Sometimes I wonder whether it is wise or not to read some of the posts my former students have left in various places. Whether on Facebook notes, personal blogs, or forums, the younger generations are flocking to sites where people will listen to what they have to say. In fact, I am doing the same thing as I type! And yet, does this personal expression actually do anything productive or useful for them, those they debate or discuss with and culture in general? From what I have seen and read thus far, my answer would have to be "NO."
Let me start by saying I do not believe these medias are bad at all. In fact, I believe these "journal-like" avenues of communication allow people to better express themselves and communicate with each other. What I am conflicted over, however, is the content of these communications.
I am a presuppositionalist when it comes to logic. I enjoy evidential reasoning from time to time, but if you can cut to the chase and deal with the root of the issue philosophically, it saves a lot of time and energy. The main problem is, that many people do not know what they believe or why they believe it so they end up with a hodge-podge of mixed presuppositions that contradict each other. Unfortunately, these folks rant and rave about a great many things without ever stopping to smell the roots of their worldview. As a result, they just sound stupid.
Case in point: I was perusing some notes on Facebook written by former Christian school graduates who are now in college and think they understand debate and philosophy. One of them posted about their problem with a God who judges people unfairly, condemns them to hell unrighteously, and then points to open-mindedness as a potential solution. Shortly after this post, along comes our Christian evidentialist, who does the old 1...2...3...4 throw Bible verses and argue point-by-point over the sub-issues instead of getting to the heart of the matter. From then on, for about 5 days, canned arguments, dated back to high school days, with a bonus helping of ad hominem and a dose of Wikipedia links.
My stomach sank as a read on and I left not feeling as though I had read a good paper between two intelligent men, but rather a laughable attempt at playing grown-up by six or seven fools who all think they are right. The saddest bit to me is that several of the posters were fence-sitters, who randomly threw in Amens! when they were not even sure where they stood.
If I was in a less critical mood at the moment, I might have some constructive plan to help such people. Unfortunately, I just feel irritated and depressed, which is sad because I would rather be laughing at the antics of Miss Teen Usa South Carolina-esque people. Instead, I am saddened because I know them personally and I fear for where their logic leads!
Wait...strike that...I suppose I have already suggested an answer. These young men and women simply need to learn to deal with the issues that govern their logic then they might get somewhere. The only other problem is getting people to see this...
**If you have some time to peruse a blog a friend sent me on this similar wavelength, feel free to check this out: http://www.theatlantic.com/doc/200807/google **
4 comments:
As you yourself said, the issue is not the blogs, notes, or forums, but what is being said in them. I love the free expression that comes with this new medium of communication, because people seem to be far quicker to write with honesty how they feel. The issue is beyond even what they are saying; the issue is their hearts. It always will be.
It is so frustrating to watch them drift away from a Christian environment only to be ensnared by illogicalities (I looked it up; it is a word) and popular lies. Many of them may not have been saved to begin with.
All I know is this: We are totally incapable of controlling the world around us; we can fight with logic and the Word of God itself, but all our toil can turn out to be as much of a "vapor" as the next vain struggle. It is God who is in control; His Spirit softens our stone hearts and will point us in the way that we should go. Then it is prayer that turns out to be our greatest weapon. So make sure it's always at the ready. Entrust their hearts to Him.
Also, I just thought of this and feel pretty excited about it: Paul tells us that we are to fight our spiritual warfare with the Sword of the Spirit, the Holy Bible. Well, as important as it is to know the Sword and quote it when needed, we're also to wield the Sword by basing our entire lives around it! That's a bit of an epiphany for me...
Anyways, I'll be praying for you as you pray for them. Fight on!
Posted on behalf of Franks, who couldn't get it to work {age perhaps an issue :) }
I agree with your assessment of today’s students’ debate skills but, I would like to offer two things in their defense:
1. They’re fighting and arguing, albeit somewhat ineffectively, they are defending their faith and that is more than I can say for a lot of other Christian college students. A Barna survey showed that 7 out of 10 high school students raised in the church quit their faith in the first year of college and only 4 of those 7 ever darken the doors of a church again. If they have the heart to battle, we can teach them proper technique.
2. Online discussions are a voyeuristic way to overhear conversations that 10 years ago would have been long forgotten the next morning, if they survived the hour. If you put these conversations in the framework of a passing conversation in a Starbucks then they take on much less meaning even though they are read by a much wider audience. My favorite take on this was by Edward R. Murrow who said, "Just because the microphone in front of you amplifies your voice around the world, is no reason to think we have any more wisdom than we had when our voices could reach only from one end of the bar to the other."
I applaud their tenacity, if not their method.
It seems as though two notions were going through your head at once when you wrote this. The first is the media which allows someone with no intelligence to argue with one who does possess the ability to argue logically. (or even worse against one who is as limited in their ability to string sentences together) My question is, has that changed from before? I remember in my classes and in dorm rooms where the loudest would 'win' regardless of truth or rightness. Is blogging different or just another way to experience the same frustrations with fallen people, like us?
Secondly, as I already aluded to, the attachment noting on the inability to read longer works due to a changing in our thinking. Is that a bad thing? I remember in my classes being taught to "skim" passages and if students are able to do this alread are they missing something. Assuming longer works are lost to history and only sections of books are commonly read. Would that be bad if people no longer read War and Peace or would something new come along that could be better and the replacement would be sufficient. Is using an online Bible to search for passages or concepts as useful as long as we read them in context with the rest of the word?
Finally, I think am I as bad as those you were speaking of...
Should I delete this or post it...
Would you better one way or another...
My doubts...
-in my message
-in my logic
-in my understanding
-in my faith
Force my reliance on God- not my arguements, regardless of validity.
i think you would like to read neil postman's "amusing ourselves to death". to put it simply, the medium is the metaphor.
Post a Comment