Todo Tiene Su Como-Se-Llama

Grats, amigo!

First of all, congrats on your grad school entry. Hope everything runs smoothly over the next couple of months.
It probably won't shock you, but I don't like the first essay that much. Sure, it has some good points on not living for the moment and all, but I frankly find it condescending. I really, really dislike speeches and papers that tell me I'm a vicious barbarian if I don't appreciate art all the time. Now, I'm going to take a wild guess, and say that the writer of this isn't a believer, and that's why we'll disagree on what the most precious gift we have is, what the most exalted activities we can perform are. Yeah, it's cliche or something, but it's also true. Art, discipline, language, they are simply a means, a tool, not an end, as he espouses. I'm not a Visigoth, but I'm not an Athenian. I'm a Christian, plain and simple. People, and God, are my highest priorities, my greatest goals. My salvation from Christ is my most precious gift; nothing else, literally, can compare with it. So, while yes, we shouldn't burn art or books or speak crudely, I think we need to move beyond sitting at the point of Athens, where Reason, Knowledge, Language, and Art are gods. We serve a Living, Loving God, not some cold, vague concepts. Let's move beyond the drudgery of elitism and disdain for "lesser men", and into compassion for them.

Forgive me, Sharpton, but did you read that whole essay? I have to ask, because I really think you're missing his point. He's talking about intellectualism, not art-worship, and he's talking about it as an ideal, not as a religion. In a broader scope, he's talking about the concept of bettering yourself (and your community) through intellectualism, not even of intellectualism as an end in itself.

I am a Christian and an Athenian, and I see no conflict in these labels. My intellect is a gift from God, and I would be shaming Him if I didn't use it to better myself and those around me.

And in a separate post, because it's a completely different topic: Congrats, Jared! Hope you enjoy grad school. :)

Maybe his intent was intellectualism as an ideal, but the language made it sound pretty religious. Again, he says that "language...you believe it to be humankind's most precious gift." I don't believe that it is. It's one of our greatest tools/gifts, but not our greatest or most precious. "To contemplate, to reason, to experiment, to question-these are, to an Athenian, the most exalted activities a person can perform." Again, no. What I'll be doing Saturday morning is the most exalted, or rather one of the two most exalted, activities a person can perform. Contemplation, reason, experimentation, and questions have there place, as do art, language, culture, tradition, etc. But they are all tools. Stepping stones, not ends. I realize that's not what you're saying. Maybe that's not what he's saying, but the bulk of the words written sure lean towards it. And I place aside the concept of "bettering myself through intellectualism" for the concept of "bettering others through love, service, and the application of God's gifts to me". If I do that, I'll inevitably become better. Intellect is a gift, one we should certainly sharpen, but...*sighs* I dunno. All of it just felt too self-focused. Maybe I'm being "over-humble" or something, but it just didn't ring true for me. Your mileage may vary, I suppose.

As you've noted Sharpton, there is a focus on intellectualism as an end unto itself which is an argument that, at its purest sense, does diverge with Christianity insofar as intellectualism being a means to an end rather than the end itself.

That said, I think you're missing the forest for the trees. Intellectual pursuits, while not the Christian's end goal, are highly valuable and much-commended throughout the Bible as long as one doesn't elevate them to an idol. And while you may argue that's what's being done here, my counterargument would be that you seem all to willing to throw the baby out with the bath-water rather than glean the important wisdom and insight that permeates the piece and simply acknowledge that the many truths the author finds might be slightly off-center by virtue of a misconstructed world-view.

The important thing to note here is that just because there is an apparent worldview that is somewhat at odds with one's own, there is not, as I see it, an excuse to disregard the totality of what is being said. In fact, as Christians, the onus falls to us to attempt to separate the gold from the dross in order to effectively assimilate the truths of God (remember, all truth is God's truth) that are being communicated with us via other sources.

Well, the basic idea I took was "Be disciplined, well-mannered, don't hate art, etc." I mean, yeah, those are good things. I dunno. I guess it didn't get me as fired up. I didn't think anything he talked about was bad unto itself. It just felt too....self-focused. I mean, part of my negative reaction comes from the "vs" mentality that he is perpetuating. The implicit "we're better than those less civlized people" kind of thinking, even if he's not directly pushing it. Implicitly, it's there. "Oh, I'm an Athenian, but you, you're just a filthy Visigoth." That's the thing that probably really set me off, besides the whole "language and reason are the best things for humanity ever!" attitude. Maybe that does, in fact, make me a Visigoth. *Shrug* Ah well. I'm still trying my best.

Postman's speech does not say we should have no other priorities in life aside from intellectualism and art. What it does say is that the "Athenian" life of the mind (which I think we should interpret as including spiritual concerns) is incompatible with a purely material and instrumental sort of outlook.

He says that you must "align yourself with the spirit of one or the spirit of the other." The word "align" leaves a lot of room for differences.

And I would argue that the Apostle Paul very clearly "aligned" himself with the Athenians in Acts 17. Paul went to the marketplace ... and he reasoned there. In his worldview, that was the best use for a marketplace. Lots of other people who go to a marketplace wouldn't dream of reasoning there. And when he reasoned there and in the Areopagus, Paul quoted from pagan authors and commended the Athenians for being "in every way [...] very religious" -- i.e., being thoughtful even when mistaken.

Likewise, regarding language, Christian thought has always prized "the Word" and "the Book." Christian ritual is based not only practical magic but on communication. The Incarnation is all about communication. Christ is "the Word made flesh."

Something I should add: The main reason language -- communication -- is so important to Postman is that it takes us outside of ourselves. Language reveals to us that we are living in a community with other people, and thus that living well requires not being selfish. That's the key difference between Athenians and Visigoths. The Athenians communicate, and thus build up a good society; the Visigoths live for themselves, and thus achieve nothing important. The Visigoths do not create a living community with common ideals and projects.

True Christianity very clearly falls on the Athenian side of this dichotomy.

One thing that I think you're ignoring, Sharpton, is that he cannot reference spiritual or religious ideas as higher than intellectualism. Whether he believes it or not, it was probably directly required of him that he not present a religious argument. He's making a secular speech at a secular school to secular students. To take that and apply it to the Sacred is a complete misuse of the speech and the arguments behind it. Do I admit that the worship of God is more paramount to the life of a Christian than intellectualism? Certainly. However, in the secular context, he has a great point in setting intellectualism as the "gold standard."

I'm going to take issue -- again -- with your points about art worship as an indication of civility. That is not what he is saying. He's saying that intellectualism is an indication (perhaps the indication, in his argument) of civility, and that appreciation of art is a subset of that ideal. To discount art in general is to shut your mind to a very broad and diverse facet of the intellectual world. Does that mean that we all have to like all art? Certainly not; he recognizes taste and personal preference (even if he doesn't explicitly say so); we are all entitled to "dislike" a work of art as much as we are entitled to dislike a kind of food. I'm not a big fan of cubist art, but I, in general, appreciate art, and try to look at it for what it is. Even cubist art, I can try to analyze within the bounds of cubism, and try to exercise my mind into coming up with criticism beyond "I think it's ugly." Context, very often, is everything.

I'd also like to point out that, despite the fact you call him "self-focused" repeatedly, Postman is VERY clear that to be an Athenian is to be concerned with and striving for the betterment of the community. In fact, it is the Visigoth that is self-centered, self-focused, and self-worshiping in this speech. To be an Athenian requires self-sacrifice, training, discipline, rising above the base condition we are born into - all extremely Christian ideas, if we choose to look at them in that light. All in all, I think you need to examine the whole of what he says, rather than take exception to one or two points; much of what he says is vitally true for the Christian life and, unfortunately, widely ignored by the majority of Christians.

I had an interesting perspective on this essay having ready Romans 8 last night in a discussion of the Holy Spirit.

My suggestion to all: read Romans 8, and then read the essay again keeping it in mind.

After further pondering, I've decided to reword myself as such:
This essay, while not personally moving/inspiring, is a good piece of writing. The author espouses solid ideals throughout, with simple, efficient, direct language. While the degree to which he and I may adjust each thing may vary, I do think we agree on a lot. I still take contention with his wording on a couple of sentences, but will let it slide due to the secular nature of the piece. I'll retract the derogatory/negative comments I made earlier. Huzzah Athens and all that.

Here's the best graduation speech I've ever encountered.

*sigh* Touche, Wilson. Touche. I'd forgotten about the Watterson speech.

Really, though, I think that in a lot of ways, Watterson's speech just gets personal and specific about the same issues Postman paints with a broad, general brush. They track in similar directions.

That's perfectly true. But Watterson outranks Postman in coolness. (Actually, I prefer Postman -- he's much less self-centred about it.)

I love that speech by Watterson; I will forever cherish the bibliography for my ethics presentation on Bill Watterson, which consisted of that speech and nine "Calvin and Hobbes" collections.