Today, Martin Luther King Day of 2009, is a momentous occasion as we look forward to tomorrow when Barack Obama, the first African American president, will take the oath of office as the 44th president of the United States. Obama will be using the same Bible used by the 16th president, Abraham Lincoln, at his inauguration in 1861.
The American promise of equality and freedom rings true as people of all races gather on the Washington Mall from all over the country and the world to prepare for the inauguration of President Obama.
The gathering is reminiscent of and a consequence of the orderly demonstration of 250,000 people who gathered on the Washington Mall over 45 years ago on August 28th of 1963 for the March on Washington for Jobs and Freedom. It was here that the historic, I Have a Dream speech, was delivered by Dr. King as he stood in front of the Lincoln Memorial.
His speech, replayed in full over CNN news today, spoke of the future struggle for justice. He warned that the struggle would be hard and many would be imprisoned for their efforts. However, Dr. King said, "We must not be guilty of wrongful deeds, not drink from the cup of bitterness and hatred"...but rather move in the "high plain of dignity and discipline...meeting physical force with soul force.".
DIGNIFIED AND NON-VIOLENT
Dr King, other black ministers and leaders of the civil rights movement were insistent that the demonstrations for freedom would be controlled, orderly, dignified and non-violent. People who could not accept this condition were asked to leave. The strength, discipline and determination of these demonstrators spoke to the hearts of many Americans as they watched with horror on television the attacking dogs, water hosings and imprisonment of the demonstrators.
This powerful strength to love, in spite of past and present violence against them, was a convincing factor that led to the passage of the civil rights act of 1964 and the voting rights act of 1965.
The determination and ability of black leadership to speak truth to love laid the foundation of a a just society for all people.
As a Baptist minister at the Ebenezer Baptist church in Atlanta, Dr. King held firm to the teachings of Jesus. In 1963, he published a book of his sermons entitled Strength to Love.
The remaining portion of this entry will honor Dr. King's wisdom by presenting excerpts from one of his sermons entitled "Loving Your Enemies".
LOVING YOUR ENEMIES
from: Strength to Love. by Martin Luther King, Jr. 1963. Philadelphia: Fortress Press. pgs. 49-57.
Probably no admonition of Jesus has been more difficult to follow than the command to "love your enemies". Some have sincerely felt that its actual practice is not possible...Others, like the philosopher Nietzsche, contend that Jesus' exhortation to love one's enemies is testimony to the fact that the Christian ethic is designed for the weak and cowardly, and not for the strong and courageous. Jesus, they say was an impractical idealist...
Jesus is not an impractical idealist: he is the practical realist.
I am certain that Jesus understood the difficulty inherent in the act of loving one's enemy. He never joined the ranks of those who talked glibly about the moral life...
HOW DO WE LOVE OUR ENEMIES?
First, we must develop and maintain the capacity to forgive... Forgiveness does not mean ignoring what has been done or putting a false label on an evil act. It means, rather, that the evil act no longer remains as a barrier to the relationship. Forgiveness is a catalyst creating the atmosphere necessary for a fresh start and a new beginning.
Second, we must recognise that the evil deed of the enemy-neighbor, the thing that hurts, never quite expresses all that he is. An element of goodness may be found even in our worst enemy...
Third, we must not seek to defeat or humiliate the enemy but to win his friendship and understanding...
Every word and deed must contribute to an understanding with the enemy and release those vast reservoirs of goodwill which have been blocked by impenetrable walls of hatred...
LOVE IS AGAPE
Love is something much deeper than emotional bosh... An overflowing love which seeks nothing in return, Agape, is the love of God operating in the human heart. At this level, we love not because we like them... we love the person who does an evil deed, although we hate the deed that he does.
How can we be affectionate toward a person whose avowed aim is to crush our very being and place innumerable stumbling blocks in our path?...
When Jesus bids us to love our enemies he is speaking of Agape - understanding and creative, redemptive goodwill for all.
WHY SHOULD WE LOVE OUR ENEMIES?
The first reason is fairly obvious. Returning hate for hate multiplies hate, adding deeper darkness to a night already devoid of stars...
Another reason why we must love our enemies is that hate scars the soul and distorts the personality... Like an unchecked cancer, hate corrodes that personality and eats away its vital unity. It causes him to describe the beautiful as ugly and the ugly as beautiful, and to confuse the true with the false and the false with the true.
...Love is the only force capable of transforming an enemy into a friend. By its very nature, hate destroys and tears down; by its very nature, love creates and builds up.
Love transforms with redemptive power.
Monday, January 19, 2009
Sunday, January 11, 2009
Vast Conclusions from Half Vast Data
Recently a group of scientists, science teachers, and interested Texans went before the Texas State Board of Education and "pleaded with the 15 member board not to confuse public school children with a watered-down teaching of evolution by requiring teachers to teach its weaknesses or limitations".
This month the State Board of Education will take a preliminary vote on "new science curriculum standards that will dictate new science textbooks for the state's 4.5 million students".
Steven Schafersman, president of 'Texas Citizens for Science' told the board, "Scientists want to get rid of this weaknesses wording...Scientific theories don't have weaknesses."
Paul Kramer, a Texas engineer, countered this argument. He presented names of 700 scientists from around the world who doubt the claims for random mutation and natural selection. Kramer said that restricting debate is out of place in a free society. He said, "It smacks of oppression and tyranny and reminds us of another darker time in Germany where brown shirted, black-booted thought police burned books and crushed any free debate."
Educators around the United States watch closely to see the direction Texas moves because their decisions on controversial issues influence the content of books. 1.
SCIENTIST PRIESTS?
In the late 1960's Spencer Klaw examined the organization of the scientific community and scientific research in the United States. He concluded that "Science has become a form of established religion and scientists its priests and ministers." 2.
This conclusion was prophecied in the early 1800's when Auguste Comte, a French social thinker who was greatly concerned by growing social problems, contended that social relationships and society operate by laws that could be discovered through the application of scientific principles. He believed that 'scientist priests' could use the methods employed by the natural sciences to discover the natural laws of social relationships. These discovered laws would be used to develop a planned socialist society for the benefit of mankind that would replace the religious view of society based on the revelation of God's will. 3.
WAYS OF KNOWING
The world we live in is largely an unknown entity. We give meaning and understanding to the world around us through subjective experience, traditional authority, mystical understanding, and reasoned logic.
Increasingly, however, these personal ways of knowing are being supplanted by science, a systematic method that bases knowledge on observation of information that can be verified with our senses,
In the 1700's, the Age of Enlightenment ushered in an era of progress through science with an emphasis on human reason and scientific discovery. Only that which could be observed and verified scientifically was considered meaningful. Supernaturalism was viewed as outdated by the intellectuals of the time.
THE SCIENTIFIC METHOD
The scientific method is one mode of obtaining understanding about the world around us. Science is a way of generating and testing the truth of statements.
The process of scientific investigation attempts to overcome personal bias and preference by a reliance on an objective analysis of facts systmatically collected.
The scientific method consists of two processes: theorizing and research based on observable (empirical) information.
THE RESEARCH PROCESS 4.
* The process begins by defining the problem to be examined.
* Literature is reviewed which describes previous studies that have been done on the problem.
* A theory, which is a framework suggesting how two or more variable factors are related to each other, is developed.
* Through a process of logical deduction, an hypothesis is developed that predicts how one variable will affect or change another. An hypothesis is an If-Then statement. If (this) occurs then (that) will occur.
* A research method is developed to determine what data are to be collected and how they will be sampled and analyzed.
* The observations of the data are collected.
* The sample measurements are summarized.
* Generalizations are drawn from the conclusions as to whether the hypothesis was confirmed.
* The theory is confirmed or revised, depending on the results of the research.
QUESTIONS TO ASK OF RESEARCH
The value of research depends on accurate measurement of variables, a well drawn sample, and objective analysis of data.
Before the results of a scientific study are accepted as valuable, questions should be considered.
* What definitions were used to define the variables that were measured?
* How were the variables measured?
* Why was the research carried out?
* What were the motivations of the researchers?
* Who sponsored the research?
* What were the qualifications of the researchers?
* How large was the sample of observations and how was the sample drawn?
* Where was the sample drawn?
* When was the study done?
* Were all of the results considered in the conclusions?
CONCERNS WITH ADVOCACY RESEARCH
When a researcher studies a problem with an 'ideological imperative', politically acceptable findings may become more important than the quality of the research.
Research studies are often used to raise public consciousness toward acceptance for
a political agenda or to develop scientific legitimacy for social programs.
The temptation may be to distort the results by using only a portion of the data that supports the agenda or to widely over generalize the results to imply 'all' when only 'some' is appropriate.
SCIENTISM
Science, unfortunately, can be and sometimes is misused for political agendas. Merriam Webster defines scientism as "an exaggerated trust in the efficacy of the methods of natural science applied to all areas of investigation (as in philosophy, the social sciences, and the humanities)". 5.
Pbs.org. discusses scientism in this way. "Unlike the use of the scientific method as only one mode of reaching knowledge, scientism claims that science alone can render truth about the world and reality... Scientism sees it necessary to do away with most, if not all, metaphysical, philosophical, and religious claims, as the truths they proclaim cannot be apprehended by the scientific method. In essence, scientism sees science as the absolute and only justifiable access to the truth. 6.
AGAINST METHOD
Paul Feyerabend, professor of philosophy at the University of California, Berkeley, in his book, Against Method, contends that progress in science has not been made by following the scientific method. He notes that the gathering of facts are biased and distorted by theories and that the observation of facts are distorted by selective perception and prejudice.
Feyerabend observes that the scientific process is full of sordid personal controversy that comes closer to mob psychology than methodology.
He concludes that theories in science prevail not because they convince their opponents, but because they overpower them.
He believes that the search for truth must encompass a pluralistic methodology, including that of art, philosophy, religion and politics, because only a method that encourages variety is humanitarian. 7.
SEPARATION OF STATE AND SCIENCE
Feyerabend states, "As the accepting and rejecting of ideologies should be left to the individual, it follows that the separation of state and church must be supplemented by the separation of state and science, that most recent, most aggressive, and most dogmatic religious institution. Such a separation may be our only chance to achieve a humanity we are capable of, but have never fully realized". (pg. 295).
REFERENCES
1. Scharrer, Gary. "Scientists Speak up for Evolution". San Antonio Express News. November 20, 2008:B1.
2. Klaw, Spencer. The New Brahmins, Scientific Life in America. NY: William Morrow and Company, Inc. 1968:12.
3. Macionis, John J. Sociology: The Basics. Upper Saddle River, NY: Prentice Hall. 1997: Chapters 1 and 4.
4. Wallace, Walter. The Logic of Science in Sociology. Chicago: Aldine Press:1971.
5. Webster's Ninth New Collegiate Dictionary. Merriam Webster, Inc. Springfield, Mass. 1988:1051.
6. http://www.pbs.org/faithandreason/gengloss/scism-body.html. 1/11/2009.
7. Feyerabend, Paul. Against Method. Thetford, Norfolk, Great Britain: The Thetford Press Ltd. 1975.
This month the State Board of Education will take a preliminary vote on "new science curriculum standards that will dictate new science textbooks for the state's 4.5 million students".
Steven Schafersman, president of 'Texas Citizens for Science' told the board, "Scientists want to get rid of this weaknesses wording...Scientific theories don't have weaknesses."
Paul Kramer, a Texas engineer, countered this argument. He presented names of 700 scientists from around the world who doubt the claims for random mutation and natural selection. Kramer said that restricting debate is out of place in a free society. He said, "It smacks of oppression and tyranny and reminds us of another darker time in Germany where brown shirted, black-booted thought police burned books and crushed any free debate."
Educators around the United States watch closely to see the direction Texas moves because their decisions on controversial issues influence the content of books. 1.
SCIENTIST PRIESTS?
In the late 1960's Spencer Klaw examined the organization of the scientific community and scientific research in the United States. He concluded that "Science has become a form of established religion and scientists its priests and ministers." 2.
This conclusion was prophecied in the early 1800's when Auguste Comte, a French social thinker who was greatly concerned by growing social problems, contended that social relationships and society operate by laws that could be discovered through the application of scientific principles. He believed that 'scientist priests' could use the methods employed by the natural sciences to discover the natural laws of social relationships. These discovered laws would be used to develop a planned socialist society for the benefit of mankind that would replace the religious view of society based on the revelation of God's will. 3.
WAYS OF KNOWING
The world we live in is largely an unknown entity. We give meaning and understanding to the world around us through subjective experience, traditional authority, mystical understanding, and reasoned logic.
Increasingly, however, these personal ways of knowing are being supplanted by science, a systematic method that bases knowledge on observation of information that can be verified with our senses,
In the 1700's, the Age of Enlightenment ushered in an era of progress through science with an emphasis on human reason and scientific discovery. Only that which could be observed and verified scientifically was considered meaningful. Supernaturalism was viewed as outdated by the intellectuals of the time.
THE SCIENTIFIC METHOD
The scientific method is one mode of obtaining understanding about the world around us. Science is a way of generating and testing the truth of statements.
The process of scientific investigation attempts to overcome personal bias and preference by a reliance on an objective analysis of facts systmatically collected.
The scientific method consists of two processes: theorizing and research based on observable (empirical) information.
THE RESEARCH PROCESS 4.
* The process begins by defining the problem to be examined.
* Literature is reviewed which describes previous studies that have been done on the problem.
* A theory, which is a framework suggesting how two or more variable factors are related to each other, is developed.
* Through a process of logical deduction, an hypothesis is developed that predicts how one variable will affect or change another. An hypothesis is an If-Then statement. If (this) occurs then (that) will occur.
* A research method is developed to determine what data are to be collected and how they will be sampled and analyzed.
* The observations of the data are collected.
* The sample measurements are summarized.
* Generalizations are drawn from the conclusions as to whether the hypothesis was confirmed.
* The theory is confirmed or revised, depending on the results of the research.
QUESTIONS TO ASK OF RESEARCH
The value of research depends on accurate measurement of variables, a well drawn sample, and objective analysis of data.
Before the results of a scientific study are accepted as valuable, questions should be considered.
* What definitions were used to define the variables that were measured?
* How were the variables measured?
* Why was the research carried out?
* What were the motivations of the researchers?
* Who sponsored the research?
* What were the qualifications of the researchers?
* How large was the sample of observations and how was the sample drawn?
* Where was the sample drawn?
* When was the study done?
* Were all of the results considered in the conclusions?
CONCERNS WITH ADVOCACY RESEARCH
When a researcher studies a problem with an 'ideological imperative', politically acceptable findings may become more important than the quality of the research.
Research studies are often used to raise public consciousness toward acceptance for
a political agenda or to develop scientific legitimacy for social programs.
The temptation may be to distort the results by using only a portion of the data that supports the agenda or to widely over generalize the results to imply 'all' when only 'some' is appropriate.
SCIENTISM
Science, unfortunately, can be and sometimes is misused for political agendas. Merriam Webster defines scientism as "an exaggerated trust in the efficacy of the methods of natural science applied to all areas of investigation (as in philosophy, the social sciences, and the humanities)". 5.
Pbs.org. discusses scientism in this way. "Unlike the use of the scientific method as only one mode of reaching knowledge, scientism claims that science alone can render truth about the world and reality... Scientism sees it necessary to do away with most, if not all, metaphysical, philosophical, and religious claims, as the truths they proclaim cannot be apprehended by the scientific method. In essence, scientism sees science as the absolute and only justifiable access to the truth. 6.
AGAINST METHOD
Paul Feyerabend, professor of philosophy at the University of California, Berkeley, in his book, Against Method, contends that progress in science has not been made by following the scientific method. He notes that the gathering of facts are biased and distorted by theories and that the observation of facts are distorted by selective perception and prejudice.
Feyerabend observes that the scientific process is full of sordid personal controversy that comes closer to mob psychology than methodology.
He concludes that theories in science prevail not because they convince their opponents, but because they overpower them.
He believes that the search for truth must encompass a pluralistic methodology, including that of art, philosophy, religion and politics, because only a method that encourages variety is humanitarian. 7.
SEPARATION OF STATE AND SCIENCE
Feyerabend states, "As the accepting and rejecting of ideologies should be left to the individual, it follows that the separation of state and church must be supplemented by the separation of state and science, that most recent, most aggressive, and most dogmatic religious institution. Such a separation may be our only chance to achieve a humanity we are capable of, but have never fully realized". (pg. 295).
REFERENCES
1. Scharrer, Gary. "Scientists Speak up for Evolution". San Antonio Express News. November 20, 2008:B1.
2. Klaw, Spencer. The New Brahmins, Scientific Life in America. NY: William Morrow and Company, Inc. 1968:12.
3. Macionis, John J. Sociology: The Basics. Upper Saddle River, NY: Prentice Hall. 1997: Chapters 1 and 4.
4. Wallace, Walter. The Logic of Science in Sociology. Chicago: Aldine Press:1971.
5. Webster's Ninth New Collegiate Dictionary. Merriam Webster, Inc. Springfield, Mass. 1988:1051.
6. http://www.pbs.org/faithandreason/gengloss/scism-body.html. 1/11/2009.
7. Feyerabend, Paul. Against Method. Thetford, Norfolk, Great Britain: The Thetford Press Ltd. 1975.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
