MY
Every once in a while I like to post a short essay or something I've worked on for class. One of my more rigorous courses this year is Modern Philosophy. We're diving into the idea of modernity, or the cultural worldview. In this particular essay, I bring up Descartes, one of the most famous modern philosophers, and one who believed that he could build up an entire scientifically verifiable philosophy by throwing away everything the past provided, and by ignoring our five senses, which he believes could be a demonic deception, and that we should base everything we believe on one principle: "I think, therefore I am." G.K. Chesterton, a brilliant philosopher, a faithful Catholic, and a figure stalwartly opposed to the evils of modernity, writes the following in his essay "The Suicide of Thought." A man was meant to be doubtful about himself, but undoubting about the truth; this has been exactly reversed. Nowadays the part of a man that a man does assert is exactly the part he ought not to assert--himself. The part he doubts is exactly the part he ought not to doubt--the Divine Reason. Huxley preached a humility content to learn from Nature. But the new sceptic is so humble that he doubts if he can even learn. Thus we should be wrong if we had said hastily that there is no humility typical of our time. The truth is that there is a real humility typical of our time; but it so happens that it is practically a more poisonous humility than the wildest prostrations of the ascetic. The old humility was a spur that prevented a man from stopping; not a nail in his boot that prevented him from going on. For the old humility made a man doubtful about his efforts, which might make him work harder. But the new humility makes a man doubtful about his aims, which will make him stop working altogether. If you're interested in reading my brief commentary, click "Read More" Of all the quotes I’ve encountered in various classes this semester (so far), I think this line from Chesterton’s Orthodoxy stuck me with the most profundity. “A man was meant to be doubtful about himself, but undoubting about the truth; this has been exactly reversed.” I remember in my first semester of philosophy, before I was a seminarian, before I was at the Josephinum, and when I was studying part time at Franciscan University of Steubenville, Descartes was brought up in my introductory philosophy course. Descartes’ first principle, his great cogito ergo sum was my greatest takeaway. Something about it struck me as logical, unable to be disproven, and a solid place to found a philosophy. Skepticism was eerily appealing. It is very strange that a modern man, let alone the entire genus of the modern man should find Skepticism so appealing. The philosophical patrimony notes that man only desires the good, apparent or actual. What is the apparent good of Skepticism? Why would something so substantially destructive be desirable?
The easy answer is that Skepticism is in vogue, as we have been covering in the lectures. The Cartesian-Kantian approach to (modern and therefore ‘so-called’) scientific knowledge has been touted as the one, singular, all-encompassing, most avant-garde, most cutting-edge, most logical, and most certain epistemology. Generations of intellectuals have been born in it, steeped in it, molded by it, and advanced it. It has been a ‘given’ in society for longer than any man, or even any family can recollect. The Church, however, has a long memory, and one far longer than the ever-memoricidal, ever ‘age-ist’ modernity. I think, however, that like the problem of evil, there’s more to Skepticism than mere ignorance. At the time of its birth and rapid revolution, something about it was appealing. I would propose, and I think Chesterton would agree, that Skepticism is attractive because pride is attractive. Worse than the vice of arrogance is its parallel unvirtuous extreme, wherein humility mediates between pride and false humility. “The new sceptic is so humble that he doubts if he can even learn… For the old humility made a man doubtful about his efforts, which might make him work harder. But the new humility makes a man doubtful about his aims, which will make him stop working altogether.” True virtue is relational. Not only is virtue what holds society together, but it is the habitual direction of the human heart toward God, toward Truth Himself. Prideful false humility, or as Chesterton calls it, “new skepticism,” turns man inward, not outward. Descartes decided he should build his house on the sandy foundation of his self-consciousness. God, however, is closer to us than we are to ourselves. Even on a rational level, Descartes can give no reason why we should not base our science on the outside world, other than that he deems his own weak faculties incapable of perceiving reality with certainty. In a way, he treats his own body as another ‘external.’ We think, often, in sentences. Sentences are based on nouns, verbs, and other descriptive words, that point to physically observable things. We experience existence in a physical way as well. To separate the soul from the body, as Descartes attempts to epistemologically accomplish, is quite literally the definition of killing a person. Descartes commits philosophical suicide. While there are philosophical and common-sense arguments against the disconnection of experience from reality as posited by Descartes and Kant, I appreciate the practical wisdom of Chesterton’s response. Skepticism is useless and purposeless. It bears no fruit, inspires no action, and has neither beauty nor satisfaction as its object. Skepticism is dead. It has the vain attraction of pride and pride’s empty promises. True humility recognizes that the prideful are the poor ones, not the humble. Humility inspires the soul to become better – to more properly place himself in right order with creation, his fellow men, and with God.
2 Comments
michael soinski
9/27/2023 11:02:23 am
Hi John Paul! With over 70 years experience, I can assure you that skepticism and pride are twins. If you encounter someone who insists that "You can't convince me," don't try!!! Karl Keating , in "Catholicism and Fundamentalism" suggests one not debate a Fundamentalist ( or anyone else for that matter) who is unwilling to think that they have the absolute answer to any question. Besides, " A man convinced against his will is of the same opinion still" . Save your knowledge of the faith for someone who is sincerely and HUMBLY searching for the truth.
Reply
Chug
9/29/2023 03:57:53 pm
Chesterton was a very wise man.
Reply
Leave a Reply. |
Author
Catholic. Archives
July 2023
Categories |