Foundational - virtually every college course, degree & module, which I’ve undergone has begun (& continued) with their definitions & insights - law, philosophy, history, literature, art, politics, etc. etc. Always worth exploring (Classical Gk civ, generally).
  In particular, Aristotle’s creation of the discipline of logic - an area which people don’t so much care for in this historical moment, one might observe.

  Of course, Greek science, like all science (like our science will be) - was superseded. However, you can bet that the creator of the scientific method, the Franciscan friar & philosopher, Roger Bacon, was thoroughly familiar with his Plato & Aristotle.

  Incidentally, Lewis has some superlative writings & insights, I’m not sure why you hate him so much?

  “escaping those relig teachings is near imposs in countries structured around & suffused by them” - Oh, I dunno, the genocidal Soviets (inter alia) had a fair go at it.

  “christian (etc) teachings always an imped to development of moral character.” - The introduction of organised charity? Famine relief? The principle of Equality? The creation of the concept & doctrine of human rights? That human life is intrinsically valuable & purposeful? Hospitals? The university? The principles of forgiveness, compassion, love - which replaced the prevailing pagan social custom & ethos of vengeance? Come now.

  “Even tolkien, who experienced suffering (who hasn’t?) & tried hard to be good, was only able to make it halfway or so to lewis’ none.” - That’s what I was saying about judging & casting stones; who makes it all the way (if we can measure half the distance to good)? In order that we may set the absolute ethical standard? How do we actually determine whether someone makes it “halfway” - or even “none” for that matter? Do we have to throw everyone out - including ourselves, as flawed beings? What objective metric are we even using?

  All of the sublime historical achievements & contributions still stand, of course. As mentioned, it’s necessary to know the history & philosophy, even (esp) for those who still want to attack Christianity. Otherwise, the likely result will be a confused gatherum of Marxist con theories. (Even people who see through the Marxist murder machine may be nonetheless influenced by the toxic fumes.)

  Out of the Ashes: Rebuilding American Culture - Anthony Esolen
• 
  caesar963
  September 12th, 2022
  

  You’re not suggesting that the diff churches over there - pastors Bob & Nadine - set & (rigidly) maintain secular medical (& onanistic) policy at the federal level? Simply upon handy grounds? (And the parents have no active, prudential role?)

  You really think that anything would stop a male from such a pursuit? Spoil alert: Everyone does it - even girls. If you happily imagine that circum. decreases it, then stay away from the works of Philip Roth. And the Amer Pie movies. And the entire culture, ftm.

  Circum. has no warrant in Christianity. Nor do the Mosaic or Dietary laws. (u guys don’t observe the Dietary laws as well, do you?!)
  Also, carnal pleasure is not “evil” - that’s not Christian doctrine. Like material goods & pleasures of all kinds, it is a virtue. Where it tends towards vice is when it becomes a person’s greatest priority, above all else, above love of another; an end in itself, similar to material wealth & power. Goods all - until distorted as objects.

  Out of the Ashes: Rebuilding American Culture - Anthony Esolen
• 
  caesar963
  September 12th, 2022
  

  On a pragmatic level, I think requiring circum. would’ve placed a substantial (& painful) barrier on the expansion of Christianity (itself one of the most remarkable events in hx). The unkindest cut of all. I can’t imagine that the queue/line would’ve been around the proverbial block. However, all such laws were set aside, Mosaic/Dietary, & circum, because the revelation had already occurred. They were functionally obsolete. As Paul observed, the gentiles are not to be judged on the basis of laws not their own.

  My understanding is that the procedure is carried out by the medical team, in hospitals (rather than a pastor/preacher in a place of worship) as a health measure, according to medical policy & practice. Clearly, as a person from a Christian culture, and as a dood, I would have strenuous reservations about this. I presume it is also based on a measure of parental consent, grounded on established medical “best practice” & guidance. This would probably explain why the practice is not actually universal throughout America.

  Out of the Ashes: Rebuilding American Culture - Anthony Esolen
• 
  caesar963
  September 12th, 2022
  

  “Ur pers quib which ought be prefer is irrelev” - Correct; both our views are irrelev. Consequently, actual doctrine has always been helpfully clear on the point. Paul: “Behold, I Paul say unto you, that, if ye receive circum, Christ will profit you nothing” - & circum. is “not by the letter (of the law).” Jewish practice, but that is another relig. Only one of my friends here had the procedure, for medical reasons, decidedly not relig purposes. He remains unperturbed by it, I’m minded to add.

  Out of the Ashes: Rebuilding American Culture - Anthony Esolen
• 
  caesar963
  September 12th, 2022
  

  (Apologies, some conjunction of letters or symbols were somehow problematic - so I had to break up text. I wasn’t swearing my head off, or anything.)

  Out of the Ashes: Rebuilding American Culture - Anthony Esolen
• 
  tenbenson
  September 12th, 2022
  

  Down with this sort of thing.

  Out of the Ashes: Rebuilding American Culture - Anthony Esolen
• 
  howlafist
  September 12th, 2022
  

  You are not the arbiter of christian doctrine. It is a global phenomenon (just like english is a global language). An enlightened muslim family in canada cannot explain away the father in iran who murders his daughter and son-in-law for blasphemy. If you want to distance from that larger world (which both outnumbers and predates you) then you should call yourself something else.

  There is of course no objective measuring stick for morality, so that i can only make judgements from my own beliefs, that one should not hurt others or value dogma over human lives, and hope that you would agree.

  This is not an abstract discussion to me. My childhood was spent being preached to in congregations across eastern europe, india, east asia, and the americas. Christian teachings were the cause of severe medical neglect when i was young. Absolutist christian notions of sex and human anatomy make people think genital mutilation is an appropriate “fix” for people born “ambiguous”, and my family to think it was an appropriate thing to do to me.

  Christian teachings estranged me from my family and led to poverty, homelessness, suicide attempts, and now rapidly declining health. Christian teachings have caused the suffering and death of my friends. Christian teachings lead parents to torture, neglect, and abandon their children when those children threaten their worldview by existing. It happened to me. It’s happened to millions of us. My best friend is currently dying.

  “But those are *fake* christians though” is not a sufficient answer when the “fake” are a vast majority and the “real” are complicit in half they do.

  And your little island has made itself in recent years globally notorious for exactly this issue.

  (Also, there are no medical reasons for cutting up “boy parts” that minor non-destructive interventions cannot solve. Christian teaching about sex led to official state policies like “Masturbation causes dementia. It is medically necessary to prevent it.”. Today the only people i’ve met in the us who weren’t cut up that way had non-christian parents. And the end result is a significant reduction in sensitivity; i learned that first-hand while sucking guys off to afford medication ^^).

  Out of the Ashes: Rebuilding American Culture - Anthony Esolen
• 
  howlafist
  September 12th, 2022
  

  (And yes, plato and aristotle are worse than useless. They actively papered over people like democritus and zeno who had useful things to say, and their ideas continue to mislead people even now (including most “lay” people and even around half of the scientists and mathematicians).)

  Out of the Ashes: Rebuilding American Culture - Anthony Esolen
• 
  howlafist
  September 12th, 2022
  

  Bertrand russell puts it (the reason religion is a stumbling block on the way to moral character) a bit more clearly:

  “it is thought virtuous to have Faith—that is to say, to have a conviction which cannot be shaken by contrary evidence. Or, if contrary evidence might induce doubt, it is held that contrary evidence must be suppressed. On such grounds, the young are not allowed to hear arguments, in Russia, in favor of capitalism, or, in America, in favor of Communism. This keeps the faith of both intact and ready for internecine war. The conviction that it is important to believe this or that, even if a free inquiry would not support the belief, is one which is common to almost all religions and which inspires all systems of state education. The consequence is that the minds of the young are stunted and are filled with fanatical hostility both to those who have other fanaticisms and, even more virulently, to those who object to all fanaticisms.”

  Religious belief systems (and their counterpart “secular” belief systems, marxism/nazism/woke-ism/whatever other “ism”) present certain ideas as beyond all question or reproach, certain positions to be valued above human life. As in Luke 14:26, religious teachings are to take precedence over even the wellbeing of one’s own family. And so, as was the case in my family, when someone is seen to be incompatible with those teachings the eye/hand/child is to be cast out and discarded.

  Out of the Ashes: Rebuilding American Culture - Anthony Esolen
• 
  howlafist
  September 12th, 2022
  

  To slightly elaborate also on plato and aristotle: their joint conception of mathematics, carried on for thousands and years and culminating in hilbert’s program, was at last exploded by gödel-church-turing and the slow process of overwriting it has begun, replacing platonism with constructivism and aristotelian logic and set theory with type theory. Other notable contagions include frequentist statistics (i.e. the foundation of scientific racism) and the mind body dualism appearing in many modern cogsci guises to hinder progress of computational approaches.

  Out of the Ashes: Rebuilding American Culture - Anthony Esolen
• 
  caesar963
  September 12th, 2022
  

  Although it’s of no practical assistance, I’m very sorry to hear of your experience, and those of your friends. I respect your point of view as expressed.

  “u are not the arbiter of christian doctr. If u want to distance from that larger world (which both outnumbers and predates you) - That’s just my point - numbers & dates captures it succinctly & perfectly. 2000 yrs of doctrine (immediately verifiable, as above), established tradition, the New Testament, Pauline Epistles, & virtually all the Christians who have ever lived. Of course, Christianity has central doctrinal tenets. There is no requirement of circum. on Christians. None whatsoever. There is such an imperative upon Jews & Muslims (although the non-religious in these groups also have the procedure performed). This is probably one of the reasons for Christianity’s incredible success. What you seem to be talking about is some kind of localised, social requirement.

  (Just by way of trying to evaluate this American circum. phenomenon, the following extract included.)
  From a Washington Post article entitled “Americans truly are exceptional — at least when it comes to circumcision,” dated May 26, 2015: “Circumcision proponents point to studies by the World Health Organization showing that it’s effective at reducing HIV transmission rates, & to the American Academy of Pediatrics statement that “the health benefits of newborn male circumcision outweigh the risks.” As you can see, these are secular, non-religious bodies.
  It also states that circum. rates in the US in 2010 were 58.3% - which obviously includes Jewish & Muslim figures, given the religious & cultural requirement.
  And dammit, masturbation rates have been consistently high throughout all of history, right up to the present moment. So that’s odd.

  Also, just to clarify, as you mentioned practices in Mali, it ought to be pointed out that there can’t be a one to one correspondence between Mali & America. The reason for circum. in Mali would be largely attributable to the fact that it has a 95% Islamic population. Thus the circumcision requirement. (The remaining 5% of Malians adhere to traditional African religions, such as the Dogon religion; consequently, Christianity is not even present at the scene of the crime.)

  Even if some snake-handling preachers in Alabamy were obsessed with masturbation, and said to the local representatives that we need to get this chronic masturbation problem under control, coz no work is getting done around these here parts at all, it still doesn’t explain the policy’s continued existence. Looking at one cause alone is always reductionist. Everything is multifactorial. The debate I see (you’ve forced me to research this) is around medical practice, hygiene & aesthetics. There are medical considerations, but insufficient to justify such a blanket approach, I believe. This general policy is redolent of pure bureaucratic nonsense. Such decisions should be based on specific medical necessity, & otherwise discretionary in nature. They should not be general, or a bureaucratic exercise.
  America is, in this, as well as in many other things, a rank outlier. This is why it strikes us (crazy outsiders) as odd.

  I was saying about Lewis; he has many recognised, superlative writings & insights, I’m not sure why you hate him so much?

  “There is no object measur stick for morality, i can only make judgements fr my beliefs, that one should not hurt others or value dogma over human lives” - This is the self-refuting absurdity of relativism. If the subjective self is the only measure, then no moral or ethical statement/judgment can be sustained; personal preference being the sole guide. Consider: if this condition is (must be) the case for everyone (as u imply), it is then an absolute, ineluctable moral rule encompassing everyone; consequently an absolute must be admitted & relativism falls. If your position was true, then we couldn’t make objective moral judgments or evaluations, but that is precisely what we do. That is how we operate. If your position was true, we could not condemn evil or unjust acts - because there would be no objective measure to determine their evil or injustice. If your position was true, law becomes impossible (as each individual may define harms differently). If your position was true, genocide, torture, murder or rape cannot be coherently condemned or rejected, because we’re bereft the necessary moral standard. Your subjective opinion actually becomes personal dogma, although you claim to abhor dogma.

  Some of my own experience: when my parents’ marriage broke down, my mum’s family were all living abroad. Consequently, when we needed help - financial, medical, housing, counselling, educational - it was substantially provided by the Church. No questions asked. State support was conditional, with every possible barrier placed in the way. I was lucky enough to attend some of the best schools in the country; the Church waived the fees. Most of our schools are religious (that’s changing now), but it’s probably a bit different here. There were no problems concerning lessons on human sexuality, evolution(!), civics, tolerance; we were even taught that (shock, horror) religions & religious people did bad things. (my history teachers were superb). And circumcision was definitively out (& this is the largest Christian denomination in the world, incidentally). All the while, my family listened to me condemning religion, at every level.

  As to the obscenity of child abuse, headlines were indeed made. It was very public, the evil offenders were rigorously pursued & prosecuted, with the full weight of the law. Publicly prosecuting these offences - with the maximum glare of the media - is the objectively moral thing to do. Concerning someone who is definitively guilty of such offences, bury them under the phcking prison. Regarding the character & profile of such crimes, it is present in all societies & cultures - not just ours, believe it or not. The rate is consistent amongst all populations,; in states both rich & poor. The western countries with the highest rates include the US, Australia, the UK. The institution with the highest rate of abuse is the family. The professions with the highest rates are medical & teaching. Abuse is carried out by people professing religious belief & atheism.

  Out of the Ashes: Rebuilding American Culture - Anthony Esolen
• 
  caesar963
  September 13th, 2022
  

  “plato & aristotle are worse than useless” - They didn’t only make vital contributions to all of the many areas of study mentioned - they actually founded some of those areas of study. Too many firsts to be dismissed. Any such dismissal is contrived, tactical & rhetorical. It’s not even an “agree to differ” opportunity, it’s simply objectively wrong. The guy who created the discipline of logic (& is regarded as the Father of Biology) is “worse than useless?” (”Yeah, those 2 lads - Da Vinci & Michelangelo - didn’t have an artistic bone in their bodies. And you can take my word for that, by hell! Newton & Einstein? Scientists?! Hold my coat!”) It’s the fate of all scientific theories to be superseded & improved upon. Would many have done as well as those geniuses in the absence of peer review & modern computational analysis? This was a long time before the Church created the university, or a Franciscan friar created the scientific method. Yet the full spectrum of their incomparable achievements in areas of empiricism, lit criticism, taxonomy, principles of justice, law & constitutional development, epistemology, etc. etc. remain astounding. (Of course, we’re all just a series of footnotes to these doods.)

  Russell did honestly admit his own significant bias. Wittgenstein - a great admirer, friend & colleague of his - used to say that Russell’s books should be bound in two covers, those dealing with mathematical philosophy in blue, & every student of philosophy should read them, while those dealing with popular subjects should be bound in red & no one should be allowed to read them. A tad harsh.
  With regard to his writing on faith: the opposite of faith is not doubt. Everyone doubts. The opposite of faith is certainty. Certainty is an alien concept to me. We are all constantly & necessarily in a faith relation to something, simply because none of us are universal observers. So what he’s saying is merely epistemically silly. The young are surrounded by a cacophony of contrary voices & doubts. Same as it ever was. We are not vacuum-packed. As soon as you encounter another being/entity, there is point counterpoint; argument, discourse, conflict, contention.
  I am neither filled with fanatical hostility, nor do I do know such fanatics. I do know lots of doubters, however. I also object to all fanaticisms. So it’s another Bertrandian misdiagnosis, as telegraphed by Ludwig Wittgenstein. Collapsing rhetoric.
  On developing moral character: prior to Christianity, the prevalent conception of the human person in the ancient world was wholly material, base & impoverished in scope & substance. Torture & murder as mass entertainment spectacle; human sacrifice & exposure.

  Human life, human rights, the dignified individual being, the Imago Dei, are of pre-eminent significance. The sacrament is reconciliation. To use a religion of love, charity & forgiveness as a vehicle for hatred is sinful.
  “Relig systems present certain ideas as beyond all question or reproach, certain positions to be valued above human life” - The religion of my family has a primacy of conscience teaching. It ties in with the concepts of free will & Natural Law. Each of us as individuals have a duty to inform our conscience, & to act in accordance with conscience. Other people cannot make the choice for you. We are dignified, valuable human persons, & our actions are consequential. We have an obligation to question, weigh, reason, critique & evaluate. And we never stop learning.

  The Jewish religion is profoundly dialectical in its educational ethos. (I reckon that’s one reason they score the highest in measures of IQ.)

  Out of the Ashes: Rebuilding American Culture - Anthony Esolen
• 
  caesar963
  September 13th, 2022
  

  “there are no medic reasons for cutting up “boy parts” that minor non-destruct intervent cannot solve” - Just to reiterate, I’m still not Mr. “Cut Yer Fireman off!, Guys” On medic grounds, the most common reasons for circumcis. include phimosis, paraphimosis, balanitis without phimosis, condyloma, redundant foreskin, Bowen disease, carcinoma, trauma, & disease prophylaxis (eg, HIV infection). Circumcis. might also have various health benefits, incl: easier hygiene. Circumcis. makes it simpler to wash the p^nis.
  There is also elective circumcision (patient choice). (This is all Mayo Clinic & NHS web material, so - don’t shoot the Fireman.)

  Out of the Ashes: Rebuilding American Culture - Anthony Esolen
• 
  howlafist
  September 13th, 2022
  

  Because this dialogue has been derailed by inessential tangents, i’ll try to avoid them and to be a bit more clear.

  Probably you’re aware of the prescriptivism vs. descriptivism discussion in linguistics?

  The french academy might declare english loan words “non-french”, but even so if people use them, in haiti or quebec or so, those people still are speaking french.

  Evangelicals march on mormon temples to decry their teachings as heresy. Some christians say “the second coming is nigh!”; others say it’s already happened. 曹洞宗 says it’s brought back “the true buddhism” from china? Well 日蓮宗 disagrees.

  Linguists would be wrong to take prescriptivist teachers at english public schools as sources of truth about what english is “correct”, and in the exact same way some guys at nicea decrying arianism or certain “apocryphal gospels” does not make their proponents any less christian.

  —

  All this to say that, when christians in south korea or the us (or poland or russia or al.) hold as part of their christian beliefs that certain people should not exist, it is incorrect to say “well, those are not real christians holding real christian beliefs”. You might decry them and they might decry you, but an impartial observer will recognise that both are “real”.

  The names of a few christian pastors who have been especially loud and public about this belief in recent months: mark burns, dillon awes, joe jones, grayson fritts.

  —

  Religious style belief systems, like christianism or marxianity, require their adherents to believe certain things without, or even in spite of, evidence. In the places i’m from, this is called faith (though maybe it’s different in your dialect). One of the such beliefs my family held was: “There are women and there are men. These two were created by god as quite distinct entities, with no overlap or cross-over.”. When confronted with evidence that this belief is false (me), their reaction was to first try modifying my body to hide that discrepancy and, when that failed, to throw me away. What they could not do was abandon their false belief, because christianity takes ultimate precedent in their lives.

  It is this position, that beliefs can be unassailable, which stands in the way of religious people being good. Because, to a religious person, it is sometimes more important to be “right”, even in the face of suffering.

  Though i’m sorry for the confrontational phrasing above, i can’t manage to respond in any other way. It’s difficult not to be emotional when discussing the belief system that’s ruined my life and killed my friends.

  Out of the Ashes: Rebuilding American Culture - Anthony Esolen
• 
  caesar963
  September 14th, 2022
  

  Ah here, professah! “Prescriptivism vs. descriptivism” - “I’m an ordinary man, nothin’ special, nothin’ grand.”

  As with all analogies, it doesn’t fully capture, and is not identical to, the original. Indeed, it falls significantly short here. Of course circumcised people can be Christian. All the original Christians were circumcised Jews - circumcised Jews who immediately determined the Christian doctrines of definitively setting aside Mosaic/Dietary laws, and the requirement of circumcision. Otherwise there would be no Christianity as practiced, merely a continuation/expansion of Judaism.

  In the Judeo-Christian context, Christianity is a discrete successor religion to Judaism. Ergo, no Mosaic/Dietary laws; & no doctrine of the requirement of circumcision, as there exists in Judaism & Islam. To be a male “member” of those religions, you must have male circumcision. In order for it to be actual doctrine in American Christian churches, they would have to definitively declare that before a male can be a member of the religion, they must be circumcised. Definite physical action would be required. They would not be able to truly join otherwise. That’s what’s meant by Christian doctrine.

  Rather, this seems to be an unnecessary (I would say) social & medical practice in America. However, that doesn’t mean it is Christian doctrine. Never has been.

  Are Christians anywhere saying that certain people should not exist? Or are they objecting to practices? Is there a Christian doctrine that says a certain type of person should be dead? Christianity separates the action from the person; as in, hate the action, love the person. The doctrine is to love all people - to will their good. All people everywhere object to certain practices & actions, whether those people are religious or non-religious.

  There’s a difference between reasoned faith & blind faith. As Aquinas observed, blind faith is inadequate because of its weakness & susceptibility. He also said that an unjust law is no law. As to sex: people everywhere have essentially been aware of intersex people. This immediately & necessarily subverts the binary dichotomy. Every individual is different to every other.

  Willing the good of the other cannot stand in the way of being a good person.

  “Though i’m sorry for the confrontational phrasing above” - Absolutely no need to apologise, you’re just being honest.

  One of the Church fathers, Irenaeus, who suffered greatly in his life, said that “The glory of God is the human being fully alive.” That’s Christianity to me.

  Out of the Ashes: Rebuilding American Culture - Anthony Esolen
• 
  howlafist
  September 14th, 2022
  

  Did you see the blurb on the book above?

  “The modern world has made itself ignorant about sex in particular that there are two of them and they’re profoundly different. We must restore manhood and womanhood.”

  This man (a popular christian scholar) believes that people like me do not, or should not, exist. All my life i’ve interacted with christians like him (including my family). It’s not about “behaviour”; but about existence. Recently, all aross the english speaking world and much of europe (with the uk and southern us especially prominent), there has been christian-led backlash against “gender ideology”, i.e. the societal acceptance of and adaptation to people like me existing.

  Recommended “standard” medical practice for people like me is to let us decide for ourselves what sorts of bodies, hormones, and presentations we want, but christian parents (like mine) tend to object, deciding for us what we “really” are (exactly one of woman / man) and taking steps to make us be that way. When younger i spent a few years “as a boy”, and now in my 20s am a woman. My friend, who is 46XX and naturally produces high testosterone levels, spent 10 years as a man and now also presents as a woman.

  Christian activists have gotten very angry about “lgbt practices”, while “intersex”, if they’re aware of the concept at all (which is rare) is delegated to some abstract nether-realm. But the truth is that “lgbt” are themselves just labels for intersex conditions, things that people just are. Because of testosterone, people like my friend tend to end up being either men or, as she is now, lesbian. Having multiple boys as older siblings correlates with people being born as trans women or gay men, as their mothers become less capable of maintaining a stable hormonal environment in utero. People with kleinfelter syndrome (47XXY), though usually men, also often have atypical hormone levels and a higher instance rate of being women. The labels l, g, b, t, and i are all just different fuzzy aspects of the same cluster phenomenon: people who in some way significantly differ from the christian cultural dichotomy of “men and women”.

  Christian-led bans on medical treatment for us have been recently enacted in states all across the us (though they of course have explicit exceptions allowing parents to have their children’s genitalia modified to “fix” them). A federal bill to drop healthcare coverage nationally was also recently introduced, and many states are pushing to ban people changing their official documents with a box for “M/F”. There are also people, like the pastors listed above, going on television and such to say that we should be executed. It is very difficult to read this as something other than “we believe you should not exist”. And these measures are supported by all but one of the christians i know, often using quotations biblically sourced. Maybe christianity is something different to you, but in my experience that would make you part of a very small minority.

  Out of the Ashes: Rebuilding American Culture - Anthony Esolen
• 
  caesar963
  September 15th, 2022
  

  As with everything related to humanity & their doings, we have a spectrum. As in sexuality, so with religious sentiment. The Cuban regime put gay people (basically those with non-conventional lifestyles) in concentration camps. And theirs was deemed by many around the world on the wider left as being supremely “enlightened” & “tolerant.” All such ideologies & regimes had essentially the same attitude. Their notions of “equality” essentially consisted of a flattened out, coercive conformism.

  The Christian doctrine of free will is vitally engaged here: establish the doctrine, but in the final analysis the dignified individual must make reference to their own conscience. That necessarily takes priority. I neither can nor want to compel others to my view. That is their prudential & conscientious role/function. I welcome all free perspectives, & wish to silence none. We have to admit that no one possesses the wisdom to do that.

  I’ve known many people who hate religion as much as they hate those who are sexually different. Needless to add, I don’t agree with either prejudice. There tends to be this opposition to all forms of extremism over here, & amongst neighbouring countries. So it’s fairly general, my view would be far from unique.

  I’m really not sure that the dichotomy of men & women is solely Christian. I think it occurs wherever we have men & women. The traditional beliefs of Chinese culture have always prioritised men before women. Men are thought to be the superior of the two genders. (This was evidenced in the One Child Policy.) This is also demonstrated in Indian culture; throughout the Islamic world; traditional African & Asian cultures; & virtually everywhere else.

  I seem to remember stats that reveal there tend to be more gay men than lesbians, in general terms. Would that accord with what you’re saying? The womb might be a more challenging environment for male/testosterone production, & women seem to report more difficult pregnancies with boys.

  Much of my knowledge in relation to this area (as in so much else) can be quite superficial, so these questions may seem fairly puerile. When you speak of presenting as male or female, is this related to socially constructed gender roles, a species of performativity, rather than any notions of essential nature, which you might reject? I’m not sure if people’s choices in relation to this are determined by sexual attraction solely, as some people on the spectrum report being asexual. If notions of male & female are rejected, why then would people wish to change/alter/transition? I can appreciate the aesthetic attraction to the different genders, but are people not then attracted to this essential nature of masculinity/femininity, in a kind of vive la différence kind of dynamic?

  Again, I freely admit to being a bit at sea in this domain, & genuinely do not wish any gauche, graceless queries of mine to offend in any way. When people ask me to call them X or Y, that doesn’t present as any form of problem, I can assure you. I’m a very curious kind of person generally, but I admit to a lack of real understanding in this area, & if we were to extend that outwards, that may explain some of the tensions which we are seeing play out.

  I appreciate those issues relating to the legislative process. As with democratic politics everywhere, the different interest groups must work the procedures to obtain the legal reforms which they wish to see.

  Out of the Ashes: Rebuilding American Culture - Anthony Esolen
• 
  howlafist
  September 15th, 2022
  

  Skipping to the latter half first: for me, “presenting as male or female” is mostly about putting on a show for other people so they’re less confused and don’t want to beat me up. That you have to “pick a side in public” this way is traditionally how things have gone. Recently there have been some people more comfortable calling themselves things like “non-binary” and worrying less, which is nice to see, though it’s also been picked up as a fad to some extent by teenagers. When i was younger it used to be that children (mostly girls) who wanted to feel special in some way would call themselves bisexual, or claim some list of mental illnesses etc to set them apart from the “normal” crowd. This is a mess of a topic worth it’s own discussion, though. It’s natural for kids to play around and “explore themselves”, but it then also becomes more difficult to distinguish the “real” cases from the “play”, and you end up with a spike of children on ssris and such. And then talking about the problem is used as fuel by others who want to portray all such people as just-pretending, which makes it more difficult to address. It’s still important to do, though, with regular back-and-forth expert dialogue with children being treated, as “trans” children do need access to medical treatment as early as possible for good results, but any possible harm to others also needs to be minimised… (of course you could say this for any medical condition, misdiagnoses and unnecessary surgeries etc…)

  Anyways, as to performances and essential natures, it’s true that everyone has got a physical nature of some sort. These natures cannot be cleanly split by any metric into “male vs. female” categories, though. Even at the level of “chromosomal sex”, there are e.g. people with turner syndrome and significant chimaerism or mosaicism, so that some cells have a y and some do not (everyone is a chimaera this way to some extent actually, as human embryos burrow into and inevitably exchange cells with mothers. And then twins will also exchange cells with one another (or sometimes one developing embryo will absorb another entirely)). At any rate, most humans have a phenotype that falls near to one of two trait-clusters that we call “female” and “male”, but this differentiation is a product of hormonal influences, so that changing hormone levels during development can leave someone anywhere between the two. Everyone has a nature, but that nature changes over time and can be controlled with medical interventions. And for presentation, it mostly boils down to just trying to feel comfortable in one’s own skin and not run afoul of strangers or the legal system.

  The “gender and sex are separate” idea is essentially wrong, but it’s been picked up and spread by people who find human biology too complicated and want to hold on to a simplified binary view of sex and cartesian mind-body dualism. Or else often by trans people who especially hate their own bodies and want to dissociate from them. Like the rest of the body, “mind properties” like one’s body map (feeling comfortable in a man-ish or woman-ish body) or attractions (liking woman-ish or man-ish bodies) are controlled by hormonal influence during development and tend to fall near the male-female clusterings, but people can end up anywhere (”butch women”, “effeminate men”, “X-leaning bisexuals” etc etc). These feelings can of course also be some extent influenced later in life by environmental influences (though admitting that is again dangerous territory, with there being people who want to claim it’s all “social contagion”). And about “more gay men than lesbians”, i think this in particular is largely a social phenomenon. In many places two girls kissing is seen by men as “hot”, so that being ambivalent about attraction for girls is a socially easier position, but when boys are some degree bisexual they’re more likely to be bullied over it by other boys and pushed into “picking a side”, and so either fall-in-line or develop a stronger “yes, i’m gay, actually” self image. For “more severe” cases of trans men and butch lesbians, however, they do tend to be more often first-born children, compared to trans women and gay men being more often one of many, so maybe there’s a numbers-difference that arises from that. And like any other traits, of course body map and attraction are not strictly tied to one another, but they do correlate (if you’ve ever heard the stereotype about groups of butch lesbians lamenting the lack of femmes). For me personally, i hate sex-the-act (due to body insecurity and past of having to do that stuff for money) but am attracted to men (including trans men) and *very* occasionally to more masculine women.

  Out of the Ashes: Rebuilding American Culture - Anthony Esolen
• 
  howlafist
  September 15th, 2022
  

  It’s very true that the strict-sex-binary phenomenon extends to other systems. It tends to appear in systems that promote “gender inequality” (e.g. if you’re going to say “wives, submit to your husbands” then you’ve got to be certain of who the husbands are) or under totalitarianism, where ambiguity of any kind is a threat. Here in the americas though, things were in many places more tolerant before christians arrived from spain, england, and france and forced them to change through religious conversions and punishment / murder. In many places there were systems that acknowledged 3 or 4 sexes, or that allowed people to choose between being “a woman who marries men” or “a man who marries women” etc. These are of course restrictive in their own ways, but at the least far less so. One of the terms in frequent use by early european arrivals was “berdache”, if you want to read more about this transition. The same is true globally, with the spread of abrahamic influence displacing more accommodating systems, sometimes by violent means.

  And maybe it’s true that democratic processes are the best government system available, but it’s still difficult to appreciate that system when it’s legislating you out of existence by denying you healthcare or legal recognition, forcibly removing children from their families to places where they can be “re-educated”, etc…

  Out of the Ashes: Rebuilding American Culture - Anthony Esolen
• 
  caesar963
  September 15th, 2022
  

  At the risk of trotting out an unhelpful platitude, it’s all a bit of a fluid minefield. I think virtually everyone is awkward about sex, because, although it’s so fundamental, it still strikes us as weird/anomalous. People are hardly ever on the same page. And then a little extra awkwardness afterwards, for good measure. A postcoital Norm Macdonald: “Let us never speak of what transpired in that room again. As long as we both abide.”

  My statistical reference points were probably antediluvian even by Kinsey’s day. I think people used to mention a certain degree of prejudice towards bi people in the lgbt community, whether that’s valid or not.
  Of course, we’ve always been aware of masculine women & effeminate men, so difference was a constant.

  I read about the berdache thing before, but didn’t know it by that term.
  “Re-education” is of course an obscenity, & all too redolent of the ideological extremism which everyone should be trying to avoid. In old-fashioned liberal terms, allow the individual to chart their course.

  Out of the Ashes: Rebuilding American Culture - Anthony Esolen

Add a comment