vol_11_no_23 by Michigan Review

THE MICHIGAN-REVIEW Volume 11, Number 23

March 24, 1993

The Campus Affairs Journal of the University of Michigan

Speaker Warns of 'Clintonian Fascism' BY AARON STEELMAN

HE SEED OF THE SOcialist idea still dominates, permeates, and continues to extend itself in the very countries that triumphed the demise of socialism as found in the Eastern European countries." So explained Dr. Richard Ebeling, Ludwig von Mises Professor of Economics at Hillsdale College, during a March 19 presentation entitled "Clintonian Fascism" Ebeling's speech, delivered in the Pond Room of the Michigan Union, was co-sponsored by the Arm Arbor Libertarian League and the Libertarian Party of Washtenaw County. Ebeling pointed out dangerous aspects of Bill Clinton's economic plan by constructing parallels between the Clinton plan and the two most flagrant forms of collectivist economic policy that have been attempted in the twentieth century - socialism and fascism. Ebeling began his comparison by drawing upon the three major concepts of the Soviet economic system: central planning, collectivist or group rights, and state provision of so--ealled "social services." Central Planning Central planning was used in the Soviet Union to determine what goods needed to be produced and how they should be distributed. 'These goods were fabricated by state-<.>wned and operated industries; all private property had been confiscated and all citizens were considered state employees. Ebeling discusSed some of the important problems with Soviet-style Communism, as had been predicted by the Austrian economist and philosopher Ludwig von Mises in the early part of the twentieth century. "Individuals use prices for information. Prices are formed by the market out of the bids and offers of various individuals to require re-

sources for production, commodities for consumption, and the prices in the market tell people what resources and commodities are worth. It tells people their relative values in terms of alternative prices . Guided by the prices of

will be given breaks and which will be And if there are no market prices, the vast multitude of participants in an left to die. economy have no idea what things are The recent targeting of the domestic worth, what their relative values are, pharmaceutical companies exemplifies and what consume~ want. " this. The Clinton administration has It was largely for >~uch reasons that repeatedly signaled that it wishes to set price caps and impose various reguthe Soviet Union's experilations to curb what it sees as "obscene" profits in the pharmaceutical industry. ment with colWhile these companies will not be conlectivism failed, Ebeling exfiscated and made state property, acplained. cording to Ebeling, "they will have a government partner who will create an " Ce nt ra I planning in the intellectual and policy framework that Soviet Union determines what to produce, how to produce, and when and where to prowas a disaster," duce." Ebeling continued. "It is impossible for any I Obliterating the Individual individual or I Collectivist or group rights as pracgroup of inditiced in the Soviet Union diminished viduals to, sue<' ," the individuality of all people. Collecceed in plantivist thinking, Ebeling noted, plainly ning, coordinatcharacterizes many of the Clinton ing, and allocatadministration's plans and is emboding all of the reied in many areas of society today. 'The sources and the collectivist concept was first put into commodities of practice in an effort to suppress the a complex, inpersonal motivations of individuals, on tricate society the theory that personal ambitions are with a multialways to the detriment of the collectude of inditive. Such logic denies that if all individuals. All of viduals pursue what is best for them the population the result will be the betterment of was told that if society. they will make Collectivist thinking, in fact, presacrifices in the short run,leadership, sumes that society is best served if the planning, and wise forethought by those general populace is divided into groups based on their ethnic or racial qualities who would coordinate, direct, and organize the production activities of the to advance their causes. As Ebeling society would assure a beautiful, betstated, "The Soviets came to think of people, act upon people, classify people, ter, and more prosperous future," said not in terms of their individual existEbeling. Ebeling believes that the "industrial ence, their individual qualities, charpolicy" being plaIUled by the Clinton acteristics or identity, but merely administration is a sanitized term for thought of individuals as belonging to this group or that group, not as indicentral planning. In particular, he cited Clinton's plan to target the "high-tech, viduals with separate, unique qualihigh-paying jobs of the future" as beSee FASCISM, Page 14 ing an attempt to pick which industries

the market, both as incentives and as information, a multitude of people's actions, separated from each other by time and space, can all be brought into a meshing pattern that the economist calls equilibrium. Socialism did away with that. If there is no private property, there is no ability to buy and sell. If there is no buying and selling allowed, there is no incentive to make bids and offers. If there are no bids and offers, there are no consummated exchanges. If there are no consummated exchanges, there are no market prices.

ii!i'_i!'~lI«1Illb:.W~-~~

eligion, Anyone?

God and the Mind

Is belief in God neurotic? Residential College Prof. Fred Peters discusses Freud and Feueroach.

Preacher Mike

on Theology ·

Are you a "brain dead Christian?" Maybe, says Pastor Caulk.

Evil and Religious Belief

Is evil a stumbling block for theism? Adam DeVore says yes. Tony Woodlief says no.

Can Christianity be reconciled with the profit motive? Has religion outlived its usefulness? Has reason's role in theology diminished? Is God a projection of the human mind? Such are the questions addressed in this issue. We don't promise any easy answers, but we're sure you'll find some of our authors' opinions controversial. Enjoy! ·:Y;:I~i,Ji·~<!:!Ji",~:t..!t'.':,\t'~:'i ..t'1:·~i\»t::r.:\\:;'!:,~;l·tZ\.-;i.~;tir,~:{:i',;:AA~;;!,J;

THE MICHIGAN REVIEW

March 24, 1993

o SERPENT'S TOOTH-' It's nice to see Ann Arbor Libertarian mayoral candidate Emily Salvette's campaign bumper sticker appear around town. One pI'Qblem: It's got green letters on a white background. How "State"-ist! U-M Law Professor Catharine MacKinnon was recently denied a position at Harvard Law School when she failed to receive the needed two-thirds majority vote for the appointment. The Ann Arbor News quotes MacKinnon as stating in response, "Everyone knows Harvard has a problem." Actually, they just wanted to avoid getting one. The Daily recently remarked in an editorial, "(Clinton's] important [Cabinet] positions have already been filled, without regard for diversity." Obviously. Cisneros, Shalala, Reno, Brown, and all those poor Attorney General

TilL \ IICHIG:\\ REY IE\\, The Campus Affairs Journal of the . University of Michigan 'We are the Establishmenr

wannabes were plainly the most qualified ... wait a minute. Could the Daily mean that it's ready to endorse a Sowell! Kirkpatrick ticket in 1996? Maybe there's hope yet. According to Mediawatch, "On February 21, the Los Angeles Times' Elizabeth Shogren reported from Moscow that 'The women of Russia are less liberated, in the feminist sense, than they were when the Communist Party ruled their country.'" Under that quintessentially gentle, just and liberating regime, Shogren notes, "Equality for women was legally mandated, and women as well as men were required by law to work." Shogren plainly fails to distinguish day-to--day reality in the former Soviet Union from its legislated ideal, but her lamentations surely speak volumes about left-wing feminism.

According to the Detroit News, "In the mid-1980s, East Germany and the Soviet Union were so completely prepared to invade West Germany that they already had communist street signs made up for West German cities." Among the other preparations for such an invasion were "cellars full" of new currency for an occupation government, massive weapons stockpiles, a "mock western city" in which East Germans practiced invasions, and "medals, complete with designations for their officers who performed well in the conquering of the west." But of course, the threat of communism was always overrated, right?

Bye, YaeL We'll miss you. Sniff. Sniff.

Do you value your liberty?

Pu bUc Service Announcement

The Washtenaw ACLU is interested in talking to any student who is charged or disciplined under the Statement of Student Rights and Responsibilities. ACLU attorneys have pledged to take seriously any request from such a student who wishes to sue to negate the results of any hearing under the Code, to seek reimbursement for damages done to an academic career, and to seek reimbursement of expenses incurred. (313) 961-4662

o ROVING PHOTOGRAPHER

by Andy Wu

What do you think is the University's # 1 responsibility? Kelly Korniski LSA Sophomore "To provide an education."

~ ~' . ..... , '-_~'_" . I

Aaron Schwass Engineering Sophomore "It's more than learning about books ... Ifs learning about people, too."

SPECIAL ISSUE EDITOR: Adam DeVore EDITOR-IN-CHIEF: Tony Ghecea PUBLISHER: Andrew Bockelman EXECUTIVE EDITORS: Jay D. McNeiH, Tracy Robinson, Stacey Walker CONTRIBUTING EDITORS: Erik Berg, Nate Jamison, Beth Martin, Brian Schefke 1---.

ASSISTANT EDITOR: Ryan Boeskool MUSIC EDITOR: Drew Peters LITERARY EDITOR: Adam Garagiola GRAPHICS EDITOR: Will Ryan STAFF PHOTOGRAPHER: Andy Wu EDITORIAL STAFF: Matt Anderson, Eddie Amer, Erik Barmack, Michele Brogley, Steve Dudek, Joe Epstein, Frank Grabc1Nski, Corey HiD, Aaron Kanter, Gene Krass, Eric Larson, Erin M::EIIig~, Crusty tv\Jncher, Tom Paska, Jay Rarms, James Roberts, Charles Rousseaux, TS Taylor, Perry Thofll)SOn, Martin Vloet, JeH Weinmann, Mchelle Wietek, Martin WiIk, Matt Wilk, Tony Woodlief MTS COORDINATOR: James Elek SYSTEMS ANAL YST: Mtch Rohde ADVERTISING DIRECTOR: Jonathan Lajiness CIACULA TION DIRECTOR: Aaron Steelman FUNDRAISING DIRECTOR: Erica De Santis BUSINESS STAFF: Jacob Bourne, Arnold Chang, Peter Daugavietis, Tori DiroIDJaido, ArTIf East, Chris Fruendi, John Gustafson, Jerry Kowal, Barry Stern, Chet Zarko PUBLISHER EMERITA: Karen S. Brinkman t .,,,,,'EXECUTIVE EDITORS EMERITI: Joe Coletti, JeH tv\Jir

EDITORS EMERITI: Brian Jendryka, John J. Wer The Mchigan Review is an independent, weekly studentrun journaf at the University (j Mchigan. We neither soIictt nor accept rronetary donations from the University of Mchigan. Contributions 10 the Mchigan Review are taxdeductible under Line 501 (c)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code. The Review is not affiliated w~h any political party. Unsigned ed~orials represent the opinion (j the editorial board Signed articles and cartoons represent the opinions (j the author and not necessarily those of the Review. The opinions presented in this publication are not necessarily those (j the advertisers or (j the University (j Mchigan. We welcome letters and articles and encourage corrments about the journal and issues discussed in tt. Please address aU subscription inquiries to: Circulation Director clo the Mchigan Review. AU advertising inquiries should be drected to: Advertising Director clo the Mchigan Review. EDITORIAL AND BUSINESS OFFICES: SUITE ONE 911 N. UNIVERSITY AVENUE ANN ARBOR, MI 48109--1265

TEL (313) 662-1909

Alicia Wendt LSA Freshman "To treat students not as numbers who pay it money, but as individuals who are looking for a solid education. "

L . . . . . ._

""'' ''-11.

Emily Burkett LSA Freshman (~rlaJ . l ~II\ "To provide an educational r · it · background which will enhance future sucess.» '. ',: i'

r '

--I.

.\-~ .~

Recently, Medical School Associate Dean for Faculty Mfairs Frederick C. Neidhart proclaimed, "Multiculturalism is the job of the University right now. tt

FAX (313) 936-2505

<"W~_'~"","""""",_",,,, «,

"",,,,,~,,

__-.,,,,_,,,,

"To my grandmother, Matilda, who ... will never read this book because she can neither read nor write." -Jesse Jackson "[T]o my parents, wh(o] ... made me

the terrific guy I am."

-Rush Limbaugh

a;;

•

THE MICHIGAN REVIEW

March 24, 1993

o REVELATIONS OF A FIFTH-YEAR SENIOR "

Why Does Your"New Cow Look So Sad? Technically, this is true. We started ety), but that didn't help me with Calwith "Hola" (hello) and "Me llamo Brian" culus either. N SPANISH, "TIENES" MEANS (My name is Brian). Because it is an No, Polish wasn't any easier. What's "have," "un" means "a," "buen" intensive program, however, it takes more, Polish is a Slavic language, and means "good" and "tiempo" means only a few weeks to cover an entire high as such, shares fewer cognates with "time." In Spanish, "Tienes un buen school curriculum . "Intensive" means English. It also has a few extra letters tiempo" does not mean "have a good two hours of class per day, as well as an in the alphabet, including: time." 'Ibis annoying idiosyncrasy additional hour at a Spanish table CJ nasal vowels like ~ (commonly the idea is to speak Spanish in a relaxknown as "a with a squiggly") called an "idiom" - is why it has taken me five years to gnlduate. ing atmosphere while eating lunch. For CJ barrell (commonly known as 1 with a line through it) In these five yeat:s, I have berome an those of us whose brain capacity ends with "Me born in Detroit" or "Green CJ kreska letters like Ii (commonly ! expert on the LSA language requireknown as n with a thingy on top) color favorite," we soon ran out of things ment. Not an expert on any particular . One of the first things I learned when to say. One thing I noticed early on, language, mind you, but rather on the taking Polish was that instead of however, was that people would leave requirement itself This is not to say Jendryka, my name was probably origithat I haven't tried my share of lanyou alone if you were eating or drinknally "Jedryka," so instead of rhyming guages. ing. East Quad's horrible food aside, I with eureka or Topeka, like we now gained 17 pounds that first semester. It all began five years ago, when I pronounce it, it supposedly roymes with Class was not any better. Though I was at freshman orientation for the had a wonderful teaching Residential College. Tony, my roomassistant, even she couldn't mate and hometown friend, and I were trying to decide which intensive lanmake me understand Spanish. When in doubt or put on guage to take. In the RC, your choices the spot, I would make up are Russian, ~rman, Spanish, or my own cognates like French. ~rman was out of the ques"Necessito el big-o notetion - to speak it correctly, one needs "ground-lick-a. " book-o." I resorted to this only after to wear a retainer and make sharp, trying to translate what I wanted to say There are also a tremendous l'\\UB:" barking sounds. French was also not a ber of z's, k's and y's in Polish, as "well as logically (i .e. word-for-word from Enrhoice because, well, French people speak it. glish). Thus I could never understand diagraphs (sounds spelled with two letIt was a toss-up between Russian ters) like cz, dz, rz, and sz. Thus words why "Tienes un buen tiempo" didn't and Spanish. I would like to say we mean "have a good time." Actually, like rzeczywiscie, kt6r!fkolwiek , chose Spanish because we foresaw the "have a good time" in Spanish is "pasarlo przezwycif(zac, pi~cdziesiecoprocent breakup of the Soviet Union and the bien," which literally means "pass well." owa are not only common, but tremenrecent signing of the North American This is fme if you are talking about dously difficult to pronounce. Free Trade Agreement 'The actual reaThe textbook and coursepack for kidney stones, but otherwise, it doesn't son, however, had something to do with make any sense. Polish are much more interesting, howhow early each class met and that Spanever. We are learning: After three months of struggling with ish (8 credits) looked easier than Russuch nonsense, I got my written evaluCJ practical bar lingo like "0 jedna za sian (10 credits). Most importantly, like ation (the RC's version of grades) which duzo proszr'" (One too many, please) and "Oczywisci.e ucha! sie zykre i zacza! English, a majority of the words in basically said "I've never seen anyone w szyskim ubliza6" (Of course he got Spanish derive from Latin. Ai; a result, try so hard and fail so miserably." I there are many cognates (cognados) drunk and started insulting everyone) received four credits out of eight, and between English and Spanish combined with the fact that I had CJ shopping lingo like "ProszEt, po trochu w szystkiego oprocz podrobow" barbacoa / barbecue, imposihle / imdropped another class earlier in the possible, completo / complete. (Please give me a little of everything term to devote more time to Spanish, I Unfortunately, there are also many except for the giblets) emerged from my first semester at the false cognates - librarla means bookUniversity with a whopping eight credCJ guaranteed conversation-starters store, not library, embarazada means like "Jestes nawet nudniejszy, nii its. After making up the four credits the to be pregnant, not embarrassed. This mySlalem," (You're even more boring next semester in LSA, I did the only often caused me much "vergiienza" than I thought). thing that made sense to me: I stopped Some of the sentences we are sup(which actually means embarrassment taking a language for two years. in Spanish, if that makes any sense.) posed to translate into Polish hearken Unfortunately, to graduate with a This was one of the many reasons I non-General Studies degree from LSA, back to the more agricultural, solemn times of communism - "rve never been was apprehensive about learning a new it is necessary to complete four semesin that tavern with your wife even once," language. Another was the fact that I ters of the same language. I found my"I wOlXed for five years as a painter and had not taken one in high school. "Don't self with two choices: I could bite the three years as a thief," "Why does your worry," they reassured me in orientabullet and finish Spanish, or I could new cow look so sad?" "Here are three tion. "'!he intensive programs start from take four semesters of an altogether square one." fish, two snakes, two pigs, and one very new language. Again, the answer was sick cow," "There isn't any cabbage toobvious: I promptly enrolled in Polish. Brian Jendryka is a fifth-year senior in day; there wasn't any cabbage yesterThe reasoning, as I remember it now, English and economics and editor emeriday, and there won't be any cabbage was "Dad's side of the family is Polish, tus of the Review . His dog's name is tomorrow," and "By accident, I found so maybe that will make it easier." Kohana, which means "sweetheart" in myself in a tavern at a mutual table What I failed to remember is that my Polish. He is naming his next dog with your wife." dad and his father are also engineers "Ko.pusta" which is PoiUJh for "cabbage .." . . This didn't ~ake . learning . ~ ~ew (of the .m~th~matic~~ J~P.t ..t~. vari-

BY BRIAN JENDRYKA

language any easier, mind you, just more amusing. After two semesters of Polish, I tried one last-ditch escape a language waiver, which involves taking a language proficiency exam. Because it also involves the University bureaucracy, it therefore necessarily involves money and red tape. '!be test costs $150, and to have a chance at a waiver you need to score in the bottom 20 percent of high school seniors taking the test. That's right, you have to be that bad. Of course, I scored at the 30th percentile - that is, 70 percent of all high school seniors had better language learning skills than I did, a senior at one of the finest institutions of higher education in the country. This was really sad, and yet still not sad enough to get me a language waiver. 'The test is crafted so that you can't cheat - you can't intentionally get answers wrong. I was just inept at language learning, but not inept enough to fail this test. So I continued plugging along ir, Polish. My professor and I seemed to have a deal. I would try very hard, writing about my spring break, where I "Go on wheels to Washington, DC. It cold. Me see friends . Happy," and he would smile, nod his head, and give me a passing grade, understanding that language-learn..illg is not for everyone, and that if I ever found myself in Poland or Spain with a very sick (or sad) cow, I would just wing it. Ml

"Prosz-r pO trochu w szystkiego oprocz podrobow" - o. Swan

' ""_

.._... ,-,,, - ._-.'-

",._ ...... _

.••",.,,"",__ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

rYo: do;;tio; he,l;k;"e;the1 I I

presses runmng at

the Michigan Review.

With a ta'\-deductibe donation of $25 or more, you'll receive a one-year • subscription to the Review.

0$25 0 $50

0 $100

o Other

Please send my subscription to: Nrune ____________________ Address _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __

911 N. University Ave" Suite Oae

----------AIlB _~bor, MI 48109-1_~~ - ..

. _.. '._ n ~_ . _. ___ ....,

'''~_"'

__ ... _ _._ ..:. .- ,..-.

March 24, 1993

THE MICHIGAN REVIEW

o FROM SUITE ONE QRR is Unreasonable

, '3"",

SORRY ABOI.JrTH£ WAn:t'l1 p.lN)y m SEE. yo u Now.

tJfl~WHm

P/36Uf Mfi •? I

HE UNIVERSITY OF MIClITGAN'S College of Literature, Science, and the Arts (LSA) has recently begun to consider instituting a "Quantitative Reasoning Requirement" (QRR) for students admitted to the College in Fall Term, 1994, According to a February report by the "Task Force on a Quantitative Reasoning Requirement," the need for such a requirement "arises from the conviction that an understanding of how to analyze, interpret, or present quantitative data in formulating an argument is essential to full participation in today's society," While such a conviction may warrant significant changes in the LSA curriculum, however, that the QRR - as currently formulated - would suffice to answer that conviction is rather unlikely, The QRR, states the report, "should require students to engage in a significant and substantial way" in the following activities:

o "mathematical modeling ofreal world phenomena;" o "analysis of numerical or geometrical information for the purpose of making decisions, judgments or predictions based on this information;" o "and critical judgment of conclusions based on statistical or geometrical reasoning" While the language here is predictably vague - characteristic of most U-M academiclbureaucratic maunderings - the QRR's end seems clear: To get students to think critically and incorporate figures along with facts, One would think it not unreasonable to expect students to possess such skills before reaching the U-M , or at the very least to obtain them from some extant combination of rigorous undergraduate courses, Indeed, the report itself states that "roughly 75% ofLS&A students" do receive such training. The U-M, however, refuses to settle for the utilitarian line; asserts the report, "we must be seriously concerned with those students who, for a variety of reasons, do not take any such quantitative course." The report lists reasons including "poor mathematical preparation, math anxiety, and other blocks" as prime factors behind the decision of roughly a quarter ofLSA students to graduate without taking a mathematics course. It then notes, "'There is evidence to suggest that this group includes a disproportionate share of women and minorities." Its subtle appeal to multicultural sentiments aside, the report's rationale for the QRR begins to sound strikingly like a call for training in remedial reasoning. If the U-M needs to institute any new requirement, it should not consist of another remedial course, particularly one akin to that rigorous psychology prerequisite, Statistics 402. 'The QRR represents the latest in a series of patchwork requirements which the U-M has sought to institute rather than recognize its primary academic problem - a lack of a core curriculum, In the last twenty years, the trend in higher education has been to move away from a core, and the U-M has been no exception, "Why teach students to write throughout the curriculum?" the administration asked. "Why have them learn about other cultures by exposing them to the classic literature of the world? Why teach them advanced mathematics? Why not grant them endless academic freedom?" The logic behind these questions was dubious when the U-M first asked them; it is equally dubious today, Its result - students with subpar undergraduate educations - have reflected its poor foundation, The U-M has realized, however reluctantly, that when students are offered the freedom to choose from a smorgasbord of courses, they often pick what looks cheap and tastes good, It has responded to the inadequacy of its curriculum by instituting various band-aid requirements , including the ECB and Diversity requirements. Now comes the QRR, and considering the records ofits predecessors and the nature of its content, this band-aid looks no more sturdy than the others, 'The report proclaims, "Quantitative Reasoning is not mathematical manipulation or computation, but rather the logical process required to make useful judgments based on quantitative information." Quantitative reasoning, then, is not a skill which one course can sufficiently teach, Rather, it consists of an ability to work with facts and figures which only the cumulative education ofa solid curriculum - of which a rigorous math course is an integral part - can provide. Put an end to the use of quick-fixes and overhaul the curriculum with a mind to installing a core, At the very least make the QRR more substantial than general mathematical mush, Require all students to take a course in calculus, or economics, or statistics, etc . Create a rigorous math requirement for all LSA students, either one specific to their chosen major or a substantive general requirement. The QRR, while perhaps a well-meaning requi{ement, simply will not suffice. Mt

. '

o FROM OUR READERS Homosexual Rights? ,r~~ ... '

To the Editor: The hard fact is that homosexual orientations are caused by abnormal environments and/or brain defects . (To anyone who says that biologically caused homosexual orientations are NOT brain defects, one can easily respond: If all living things had homosexual orientations, lif~ would die out in short order, so it's obvious that any biologically caused homosexual orientations are brain defects.) We should have much understanding for anyone born homosexual, because after all we are all born with imperfect natures; but imperfect natures and brain defects do not justify immoral activity, Thinking people have known for centuries that there is no logical or moral justification for homosexual behavior, because such behavior is a bad legal precedent. If we condone

homosexual deviations, then we mll!'t fairly condone other unusual deviations. What if someone is accidentally born with the desire to have sex with cows or sheep? Some people have such sex. How ridiculous and bizarre are we going to allow the world to get? People clearly should be penalized for wrong behavior. Homosexual activity is clearly wrong behavior. Penalizing immoral people is obviously NOT discrimination. Penalizing hom<rand bi-sexuals is NOT discrimination. Hom<r- and bi-sexuals do not deserve special rights or "gay rights" (sad wrongs). They have the same rights as normal heterosexuals, but there is clearly no constitutional right to engage in homosexual activity,

Wayne Lela Downers Grove, IL

letters to the editor should be 500 words or less, typewritten, and Include the author's name and phone number. Brief opinion essays are also welcome . Contact Tony Ghecea at 662-1909 for more Information.

Letters or essays may be sent to:

Suite One 911 North University Avenue Ann Arbor, MI 48109-1265 or via MTS to " The Michigan RevlewH (The _ Mlchlgan_Revlew@um.cc .umlch .edu)

"' '' ·''''M · '"' ' ·~l'',,,,,·_;..~,...,.~,,m,,,,.,,~ ~~ ",_,, .,,·,,,,,,

• t

.. ,,,,

...

\ ......

"V" ""'''''' ''~ ''''''''''''<''''''~'''''''''''''' ''''''\M-,.'''''1''I~~·. , .".",.,,,,,,,,,,,,,'T,, .·,T<F" ~ '

"';" «""~"" " ","r "~"" ' ~:VM~r:I~~

March 24, 1993

THE MICIDGAN REVIEW

o INTERVIEW: FRED PETERS

God: Projection or Pathos? Professor Discusses Two Psychological Objections to Theism

F THE VARIOUS ARGUments against the existence of God, perhaps the most unsettling are PltYchoanalytic in nature, for they cuseri that God has no reality outside of man's mind. On March 19 Adam DeVore talked with the Residential College's Fred Peters. Peters holds degrees from Oxford and Cambridge and specializes in existentialism, PItYchoanalysis, and their relationship to literature.

MR: Ludwig Feuerbach has been called the most pt'ofound atheist of the nineteenth century. How does he advance his psychological argument against the txi8tence of God? PETERS: Well, he asserted that "God" is the name for mankind's own idealized collective essence projected into a transcendent sphere. This mea..'1.8 that religion, myth, ritual and dogma tell us much more about the inner lives of individuals than it does about their presumed object of worship. Why is this? Because religion, he asserted, is man's means of objectifying his own essence into ideal terms or spinning out visions of what he might be. For example, the Christian idea of the incarnation is nothing but a reflection of man's dream of becoming God, according to Feuerbach. Now, what is unfortunate about this? The result, he says, is that mankind is alienated from his own essence. He has exteriorized or alienated his best and essential qualities into the figure of God and thereby impoverished his own inner nature. In. short, Christ was perl'ect; man by comparison is imperfect. But Christ is really-the alienated symbol of man's best qualities. The practical consequence of this, Feuerbach asserted, is that once this is understood, man will be able to overcome his own self-alienation which now exists, as it were, in the sky. He will then be able to draw his own essence back into himself and he will be able to recover faith in himself The result will be that he will cease wasting his energies by directing them upward. He will then turn them toward the community of man. So that's his theory in a nutshell. And of course the reason this theory has become 80 important in intellectual history is because of Karl Marx's reaction to it. M8.rX on one level is sympa-

thetic with Feuerbach's ideas, but he basically disagrees with Feuerbach's reduction of theology into psychology or anthropology. Marx was interested in the social or economic factors of this problem, not in the psychology of religion. Marx asserted that the existence of a world which transcends this world is comprehensible only on the basis of the real deficiencies in this real, material world. So, if one assumes with Feuerbach that the religious world is only a shell - a projected shell surrounding the earthy kernel of the human world - then, says Marx, one has to ask why man is surrounded by this alien shell and how there comes to be any superstructure of a religious, ideological world. He believes that Feuerbach really never asked this critical question. Feuerbach was only concerned with uncovering the s~ed earthly kernel of religion, the kernel that was in the heart of man. But the important thing for Marx was to proceed in quite the other direction, that is, to analyze historically the social conditions of life on Earth and discover the human suffering within the social world that made religion possible and in fact necessary. So Marx's goal was to show why various aspects of social life, particularly in the capitalist world, came into conflict with each other and how out of this conflict a need arose

perversion which remains necessary 80 long as the social aspect of human nature does not achieve true reality. And thus the Marxist struggle against a religion of the beyond is indirectly a struggle against the world of the here and now. It's a struggle against an earthly world that is so poorly fashioned that it demands to be supplemented and transfigured by religion.

son to deal with the inner or outer forces - he's too young or the race is too primitive. Religion for Freud is really a form of regression. Because of man's feeling of helplessness, he develops what Freud calls an "illusion," the material of which is taken from his own individual experience as a child. So, being confronted as an adult with dangerous, uncontrollable and incomprehensible forces within and outside of himself, he remembers, as it were, earlier and happy times and regresses psychologically to an experience that he had as a child when he felt protected by a father whom he thought of as being of superior wisdom and strength. This was a father whose love and protection he could win by obeying his commands and avoiding transgressing his prohibitions. So, religion according to Freud is a repetition of the experience of the child. Adult man copes with threatening forces in the same manner in which, as a child, he learned to cope with his own insecurity. How? By relying on, admiring and fearing his father. For Freud, as a child grows into an adult, an index of his maturity and adequacy lies in his ability to face life without projecting a father or a universal law into the heavens.

Freud once said that neurosis is an individual religiosity, and religion is a collective neurosis. From the Mandst perspective, there's no need to ban religion and religious institutions. Rather, if one creates a "lnore perfect" communist world, where man's .social needs can be given full expression, then religion will disappear in and of itself and have no more function, precisesly because there wilf no longer be a correction needed on the transcendent level for the flaws in everyday life. So what one has to do is promote earthly happiness - then the need for God will disappear. MR: But none of that is to say that accepting Feuerbach's argument implies Marxism. PETERS: No. Certainly Feuerbach's ideas have also been given further expression in psychoanalysis, particularly in the theories of Jung. When we usually consider the psychoanalytic critique of religion, it is not one that really embodies Feuerbach's ideas as they are found in the psychology ofJung but rather those of Freud, who took quite a negative attitude toward religion.

Marx says that religion is a perversion of this world, a pervsion which remains necessary so long as the social aspect of human nature does not achieve true reality. that caused man to create a different transcendent world beyond the earthly world in which he lived. In short, Feuerbach's problem was that he ~eved that religion in a sense was a truth - an inner psychological truth. The only unfortunate aspect, Feuerbach believed, was that man had unconsciously projected these inner truths into the heavens and thus became alienated from his best self Of course, Marx really doesn't believe in this iimer self, this inner essence, he works to resolve the religious world into its secular basis. Because this true self does not exist, Marx says.that religion is a perversion of this world, a

MR: Could you elaborate Freud's psychoanalytic attack on religion? PETERS: For Freud, religion has its origin in a psychological feeling. It is a feeling of a man's helplessness confronting the forces of nature outside himself and the instinctual forces of nature within himself He believed that religion arises at an early stage ofhuman development, that is, the development of the individual or the development of the human race as a whole. In. other words, religion arises during the time when man cannot yet use his rea-

MR: Does Freud talk about the cIffefent world religions in different ways, giving different explanations for each? PETERS: No, not at all. Freud really did not feel it was necessary to do any kind of research on the nature ofreligion. Rather, he thought that he could draw upon his knowledge as a psychologist in order to understand what the religious impulse was like. He really was not concerned with the history or the philosophy of religion. What he really asserted was that religion is caused by conditions similar to those which produce neurosis. Therefore, in order to understand the religious impulse, one has to study the human psyche. Freud once said that neurosis is an individual religiosity, and religion is a collective neurosis. He said that the pathos of the religious man is like that of a woman who is forced to obey unconditionally. Therefore, to be religious is to be passive, compliant and dependent. Why? Because the religious impulse basically reflects the need for a strong authority figure, one who praises and one who punishes. Ml

~.'.<W'1-~~V"""~_~"~'_~

at'l\lli~

# """""_.-_-",,,-_._--

March 24, 1993

THE MICIDGAN REVIEW

o INTERVIEW: MICHAEL CAULK

Preacher Mike Talks Theology N MARCH 15, ADAM DEVORE of the Review interoiewed Cornerstone Christian Church Pastor Michael Caulk. Better known tc stu-

lot more to Christianity than that. to the complexity of the real solar sysThere's a Christian worldview, a Godly tem, and you stubbornly refuse to beperspective on human history and crelieve that it had a maker." ation, and even a philosophy that I So, I think the watchmaker arguthink we have failed to teach our people. dents as Preacher Mike, Caulk can ofment is overwhelmingly strong. The The Church needs to wake up. Francis ten be found spreading the Gospel on man who says there is no God is fightSchaffer saw this forty years ago and the Diag in the autumn and spring. ing against rationality and ignoring r - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - " the laws of nature and what began to sound the alarm that we are we know. There must have losing the battle for the minds of men MR: One historically significant arnot because we don't have the best been some incredibly powergument for the existence of God Is argument, but because to a great exful and intelligent source to the ontological argument, which tent we haven't educated our people to make all the just rights" that cI'lms that God, being ,I\-perfect, present the argument. allow humans to live on this necessarily has the quality of existplanet. Either it's a quirk that ence because existence Is a perfecthe planet is just where it MR: So you would take issue with tion. How do you eYlluate tIwt arguwe see in nature. There's a long list of needs to be to keep us from frying or Kierkegaard, for instance, who. thought that ment? freezing, or there was a superintendwe must be tom between faith and reason and things which, when you consider them, CAULK.: I don't know that existence is point back to somebody very bright out ing, compassionate Creator who placed simply make a leap offaith? inherently perfect. Humans exist, and there who started it all. us here with something in mind. we're obviously not perfect. But I think Take curiosity, Our universities are CAULK: I don't think the two are muthe ideal planted. in our minds of a testimonies to this strong drive in man MR: These arguments you've endorsed all tually exclusive. The Scripture says perfect being of absolute benevolence to know something, to answer quesproceed without reference to the Bible. that our faith has to be based on knowlprovides a pretty good argument. Where i tions. Why are we curious? What part edge. How can they believe unless did that idea come from? Where did of the Periodic Table - what chemical CAULK: I really believe that you can they've heard, and how can they hear that lofty notion originate? Imperfect reaction - creates that? So much of argue a strong case for the existence of unless there's a preacher? So there's human beings would have a difficult human personality is non-material, and Ck>d, and the kind of Ck>d that He is, got to be information. time,left to our own devices, ofimagintherefore well outside the realm of what without going to the Bible. There are There's another point in Scripture ing a petfect being. we call the hard sciences, that the antoo many Christian believers who don't where Ck>d even pleads to the prophet f§ru.ah and says, "Come, let us reason realize this, and when they try to make. swers will never come that way. They MR: So you wOtid follow Descartes in arguhave to come either from the philosotheir appeal just on the basis of Scriptogether." So there's an important role ing that this Idea of a perfect being has to have pher or the holy man. ture, they're accused of being circular. for the human mind and this process of acause of some substantial perfection itself? reasoning. Now, rm not saying that it's Although I'm certainly not opposed to MR: You seem sympathetic to the teleologiusing Scripture, I think that there's a exclusive. There are a lot of people who CAULK: You've got two choices, really, cal argument, the "watchmaker" argument. tremendous body of evidence out there study Scripture and religion their whole Either you've got an infinite regress, Some have argued that just as one would infer that no one can deny and that we need lives and never come to a real, personal and you say that our non-material apthat a watch discovered in the wild had been encounter with their Creator. They to use to show the existence of God and petites, drives or ideas just arose fabricated by an intelligent designer (because what kind of God He is. seem to be on the outside looking in. through some quirk of chemistry and of how its intricate parts work together), so For example, Nikita Khrushchev memocame into our heads, or you can say too, because we see a certain ordering or MR: That seems to suggest that reason is at rized the entire New Testament - he they originated with the Real Article, harmony of functions in nature, we may infer least an adequate means, if not the ony means, had an amazing mind - but he defithat these are just an expression of a that the Universe had a proportionally greater, for justifying belief in the existence of God. nitely did not live what we would clasknowledge innate within us, that there vastly more intelligent Creator. sify a Christian life. So rationality alone must be a God out there who made us. CAULK: I don't think it's the only is not enough, but by de-emphasizing It's kind of a fingerprint He left on us. CAULK: Newton, a devout Christian, thing, but I do think it's something that it, I think we've contributed to the idea had a friend who was a devout atheist. we, the Christians of the late twentieth of a blind leap of faith, or the concept of MR: Your mention of infinite regresses brings They were very close and debated frecentury, haven't used. We've let the the brain-dead Christian. to mind the cosmological or "first cause" arquently about the existence of Ck>d. secularists outpace us in thinking and At the University of Michigan, a lot gument for the existence of God. Such arguNewton constructed a miniature workargument. A lot of the Christian masses of people just come up and assume ments, in order to do ..way with an infinitely ing model of the solar system. you're ignorant, and that the regressing causal chain, assert that God is the It was a set of gears and cogs only reason you've ascribed first, setf-moving cause. Do you accept that? with little representations of to these beliefs is because the planets and the Sun, so mentally you're a little bit deCAULK: I think it's logical. We have when you turned a crank, it ficient,notimpaired,butone the capacity for logic, though I hesitate would move in a fairly accustep behind, certainly lackto say we're logical - people do some rate representation of the soing in the emotional departprettyiITational things sometimes. The lar system. He left it on his ment, and probably afflicted idea that things just are or just happen workbench but didn't tell his with some kind of weakness doesn't satisfy me intellectually, and I friend. He came in one day 1'____________________..--' or inherent flaw which causes don't think it satisfies the average perand saw his friend cranking it, who are reduced to sort of a reactionary you to cling to this archaic God of the son to hear that this incredible thing, then asked Newton who made it. Newposture. They're not presenting the desert. That idea is nonsense. Jesus the human mind, just happened by ton said no one made it. His friend claims of Christ, nor are they presentwas a brilliant man. He took on the best itself and that the design we see in all asked again, and Newton again said ing the evidence for the existence of minds ofhis day and left them stumped of its complexity and capacity just hapthat nobody made it. His friend perGod in a convincing way. every time. They finally quit confrontpened or just is. sisted, and Newton said, "Look, you're Too many Christians only undering him publicly because they always Instead, more logically, you back up insisting on knowing who made it, bestand some basic doctrines about a perended up with egg on their faces. and find an originator, a creator, we cause logically you understand that it sonal sort of a encounter with Jesus rve been very successful on the Diag call God or Jesus Christ. The intuitive, was made by somebody, and yet this (and I don't want to devalue that, bein that regard. Whenever rve relied natiy~, cominoh sehse, irltelligence is i crude little 'Il1oQ.el is UQthing compared cause it's important) but there's.8. w40le . upon qoa~ not gotten ;:m;ogant, I've ,\'(,J.~\ i"'I>.. • .. 'J:' ..(l, ... ).~,IJ(,(,\. " .! ... 4~.J:·.Jt,. __ " . /."".t,\ J/.I\I~

satisfied by that, whereas you have to undertake pretty strong mental gymnastics - playa philosophical shell game - in order to avoid the infinite regress, to deny that there had to be an original cause for all the characteristics of our personalities and the design

The Church needs to wake up. We are losing the battle for the minds of men.

The Scripture says our faith has to be based on knowledge. How can they believe unless they've heard? How can they hear unless there's a preacher?

it,'!,

',;I • •

"J,l"""I,-~

,,·>f.e:'J').L:.i~'Lt...

.. tl'_

'.\.'

... '1.' /~I~:\!i',t~lJj'.:.· ../~...\I~,4.J;-'';j'j-t~\.o1 ':"~':',."

....

THE MICHIGAN REVIEW

March 24,1998

been able to help the people rm talking with see the fallacies in their arguments, and more importantly, that their motivations are often insincere. The Bible talks about the heart being very deceitful and tricky. The mind plays tricks on itself The challenge is to help people see that the reasons why they've bought into some alternative explanation for their existence are wrong and they're deluding themselves. There are tremendous arguments not only for the existence of God, but also to show that he's a loving God who holds people accountable. After I build a case like that, appealing to their own experiences and what they see around them, I confirm it with an excerpt from Scripture which labels what they already know to be true. If you start from the other end, with Scripture, then a lot of people will just reject you out of hand.

idea of a good God in his ~alongside his pain or because he was reacting and fighting back the best way he could by saying'Tm not going to believe in you if you're going to do this to me." At any rate, it was irrational. There was an emotional seed to this rather than an intellectual one. I find that's often true. On the other hand, purely logically, part of it we don't fully understand. Some of the explanation lies in the mystery of the human will that God has given us. It's a really dan-

There's no question about that. I £requently hear this on the Diag - people say, "Mike, I serve God in my own way." I call this God the Gumby God because he's flexible - you can make him anything you want to make him. But it's a contradiction in terms - you rnn't serve somebody in your will. A servant, by definition, does the will ofthe master. They belie their own heart when they

~rous so~ of thing, a god-

throu~h all of them - at least ill the sense of moral behavior on the part of man. When you get into the definition of God, they dedo that. I found that the God of the part quickly. The Islamic God is pretty Bible is not at all as I wished Him to be. violent, whereas some of the Eastern He makes me uncomfortable, and He Gods are a pacifistic ideal, an aggreforces me to throw crutches away time gate of all of our consciousnesses. Cerand time again. I get that a lot too tainly there's truth in all the world's "Christianity is just a crutch for you, great religions - the promise of tranbut I don't need it." 'They say that it's a quility from the East, or the sense that security blanket I'm carrying around, God can use you but will back you up but I find that the opposite is true. from Islam. Various demoninations and When you have a real relationship sects of Amerirnn Clui.stianity also posit with your Creator, He has something very different nuances in the personalin mind for you far nobler and higher ity of God. But the idea that there are than you would ever submit yourself to j~, many different paths, all leading to the because frequently it is very painftll.~' I same God, or that God used different Freud and those who would argue . expressions of Himself to lead all people this point are correct that some people to the same point, poses real problems. create or project a "God," there's no 'The identities of these Gods and the question about it. But the God that means ofgettiog in harmony with them they espouse is not the God of the Bible. are vastly different. The basic concept He's their own personal little god. People of Christianity is diametrically opposed can get away with that when their to most of the other faiths. The idea church or Christian fellowship is not that if you do certain things and abreally grounded on Scripture and workstain from others then God will accept ing properly. But in a true relationship you, is at the heart of all the world's with God, all of our petty selfishnesses great religions in some form. But the and desires to escape reality are brought Jewish faith, connecting on into Christo the forefront, and they get dealt tianity, assumes that there's nothing with. God has means of smoking people we can do. The whole idea of a sacrifi.out, but I think it is cial lamb says "If you're guilty, you the human tendency can't pay for your own sin - it has to be to create a God out of done by someone innocent, by this their own thinking. blood." That whole concept set up the • God has defined HimJewish people for centuries to underself pretty clearly in stand that God had to pay for our sins the Bible. On campus in a substitutionary way. The ideas much of my time is that God must intercede and initiate spent redefining God. this covenant and that Christ died for People have this personal definition of our sins are unique. Jesus said, "1 am who God is, and in most cases they're the way, the truth and the light. 'There really way off. We're amazing in how is no other way but me." What about we can manufacture these ideas. those who never hear this name? The answer is in the first two chapters of Romans: God judges people according MR: This idea of defining God correctly imto the information, intelligence and inplies that religions which do not share that sight that they have - no more, no less. definition can't both be true. Is there some So God will judge people without that sense in which distinct religions might be functionally just as good, or must one follow a information on different criteria than people who have had a legitimate shot particular religion? at belief. I'm not saying that you get to Heaven by being a good Hindu; your CAULK: One overarching truth is that Hinduism won't get you anywhere. It's all truth is God's. 'There's one true God really a question of the h~s relation- the idea of several Gods being up there vying for worship and allegiarice' ship to God and what one knows. NR .

is almost ludicrous when you think about it. "'The Lord our God is one" was at the very heart of the whole nation of Israel. God called Abraham out of a polytheistic culture and said "I am one God." Man had drifted from the knowledge of who God really is. But I think inherent within man is the knowledge that there is this Supreme Being out there. So if you look at the various world religions, there's a commonality in m.uch of the ' revelation and concepts. There's a thread that runs

[God is] after a longer-term goal . . and ... sometImes He wIll allow suffering to accomplish a greater good over the long haul.

like quality of self-determination, the ability to make choices that really are choices. God is going to accomplish what he wants in history, but within given parameters individuals have leeway to do as they please. A lot of the suffering we see is inflicted on humans by other humans. MR: A prominent objection to belief in God is We live in a world that isn't fair by the problem of evil. The argument claims that any stretch of the imagination. 'There is an al!-good, al!-powerful God would neither an apparent unfairness in this short wish nor allow evil to occur, but because there life we live. Bad things happen to apIs evil, we can reasonably clsbelieYe that such parently good people, and vice versa. a God exists. How do you respond? We err in assuming that there are good and bad people, when the Bible says that we're all sinners. There are cerCAULK: Purely logically, you can see tainly people who have better behavior that questions come up. Either God isn't all-powerful, because he doesn't than others, but it's not always cause seem able to stop this evil, or he's not and effect. 'The Disciples looked at one all-good because He causes the evil or guy who was born blind and asked, allows it to happen for some reason. I Who sinned to cause this man's blindthink those thoughts occur to people for ness? And Jesus said nobody. That blew two reasons. their whole theology. Some things we One is that they don't understand can understand and we can search out the full nature of the revealed persona complete, logical explanation for them. ality of God we see in Scripture. They Other things we just don't know. don't know what kind of God He is. 'The In the mystery of God's counsel this second reason is that they see things life that we make so important is not too much through their own lenses. 'The nearly as important to Him. He's thinkthings that have impacted them emoing from an eternal perspective, we're tionally taint their logic. 'The majority i thinking from a 70-year perspective. of the more vehement •• • reactions I get on cam-

Rationality alone IS not enough, but by de-emphasizing it ... we have contrib• • uted to the Idea of a blind leap of faIth, or the concept of the brain-dead •• Christian. He's after a longer-term goal, and I

think that sometimes He will allow suffering to accomplish a greater good over the long haul. If you have that perspective, you can explain a lot more than the guy who doesn't have it.

_ _ _" " '_ _ _. . . ._

___

CAULK: I think that's what we want.

MR: Another objection to belief in God is psychological in nature and comes from folks like Freud and Feuerbach. The claim is that God is a projection of the mind, perhaps a father figure filling a void in the psyche or a projection of man's self-image writ large. If so, God could be explained psychologically.

pus come from peop~e who have had traumatic or empty relationships ~th their pan:ntS , partlcularly therr dads. 'That doesn't apply to everybody, but it is true of a vast majority of those who are really reactionary to the idea of a God in an authoritative position and who decides who lives and who dies. I remember arguing with a young man one day who was an atheist and bitterly opposed to the God I was preaching. I sat down and talked with him, and in half an hour he downgraded to agnostic. 'Then in another halfhour he admitted that he believed in Jesus. What had happened was that his father had died when he was young and he just couldn't understand why God took his dad away. So he.became bitter, either because he just couldn't hold the

. . . ._ _ _ _. . . .

THE MICHIGAN REVIEW

March 24, 1993

o REVIEW FORUM

Evil Does Not beny God's Existence BY ANTHONY WOODLIEF

ELIEVERS OFTEN AVOID asking difficult questions about our religions, as if doing so will either convince us that we are wrong, or be an affront to QQd. We cannot expect to discern with complete accuracy God's nature and motives, but it does not follow that we should not e;<amine God's existence, for we can discern many things about it And far from being offensive to God, it is welcomed. As Paul suggests: "Test everything. Hold on to the good." (1 Thess. 5:21) The Bible indicates that QQd is an omniscient, omnipotent, benevolent - being who created the univel'8e and all it contains. God endowed humans with a free will that enables them to choose whether to obey Him. A corollary of this is the ability to choose to do evil. There are other relevant considerations pertaining to a theological debate, especially regarding the firat and second coming of a Messiah, the existence of demons, and the implications of the Fall, but these are not immediately relevant to the forthcoming replies to the problem of evil. How can people follow a God who has done so many terrible things? Aro:>rding to the Bible, God has killed people with lightning, afflicted them with plagues, and even sent a bear to maul youths. Some atheists, finding these actions morally objectionable, use conflicts between their own morality and what they suppose must be God's morality as evidence of His non-existence. This "argument from moral disagreement" is rather silly. It assumes, first, that the atheist's morality, which can only be the product of social and biological evolution, is somehow objectively "superior" to other moral systems. More importantly, it assumes that God can only exist if He conforms with the atheist's notions of right and wrong. This seems akin to saying that a river can only exist if it conforms to one's prior conceptions of a river. In addition, each Biblical incident of God's "cruelty," taken in context, conforms with the notion of a benevolent God. The mauling of youths, for example, occurred after they mocked the prophet Elisha, who had been sent, among other reasons, to warn against waning faith. The mauling served to strengthen the faith of the Israelites, who later relied on Elisha to show them

Anthony Woodliefu agradua.te student

in poli.ticalscience and a staff writer for the Review.

how to defeat invaders. This suggests that what appear to be Biblical examples of QQd's cruelty - examples which some atheists claim disprove God's existence - actually show that God is willing to allow or even cause suffering in order to achieve a greater good in the long run. How can an all-powerful, benevolent God allow terrible things to happen, especially to good and faithful people? This argument posits an inconsistency not between QQd's morality and that ofan atheist, but within a particular portrait of QQd Himself So let us ask how and why a benevolent God could allow such evil. First, recall that God has given humans free will, which necessarily entails the ability to disobey Him, and hence to do evil. Evil acts do not occur in a vacuum, however; they are often visited upon others. But suffering arguably serves two purposes: it strengthens and transforms those who weather it, and they in tum evidence to unbelievers the power of faith. I have a close friend who for quite some time did not believe in God. In the space of a year he watched his father die of cancer, emerged jobless and in debt from a fruitless college career, and separated from his wife. In the depths of his despair, he opened his heart to what his mind had denied, and was literally transformed. A childish selfishness and pettiness which previously separated him from most people became selflessness. Had his life continued in comfort, he might never have embraced God. His situation is not much different now, but his life is - he is peaceful and happy, and he faces his problems with admirable strength. Consider the second consequence of suffering. In the early years of the Christian church, the belief in one God and the divinity of Christ was a crime punishable by death. The historian Tacitus refers to "an immense multitude" of Christians who were slaughtered in Rome during a single year of Nero's reign. Other Roman writers refer to the sport of publicly brutalizing and executing Christians. While critics today point to suffering as evidence of God's non-existence, the martyrdoms of Christians convinced thousands of their contemporaries that He does exist. The Christian writer Tertullian acknowledged this at the time, writing to Roman governors: "The .oftener we are

do not have free will unless they can act upon their environment, and be acted upon by their environment. These criticisms seem to ignore suffering that does not have its origin in physical events. If God chose to prevent us from acting on evil impulses, for example, we could still cause suffering by hating others, or simply through careless comments. He would have to go further, and prevent us from showing any signs of dislike, jealousy, desire, and bitterness. He would have to prevent us from carelessly saying hurtful things. It is not clear, in other words, just how separate evil intentions are from evil actions, nor is it clear that we can eliminate pain caused by the evil of others without transforming humans into angels. This leads to a fmal criticism: If God knows everything in the future, how can humans have free will? Free will immeans of achieving a greater good. , ,0' plies that we control our lives and make Clearly, suffering and evil can yield our own choices. If God can see into the greater happiness and good. The friend future, however, then He must already whom I mentioned earlier, for example, know what we choose, which suggests says that his suffering was the best that we are predestined to make these thing that ever happened in his life. choices. There are a couple of responses Furthermore, if people could not act to this critique, and I will give what I upon their impulses to do evil, they think is the simplest. When humans would neither see nor experience the make decisions, we consider the costs fruition of evil, and thus never be moved and benefits we expect from different to wish to divorce themselves from evil. choices. If someone could know the value Instead, they would experience only I of these variables, they might be able to the pleasure of imagining the evil they predict our actions fairly well. For exwish to perform. ample, if we see someone approach a To assume that God's omnibenecrosswalk, we might predict that they volence requires Him to seek means will glance at the crossing signal, look other than suffering to achieve good is up and down the street, and wait if they to assume that we can choose to divorce see traffic. The more we know about ourselves from evil and embrace God them, the more we can predict about without experiencing the consequences their behavior. of evil. When we shun evil, it is not One might reply that people are not because we do not experience its immealways perfectly rational. But this simdiate pleasure, but because we are ply means that people often behave in aware of the terrible consequences of ways that seemingly more rational obthat pleasure. 1herefore, if the experiservers would agree is not in their selfinterest 'This does not necessarily mean ence of evil is the only true avenue to a rejection of evil, then God has no other that people behave randomly; it just option than to allow evil acts and, conshows that we don't know enough about comitantly, suffering. a person's perceptions or preferences to DeVore also questions why a benevoperfectly predict their behavior. Even a lent God would allow physical, or what madman, for example, is driven by his he calls "natural" evil. There are a few perceptions and perceived choices; we replies to this. One is that God origisimply have little ability to discern what nally protected humans from physical those perceptions are. An omniscient harm in the Garden of Eden, but cast being, of course, wouldn't have this them out after they ate from the Tree of problem. '!he fact that He thus can see Knowledge, both as punishment and as the future does not deprive us of free protection, lest they eat from the Tree will any more than our predictions about of Life and be in an immortal state of the behavior of people at crosswalks sin. Another argument is that humans deprives them of choice.

mown down by you, the more in number we grow; the blood of Christians is seed ... For who that contemplates it, is not excited to inquire what is at the bottom ofit? Who, after inquiry, does not embrace our doctrines?" (Apology, 50) Christians who gracefully suffer burdens that non-believers would find unbearable inspire others, and serve as living testaments to God's existence. Some argue that God could have avoided suffering by giving us only the ability to choose to do evil, but not the ability to perform evil. He also argues that an omnibenevolent God cannot allow evil to occur unless it is the only

But suffering arguably serves two purposes: it strengthens and transforms those who weather it, and they in turn evidence to unbelievers the power of faith.

~+~-<

_m+_~,<~

""<"~,,_,~""'''~~,~''''~~

_ _.,,_~w~~~'"~~".''v~

HW?M;>""_ _" _ _ ,

"'''~''_

_'liMA>:!

:;Qt\')t

March 24, 1993

THE MICHIGAN REVIEW

o REVIEW FORUM

Worldly Evil-Justifies Disbelief BY ADAM DEVORE

ommon to several versions of theism is the beliefin an omniscient, omnipotent, omnibenevolent Deity. While such a beliefis not prima facie irrational, relatively few theists are willing to say the same of atheism. The problem of evil, however, provides adequate reason for disbelief in the existence of such a Deity.

The Problem of Evil An omnibenevolent being presumably would wish neither to cause evil nor to allow it to go unchecked. An omniscient being would know of any and all evil that would arise in any posSible world it were to create or actualize. An omnipotent being could prevent this evil if it so desired. But, evil abounds. Therefore, the argument continues, we have an adequate reason for disbelieving that an all-good, all-knowing, all-powerful God exists (which is not necessarily to sayan adequate reason for disbelief in the existence of every imaginable "transcendent" bei1'11!1.

To appreciate this argument, it is helpful to clarify the meaning intended by "evil," as well as the distinction between moral and natural evil. Unlike natural evil, which includes drought, famine, pestilence, plagues, violent storms, and a host of agonizing infirmities, moral evil includes acts of violence and willful cruelty. Let us further explore the problem of evil by considering some common theistic rejoinders to it.

Wrongheaded Replies Some theists deny that evil really exists. Rather, they claim, we only perceive things as evil, either due to a naIve view of the world or a failure to comprehend God's mysterious ways. Even ifit were plausible to deny that a newborn's suffering at the hands of some villain or in the wake of Mother Nature's whimsical savagery amounted to anything short of evil, it would remain the case that our "illusion" of evil is an agonizing one and thus evil i.n itself Another common reply is that we humans cannot oomprehend God's ways and thus cannot explain apparent evil. Although it might be asking too much of the theist to demand a justification for every evil event, it seems quite reasonable to require explanations of some of the most heinous events the world has seen. Secondly, this "reply from inexplicability" begs the question in favor of theism, for it ignores the reasoning behind the problem of evil, to wit that while evil may make God mys-

terious if we first knew with certainty that He existed, evil can also be taken as evidence against the existence of an omnipotent, omnibenevolent God. Theists have also argued that without evil, humans would be unable to know its opposite; thus, some evil is necessary so that we can appreciate all that is right and good. Here the problem becomes quantitative. If this defense is to succeed, the theist must explain why so vast a quantity of evil is necessary. Far smaller amounts would provide ample contrast between good and evil for many generations to come.

mafic reverence for the Christ. If the theist claims that God could have so done but decided not to, then His supposed omnibenevolence begins to fade. The same basic analysis can apply to virtually any scenario the theist describes. Must God allow humans to be violent so that we learn to shun violence? Only if He could not or would not instill this knowledge through some other epistemic channel, such as an innate aversion to violence. Thus a pat-

person. The aggressor first wills or resolves to undertake the action; he then acts upon that will or resolve. According to the'Free Will Defense, it is inevitable that humanly free agents will sometimes choose to do evil. But as Mackie puts it, "If there is no logical impossibility in man's choosing the good on one, or on several, occasions, there cannot be a logical impossibility in his freely choosing the good on every occasion. God was not, then, faced with a choice between making innocent automata and making beings who, in acting freely, would sometimes go wrong: there was open to him the obviously better possibility of making beings who Greater Goods and Freer Will, More thoughtful apologists would act freely but always go often argue that God will some, right." times allow or even cause evil in . ._ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _- - - - 1 Furthermore, God could have order to achieve some greater good. tern emerges: The more powerful we constructed human psychology such Just as one might endure a tooth eximagine God to be, the less benevolent that we would be overcome by a stymieHe seems; the more benevolent, the ing, paralyzing guilt upon trying to traction to avoid a more serious ailment in the future, so too might God less powerful. initiate force against another. The theJ. L. Mackie summarizes this well in ist rejects this second-guessing of God's allow a child to become ill in order to "Evil and Omnipotence": "It is somedesign and replies that if we were indevelop certain antibodies. Similarly, just as a good parent may punish a times suggested that evil is necessary I nately incapable of actually commitchild for doing something dangerous, for good ... as a means. (T]his has little J,.iing such evil, we would become mere plausibility as a solution of the problem I automata. We would no longer be able so too might God attach painful conseof evil, since it obviously implies a se- I to make meaningful choices, and we quences to behaviors which wishes to vere restriction of God's power. It would would no longer enjoy the good which discourage. be a causal law that you cannot have a derives uniquely from having chosen Perhaps the most serious problem certain end without a certain means, so not to do something which we really with this defense is that it presumes that if God has to introduce evil as a could have done. that for God to achieve a certain good means to a good, he must be subject to Such a reply is specious, for it asks end, He must allow some evil. If God is at least some causal laws. This cerus to imagine two different possible omnipotent, however, it makes no sense tainly conflicts with what a theist nordegrees of freedom while neglecting to to assert that He can only achieve cermally means by omnipotence." remember that God could have made tain ends through certain means. This If the theist responds that good nevappropriate to humans some level of "defense from inescapable connections," ertheless often comes out of evil, one freedom other than that which we presas we might more accurately term it, might respond along with John Stuart ently enjoy. If God created the "laws" implies that God is incapable of alterMill that "the converse fact, evil coming defining human nature and freedom, ing or circumventing the laws of nature out of good, is equally common." Inthen unless His creativity was subject which allegedly render a particular evil deed, as Mill notes, a stronger pessito some p:re--€xisting criterion, He had a necessary means to a certain good. mism might be in order, for "unhappily the power to create a different set of If God cannot change these laws even there are many misfortunes so over"laws" which would entail a different though He (presumably) created. them, whelming that their favorable side, ifit definition of human freedom. For inthen He is in the paradoxical situation exists, is entirely overshadowed and stance, it is absurd to imagine someone of having created a natural force which made insignificant, while the correbeing upset over not being able to fly, He thereafter cannot control. The sponding statement can seldom be made because flying is not in our nature. Had Greater Good Defense, in other words, concerning blessings." (Nature and we a violence-prohibiting) psychology supposes that an omnipotent being Utility of Religion) and thus a different nature, we would could be bound by certain chains of Whereas the Greater Good Defense see our inability to do violence much as causal necessity or certain precondiseems applicable both to moral and we now see our inability to fly. tions to achieving some desirable end. natural evil, the Free Will Defense is Although the preceding arguments For example, must people suffer nogenerally understood as an explanaby no means disprove the existence of bly in order to mcrease God's following? tion of the former. The Defense asserts any and every imaginable Deity, they Well, when theists claim that God had that moral evil is an unpreventable bydo provide an adequate reason for disto allow egregious cruelty against early product of free will and, further, that a believing tha t an all-good, all-powerChristians in order that the faith would universe containing both moral evil and ful God exists. Confronted with the spread, they are presuming that such free will is better than one containing problem of evil, therefore, the theist suffering was a necessary means to the neither. need not reject his beliefs entirely. At end. The end literally justifies the Both of the Defense's claims require the very least, however, he must conmeans on such a view. But if God were scrutiny, but I will focus on the first, for sider whether the particular portrait of omnipotent, He could have created other it conflates freedom of the will with God is reconcilable with the existence means - perhaps via simultaneous, freedom of action. Consider the moral , of abundant evil. Mt world-wide revelation, perhaps via the evil of a thug's attacking an innocent installation of an instinctive and auto-

The more powerful we imagine God to be, the less benevolent He seems; the more benevolent, the less powerful.

___,..,w___

.---II1II-----..

I!I\!I.'I'IO..IOI'..... " ............_ _ _

-..~~~"~'"""'~><",""'~>,~ _ _<"" _ _ _ ~,,~,,~ _ _"''''''''...-~--'''''"'''·,~'''-,-~"..--~~_ _ _ ' . _ ....

March 24, 1993

THE MICHIGAN REVIEW

o EsSAY Toward a Libertarian Existentialism BY

ADAM

GARAGIOLA

Madness is rare in individuals - but in groups, parties, nations and ages it is the rule. - Friedrich Nietzsche

I I

ellow free spirits, this is addressed to you. I say to you that the time has come to give the role of organized religion in modern civilization a critical examination. This task falls upon us because we do not owe allegiance to any of the particular brands of Truth - the great religions traffic in too many brands, each proclaiming itself superior to its competitors; the claims, counter-claims and new, improved formulas struggle eternally for market share. In short, we are in the position of consumers who, unfazed by advertising propaganda, ask whether we really need the product. I do not seek to be crassly materialistic in using this metaphor, my friends; I employ it merely to highlight our penchant for skepticism - a trait once , considered a sign of a superior mind before it was supplanted by faith. Our skepticism frees us from the limitations of the religious worldview. All "faiths," in addition to their scriptures, have their strictures; i.e., that which may not be questioned. We skeptics reject this sacred cow (or was it a golden calf?) in principle, and in so doing we undertake an investigation on behalf of mankind. We seek to evaluate organized religion qua institution. Thus setting aside the claims of any particular theism we may - indeed, must - ask: how has the collective adoration of the "divine" benefited civilization? And more immediately, has organized religion outlived its usefulness? You see then, my fellow free spirits, why it is we who must undertake this task. The faithfUl and the pious can only equate our skepticism with heresy and our humanistic impulse with sin they are not permitted, nor even generally inclined, to question what they "know" to be "true," Since it is what I am most familiar with, my friends , I ask that we might turn our attention to the history of "Christendom." We do this because the religion's apologists argue that it has been primarily responsible for the "civilizing" of Western man. I understand this to mean that they feel religion has mitigated mankind's instinct for bru-

Adam Garagiola is a senior in creative writing and comparative literature and the literary editor of the Review.

tality - reverence for god and Christian morality have supposedly made these humans more humane. The traffickers in truth market no greater falsehood than this: look at history, and you will see that the hands of the heavenbound have spilled torrents of blood in the name of their benevolent god. Christianity, hav- . , ing survived repres.: : sion within the Roman Empire, learned much from :, this experience, and .. in the latter Dark Ages many of the barbarous peoples of northern and eastem Europe were ronverted as much by the point of the sword as by the euphonic persuasiveness of sermons. The history of the "missionary'" efforts sponsored by the Carolignian kings is illustrative of this militancy. By the High Middle Ages, the Church whose savior counseled that "those who live by the sword shall perish by it" had assimilated "holy" orders of knighthood into its ranks, and the violent pursuits of those rich enough to afford armor and swords received divine sanction. Later would come the Inquisition, the pogroms against the Jews, and the pillage of Latin America by the Spanish, all under the banner of Christendom,all ad majorem Dei gloriam. This is not to argue that Christianity was wholly detrimental, for it achieved much: literacy, the arts and architecture flourished under the Church's auspices, and common beliefs provided the social foundations for the modern nation-state. But my friends, these accomplishments, grand as they may have been, did not effect a fundamental change In human nature or behavior; the barbaric and brutal impulses of Christendom were merely regulated and channeled outward - toward the unbeliever. Such was the "will of god," To "Thou shalt not kill," there has always been an unwritten qualification: "Does not apply to heathens, hereti.cs, and enemies of the moment." And such is still the case today, friends ; Serbian propaganda will tell you that the war in Bosnia is "really" a crusade to "save" Europe from Islam. And of course, this state of affairs is not unique to Christianity: a jihad against the Great Satan is today being waged by

the mullahs of Iran; the Hindus and velopment, to the detriment of a society Muslims of India beat and bomb one which encompasses, and professes to another - I ask you, free spirits, is it be tolerant of, a wide range of religious symptomatic of a madness inherent in traditions and value systems. human nature, this arrogance which 'Ibink not, my friends , that the alterleads the adherents of one creed after native to organized religion lies with another to proclaim that their mode of Rationalists, for they are so stubbornly spirituality is supeand short-sightedly attached to Objecrior to all others tive Reality that they cannot underindeed, the only path stand why the whole world hasn't aimto god? Pray that it ply "thought the matter through" and is not an inherent turned atheist long ago. I say to you \','.+ madness , my again,religion, despite all the harm it . friends, else truly has done, seeks to fulfill a basic human there is no hope for need - call it the "irrational impulse" '. mankind. or the "desire for transcendence" as God, a being you prefer. whose existence is We suppress this impulse toward entirely speculative, the irrational at the peril of diminishnonetheless inspires ing our selves; no, my friends , what we his believers to kill must seek to do is establish a mode of in the name of their spirituality and a philosophy of living beliefs, even kill which emphasizes the individual's prithose who believe in macy in formulating his own spiritual the same god but understanding of the world, while proworship him in the viding an ethical framework for the "wrong" way. Zealinteractions of individuals in their sociots, my friends, have ,~.~ty. a mind for detail, Such are the aims of what I have which is a supreme irony. Nietzsche termed a libertarian existentialism. An wrote, "it was subtle of God to learn existentialism, because it emphasizes Greek when he wished to become an an individual path to spirituality (or author - and not to learn it better." non-spirituality, as one might will) This is surely the most succinct sumwhich asserts that the relevance of inmation of the religious mind's eternal dividuals' beliefs is wholly subjective paradox: the scripture upon which a - each is his own theologian. Why be a religion is based is open to myriad inmere consumer when you can be your terpretations, and yet, doctrine is disown producer and supplier; in other tilled from it and asserted with authorwords, the spirit within you is yours to ity. The "word of god" is unambiguously realize - or supress and ignore - in the text, but the "intent of god" is somethe manner best suited to you. But thing every creed interprets for itself then, why libertarian? Because it recLest you think. I exaggerate the case, I ognizes that all people must be free to urge you to remember the Ninety-Five realize their spiritual selves in the Theses nailed to the church door at manner best suited to them, provided Wittenberg, which splintered that it does not infringe upon the life, Christendom forever, liberty, and property of others. From Since the Reformation, Christianthis perspective, the idea of initiating ity has become increasingly sectarian, force in order to impose one's creed and perhaps this fragmentation is now upon another is not only unethical, but reaching its absurd extreme, encomfutile, as no virtue results from compulpassing variations ranging from origision. Compulsion, indeed, can purge nal formula Roman Catholicism to the the intrinsic virtue from the most seemBranch Davidians -"'holiness through ingly noble - or pious -action. superior firepower." There is no simple I have given you only the barest explanation for this phenomenon, but bones of a new consciousness, my clearly, the death of god - which is friends; my purpose here was merely to really to say, the dramatic diminution present the case for its introduction, of the relevance of the divine and absoI hope, my fellow skeptics, that you lute to the realities of existence in a will question all that is deemed unmodern age - has created a vacuum questionable; perhaps together we can within the hearts of many, a vacuum chip away at the foundations of the which emerging sects seek to fill in collective madness of organized relioften unhealthy ways. Zealotry, miligion and carve out a niche for a more tancy, evangelic fervor, and self- righhumane spirituality, It may be man's teous moralizing are all too often a (and god's) only hope. m substitute for. ind,ividual spiritual. de- .

_ _n'~'~_"N ~t!'!M!l'tm:;;;:;4Â˘i

It#W<.~_J*)\!OIlI ,,,,;;;

March 24, 1993

THE MICIDGAN REVIEW

DEsSAY

Church, State, & Misplaced Moralism BY GENE

KRAss

ne can certainly look to the recent presidential campaigns of both Pat Robertson and Patrick Buchanan to see the way in which religion and politics in the 1990s continue to be intimately associated, despite this country's ostensible separation of Church and State. Indeed, a strong religiosity is evident in the major parties' conventions, albeit more subtly, in order to appeal to mass audiences of voters. While this element of religion, or more specifically Protestanism, may appeal to the majority, the Constitution provides protections for those outside the mainstream. It is therefore important to ask whether the religious proclivities of our elected legislators have grown too influential in determining public policy. Historically, one can see the inherent bias of a society which overtly determines its laws based on the word of GOO. For example, the Massachusetts Bay Colony was ruled in an iron-banded m3nner accordin2 to Puritan mores. Punishments for non-believers ranged from fmes, to banishment, to death. Even laughing was frowned upon by the grim Puritans, who settled in America so that they might have religious freedom. Over two centuries later, while overly-zealous religious rule ~as.long s~ce ceased to eX1st ill Amenca, our laws are still influenced by such religious mores, but in a more subtle manner. Today we have the Religious Right, a powerful coalition of religious figureheads and prominent Republicans, which aims for a cultural revolution in America. It attributes crime, drug abuse, low scores on standardized tests, and illiteracy, among other problems, to poor family values. Those espousing the rhetoric of "family values" rarely specify what these values are, yet religious leaders and politicians alike push for them while denouncing homosexuality, divorce, abortion, and other "ills" which they believe threaten our society's very core. It may be debatable whether one should find in this mentality the germ of a serious threat to the separation of Church and State. Yet those who find that their religious beliefs do not accord with those of these petty, would-

be theocrats must, for their own sakes, remain eternally vigilant in this regard. It is likely that most oftoday's politicians - Republicans, Democnlts, and others alike - were raised in religious households. Even current President'Bill Clinton, denounced by certain congregations as a "sinner," holds religious views. The Framers of the Constitution, who created the freedom of exercise clause, held strong religious views. The problem today, however, does not consist simply of those who hold such views. Rather, the problem lies in individuals who would deny others the right to practice their religious beliefs, even though these practices do not infringe on others' rights.

The war on drugs and religion A 1991 Supreme Court decision struck down the right of American Indians to practice a sacrament requiring the use of peyote, an organic hallucinogenic drug. This practice, according to the majority opinion, violated federal drug laws. Religioufl praMkes, RCCOMing to the Court, should not violate laws. But what is the basis for such laws? The problem here is not that the Bible explicitly condemns peyote; rather, the

one construe an involuntary human sacrifice as a necessary aspect of a religious practice? Here it seems reasonable to limit one person's liberty to practice religion in cases where it would infringe upon another's rights. The ceremonial use of peyote , however, hardly falls under this rubric.

man body is sacred and should not be violated. The Bible also speaks ofhuman lives as being the property of God. But as many Christians assert, an individual's actions and his morality are between him and God. The law against suicide, extends the State's authority unduly and interpose the state between man and God. Even if God has given man responsibility for social justice, this responsibility does not confer unlimited (moral) authority upon the state. Some might religiously oppose Kevorkian on the grounds that suffering is good for the soul or perhaps a teet of faith. Again, whatever one thinks of such beliefs, it is plainly inappropriate to force another to suffer unwillingly on the basis of one's own theological views. In a sense, such "exercises" of one's religious views begin to interfere with others' liberties.

Consenting Adults and State-approved Marriages Though it is currently illegal in the United States, marriage to more than one spouse is allowed by the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints, better known as the Mormons. Typically, polygamists are men who have mul- i tiple wives, though in theory it could allow women to have multiple husbands. Even in the Mormon community centered in Utah the practice of polygamy tends to be limited. The lawenforcement offices of these communities often ignore federal laws and allow the practice of polygamy. Victimless crimes What harm, however, results from Activities such as gambling, prostitution, and drug use are often referred polygamist relationships? If the participants are consenting adults, why .J-'f as "victimless crimes" by those who should this practice be prohibited? 'The wish to relegalize them Sum tf'nninolChristian tradition ofmamage between ogy emphasizes that the only people one man and one woman has created "hurt" by these activities in themselves the cultural mores influencing laws are those ~ho engage in these pracagainst polygamy and intruding upon tices. Others may be harmed, of oourse, the lives of non-Christians. by a drunk driver; but in that case, the activity's wrongness resides not in the Suicide and drinking but in the harming of others. doctor-assisted suicide The state can legitimately penalize someone for harming another person; Th~re can be no decision more IDlportant and final than in general, however, it ought not seek (on moral grounds) to save individuals ending one's own life. But that from themselves. suicide has been made illegal is not only laughable, but also One can accept this view yet believe tragic. that a victimless crime is wrong beSince Dr. Jack Kevorkian stepped up cause it is detrimental to society as a his practice of assisting suicides, the whole and burdensome to the state in Michigan legislature has all but devirtue of its effects on individuals' voted itself to putting him in jail. Evhealth. An argument for regulation erything negative that could be said based on such an assumption, however, about him was, including a lawyer call- I may advance itself without relying upon ing him "Jeffrey Dahmer in a lab coat." : religion. The overtly moralistic alterThe unorthodox nature of Kevorkian's native needlessly mixes church and practice and prevailing religious be- i state. liefs seem to be the main reasons for I this opposition. Toward principled individualism Opinions on the morality of certain On a recent CNN Crossfire, conservative troubleshooter Pat Buchanan behaviors - where harm to others is and a guest debated this issue against not an issue - are too contentious to the husband of one of Kevorkian's ear- rely upon when determining legislalier patients. When the husband asked tion. It is not the business of those who the guest whether her religious beliefs want to "save souls" to decide that achold her to her anti-Kevorkian positions which violate their moral codes tion, she answered, "Yes, and I make no should be illegal If they want to spread apologies for this." Whatever one thinks their moral beliefs, their efforts would of her belief, surely such eagerness to be better spent convincing others from impose her morality upon others must behind the pulpit rather than from bebe seen as a threat to individual liberty. hind the judge's bench. m Acc!)rding to Chri~tia.nit;.y, the hu-

I t is not the business of those who

want to "save souls" to decide that actions which violate their al d h Id bOll I mor CO es s ou e 1 ega.

Gene Krass is a freshman in biology and a staff writer for the Review.

problem arises because the use of peyote is not part of a sacrament-in Judeo-Christian religious practices. Due to the origins of America's culture, however, the law tends to conform with Judeo--Christian theology, not with American Indian theology. No one took into consideration American Indians' religious practices when constructing drug laws. Rather, their religious practices were ignored in favor of someone else's. Clearly, this is a case in which freedom of religion has been ignored. No one is forred to ingest peyote and those who do not use it are not harmed by it. In fact, even those who use it for religious purposes do not use it when it is not needed. This kind of uncommon practice is exactly what is protected under the First Amendment. Some might worry that such a liberality toward religious practices might entail absurd results. Might not some-

--~~~,,++~~

<"禄~'''~<''''路>'_'~''

"'''''''''''''''~'''m<ffffffM~

m'""''''-......

''''''<~'''''''''

..' ' - -..- -_ _ _ _ __ ~

..路'"'''..._ _ _ _...._ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __

''''''''''~V_~M~_

THE MICHIGAN REVIEW

March 24, 1993

o FEATURE EsSAY

Religion Thrives on Campus BY JAMES A RoBERTS,

"way to God is through Christ," and that they «must turn from sin to Jesus Cluist." Guarisco insists that it is inadequate simply to believe in Christ; Cluistianity is «more than just [attending] church." Indeed, there is no such thing as a "Sunday Christian" or a "Christian by practice." True Christianity is a total commitment to follow

N SOME RESPECTS, IT CAN be said that the University of Michigan campus represents amicrocoem of American society. As in the United States, religious diversity, aIthough not visibly apparent, is quite pronounced at the U-M. A multitude of religious groups are active on campus and represent a wide variety of faiths . Despite this diversity, however: the individuals repn:sentingeach group are runfied in how they view their religion as it relates to their everyday lives. One of the largest and most widely represented religious communities on campus is that of Christianity. As Neno Guarisco, an intern with the campus group Christians In Action, explains, the true Christian must develop a "relationship with Christ," for He is the son of God. Christians believe that the

or electricity. Although these laws may seem quite strict, they allow for the "opening up of new channels in life," bringing Jews closer to God. In addition to Christianity and Judaism, the religion of Islam is also present on campus. As explained by Kamran Bajwa of the Islamic Circle, this particular faith focuses upon the teachings of Mohammed as well as the word of Allah, as documented in the Koran. Bajwa emphasizes that the Islamic people are dedicated to following these teachings. They provide a "comn~e, t:hls p~cular o~plete code on how to live." Islam is a gamzatlon, like the African Christian Fellowship, unique "way of life," and this code "covis centered around the ers every aspect of everyday life - 24 teachings of Christ, not one particular hours a day, seven days a week." Beculture. Kim reiterates what the other cause "everything falls under this code Christian representatives state, emof religion," he says, the Islamic people phasizing that Christians must do more are constantly challenged. to "live like than simply attend a church service Mohammed lived." The various aforementioned religious once a week; they must make Christ "their number one priority in life." In groups, as well as those people reprethis manner, all Christians, regardless senting each, exemplify the religious of their ethnic or cultural background, diversity of the U-M student body. The U-M celebrates this diversity extenare united by their commitment to foIlow the life of Jesus Christ. - ' sively, boasting of its "multicultural" campus. Ironically, each group is quite I Judaism is also represented on camsimilar in one important aspect - the I pus. As Brian Gastman of the Jewish . Student Network explains, Judaism way in which each views the relationship between relifocuses primarily upon the laws and , - - - - - - - - - - - -- ---, gion and their everyday lives. commandments of I. God. The Jewish All believe that people are dedi0 religion is an actual way of life, cated to the passage of their laws, either that it embodies spoken or recorded much more than in the Torah or varijust attending relious other books, and traditions from gious services or affirming that one generation to generation. Gastman accepts a certain belief. They tend to : stresses, however, that his descripti9n also express some concern for any sociis a much simplified one, for Judaism is ety that lacks religious principles. I a very detailed and complex religion. Chibuzor Ozor observes that many He emphasizes that the details of the people have abandoned religious prinJewish religion are really its true esciples and are "carried away with curI sence. rent events." As a result, people "do not Judaism calls for the dedication of love their enemies; they kill them." In one's life to learning and living by the this respect, many of the organizations laws of God. These laws and traditions elevate religion, a rather personal asmust be applied to everyday life, repect of one's life, to a more universal Active Christians, in fact, are practicing something much more than a religion; they are a "Biblical-minded people" who have "based their lives upon the teachings of Christ." Ozor stresses that Christianity is an actual way of life, "centered on the message of Cluist," that permeates any cultural or ethnic barriers that may exist. John Kim of the Korean Campus Crusade for Christ agrees with this assessment. Despite its

Christians must do more than simI tte d h h pya n a c urc servIce once a week; they must make Christ "their b O o t y 0 l0.t' " num er one pnon In he. 0

the teachings of Christ each day. .Tun Kuiech, a staff member of Christians In Action, echoes this sentiment. Christians, he says, must "live out their beliefs on a day-to-day basis." Just as it is one of the largest communities on campus, the Cluistian community is also one of the most ethnically diverse. Yet as Chibuzor Ozor of the African Cluistian Fellowship points out, Christianity is not a culture, nor can it be adapted to anyone culture.

Ja.m.u A. Roberts, II is a freshman in LSA and a staff writer for the Review.

OtTers To Warm You Up

1 '

Islam ... focuses upon the te ac hi ngs f Mohammed as well as the word of Allah.

'-...,.''''''''''''''....' ....... _ _ _

"'.'•..,'''•.'<_

role. Religious faith does not merely ensure one's personal salvation; more broadly, some students are saying, it is the moral law upon which all prosperous societies are built. ~

...

.'w,·" _.,..._,.."..'.....,..., ..,····,o<"

995 .. 9101 .. "

Lbplmrmmunttobt" .

Since 1948

North Campus ••927 Maiden lAn,

stead, one "bend technology to fit God's law." Because "every little I detail is important," many of the more conservative Jews, among other things, remain kosher and follow the traditional Sabbath restrictions of no travel "

-,~'lnn 769-5555 'l'iZZci

Central Campus--546 PackardIHill

Io'

EqlntAprll7,1m

----------- ---------8. '

The Jewish people are dedicated to the passage of their laws, either spoken or recorded in the Torah or various other books. mustl . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .__~

"'''''' .....

~essofhowWf- ~------------------------------------~

ficult or sacrificial ' this may be. C.;.ustman states that one must not "bend what God said for [the sake of] technology;" in-

II ~~ Valid only at PackardlIDll I and Broadway locaUons. II . Not valid with other offers. I tII:::. One coupon per PIzza. II Sia 1~ fr&l,Q Limited delivery area. I .J L LII _ _ _ _ EqlntAprll7,l993 .J

Val id onl y at PackardIHili and Broadway locations. Not . .v• Iid with other offers. ~. One coupon per pizza, rllZQ limIted delivery area.

SiICt l~

(plus ...).

$8.95

:@m I ~~

I I

(plus lax).

A large deep dish or round pizza with cheese and one topping only

: $5.95

II II

A medium deep dish or round pizza with cheese and one topping only

I I

. •_

_ _ _ _ _ _ _...._

_ _ _ _ _ _ __

"'..' :: ?" ~'lj?t:,l""x·!r'rr-'-·T"',"·

March 24, 1993

· -:·"j""'!:i·'r.it:.~;:,·r:::!rrt:~<:V;··'-· ~"j ' "

THE MICHIGAN REVIEW

"~'~:~'

o BOOK REVIEW

When the State's Help Hurts BY JOE COLETTI

Soviet Empire. Here Neuhaus pays particular attention to the role of the HE SERIOUS CONSIDERPope in providing hope to the people of ation of a papal document among Eastern Europe. He also notes some of the popular American media is the more heinous aspects of Commualmost as rare as the collapse of an nism while emphasizing the Pope's conempire. In the last four years, however, demnation of retributive acts. John Paul the world has witnessed the coinciding and Neuhaus correctly emphasize the of both. 'This is no mere coincidence, for importance of the old guard's role in the message of Pope John Paul II was a building a new system. key factor in the fall of the Soviet EmNeuhaus' subsequent elaboration of the Pope's arguments is insightful, as is his examination of the encyclical's Doing Well and Doing Good: implications for social change in develThe Challenge to the oped and developing countries. Christian Capitalist One of the fundamental elements in the papal vision presented in Richard John Neuhaus Centesimus, according to Neuhaus, is Doubleday an idea stated by the seventeenth-cenHardcover, 304 pages tury Puritan preacher Joseph Hall: "God loveth adverbs; and cares not how good $22.00 but how well." Here, as elsewhere, pire, and it was in response to the new Neuhaus cites some very diverse order resulting from this collapse that sources. His arguments at points resoJohn Paul wrote Centesimus Annus nate with Frederick von Hayek, Joseph (The Hundredth Year). Schumpeter, Soren Kierkegaard, and, Writing Centesimus, John Paul not shockingly enough, even Nietzsche. Once one takes Hall's view of proper only saw, as many now have, that socialism is inviable, but he also peraction, the life of John D. Rockefeller ceived that a market-oriented economy does not seem so contradictory. provides the best setting for all men Rockefeller was a practicing Christian and women to fulfill their potential as who regularly went to church and read humans. In affirming capitalism (within the Bible. He humbly stated once, "God moral limits), the Pope also pronounced gave me my money," meaning that he resoundingly in favor of democratic had worked within God's grace for all government. his gains. Neuhaus does not see the In Doing WeU and Doing Good, RichPope objecting to this view of how people ard John Neuhaus explicates the Pope's can justly attain wealth. encyclical and places it in the context of Consider, for instance, the wonderthe papacy's ongoing teaching mission. ful example of the ethos that ''God loveth This book, like the Pope's encyclical, adverbs" presented in the movie Chanrepresents an important step toward ots of Fire. One of the runners in the reintroducing morality into economics movie is a Christian whose sister urges and politics. him to give up running and "please Neuhaus, editor of First Things: A God" through missionary work. He reMonthly Journal of Religion and Pubplies, "Sister, God made me. And God lic Life and an occasional contributor to made me strong. I feel his pleasure the Wall Street Journal, begins by clariwhen I run." If a person does not feel fying his terminology. Society, in his God's pleasure in what he is doing, lexicon, is not monolithic "Society" but either he is doing the wrong task or he rather a multifarious, pluralistic orgais not doing the task well. nization. He uses John Paul's phrase The previously stated vision of soci"subjectivity of society" to emphasize ety as composed of subjects is not quite that people are not objects acted upon complete. Society is also a collection of by Society; instead, by their actions organizations - what the Pope calls people define society. "intermediary groups" - such Neuhaus proceeds to discuss Cathoas businesses, schools, communities, lic social teaching and its role in society churches, and families that separate to the present These first four chapters . the individual from the superstructure are intended to defme the setting for of the state. This view of society is Centesimus. similar to that of Peter Drucker's vision His fifth chapter explores the events of a "society of organizations." surrounding the 1989 revolution in the These groups make life bearable simply by existing in the huge space that Joe Coletti is a senior in Asian studies separates the individual from the state. and an executive editor emeritus of the It is in these groups that one becomes Review. human and a member , ~f society.

'".

Neuhaus notes, "Here [John Paul's] argument is similar to the well-known claim of Edmund Bmke: To be attached to the subdivision, to love the little platoon we belong to in society, is the first principle (the germ as it were) of public affection.'"

Among these "intermediary groups," the most important is the family. In the United States, Senator Daniel Patrick Moynihan and William Bennett, among others, have realized that the major failure of the last thirty years has been the destruction of the family. These men have joined the Pope in recognizing that "The first and fundamental structure for 'human ecology' is the family, in which man receives his first formative ideas about truth and goodness, and learns what it means to love and to be loved, and thus what it means to be a person." Neuhaus states that the challenge facing us in this area is that "we cannot know if the institution of the family can be reestablished." He continues, "It is, for the most part, not a matter ofreviving the institution but of reintroducing it. In many cases, there is now a second and third generation that does not remember it, although they do occasionally watch functioning families on television." The breakdown of the family is particularly troublesome in the innercities. Neuhaus finds John Paul holding the state responsible. Government's role in Centesimus is as umpire - setting the rules and ensuring that they are obeyed. The state's purpose, Pope Leo XIII declared in Rerum Novarum (The New Things) in terms strikingly similar to those used by Frederic Bastiat in The Law, is to uphold the law of society. Neuhaus notes, "The key presupposition ... is that society is prior to the state - prior in terms of both time and dignity." Indeed, "[S]ociety is 'We the people.' The state is. not 'We the .

• •_

,~",,,~,.,,

'.(

. :i. f . "

people,' and 'We the people' are not the state." Paradoxically, it is precisely when the state takes upon itself the roles rightly belonging to other institutions within society that it undermines its own authority. This is what the state did to the family. Government programs, according to Neuhaus, focus on the people's pathologies rather than their potential. Having "identified" L~e problems afflicting many families, people in the government saw the problems offamilies and attempted to solve them by taking more of the responsibilities that had belonged to the family. The call in Centesimus, then, is for a more restrained government; a proper respect for the other institutions in society, particularly the family; and an emphasis on the potential of people to contribute to society. Society's ability to meet John Paul's call for a humane environment requires the acceptance of transcendental truth, according to Neuhaus. The result is .-,what the Pope calls "the culture of life." 'The alternative is "the culture of death. " Here Neuhaus examines abortion and euthanasia. He finds a "chilling similarity in both logic and rhetoric" between those who deem that it would be better for some to have been aborted than to have been born and the Nazis, who "used a marvelous phrase, lebensunwertes Leben - lives not worthy of life." John Paul and Neuhaus both find the best hope for man within man himself Man's ingenuity has averted many proclaimed disasters and can avert more still given the opportunity. The free economy and democracy are essential to the granting of this opportunityaccording to John Paul . These two systems must always be tempered by a sense of human and moral values. 'These values are not constraints upon the smooth functioning of society - they are its foundation. Centesimus Annus represents a valuable contribution to the rest of society from the Catholic church. John Paul rejects the "simple and radical solutions" presented in Utopias in favor of the messy and illogical capitalist democracy, although he does recognize the latter system's problems. In Centesimus, he refocuses attention on the need for virtues, morality, and restraint in society - a focus that has been absent from public discussion for too long. Neuhaus' Doing Well and Doing Good helps bring this perspective to , America as many are beginning to recJ ogIliz.e its importance. Mt

••

. •."" .. ~

. '

, .-'", '..,.,....~.'l-'''_

t •• ,. 1 •

...,..."''' ..

••

"4" ~

• • I

'. ' '''''>~ ''' ''',,..,~ ~~~,~'''''''~~\"i'!""_"""_"""'

____

THE MICIDGAN REVIEW

Fascism

\'.

March 24, 1993

~ ,"

Continued from page 1

ties." to the hiring and admission policies of Ebeling discussed the Soviets apmany businesses and universities, proach to collective rights at great people are conceiving of others not as length. "What the Soviets practiced individuals but as representatives of throughout their history was a form of sundry groups, be they determined by claBS and ethnic affirmative action, and ethnicity, economics, gender or any what resulted was that every group, number of other handy criteria. Viewed every segment of society came to see and view all other ethnic categories as competitors," that is, threats to their own s l i c e . ' _' of the state pie.

state and not the market. Clearly, Bill Clinton and those in his inner circle of policy analysts have socialist leanings, an example being Laura D'Andrea Tyson's admiration of Ceaucescu's Romania. Yet they have not gone as far as to advocate the confiscation of the means of production and all private property. 'This is where Clinton's viplans fall under the political classification offascism. Under the rule ofMussolini

[CI-Int on'span I ] won't resuIt In - the brutality; the cruelty; and the clousness of the SOVIet -economy, but it will be nothing less than government planning of the entire econo.u.u.~C structure 0 f thl-s s OCI-ety..

In. fact, accordin~ to Ebeling, U[ Opportunity] was extended not only on the b~sis of class, in the "ft1I Mruxian sense ofclaBS, but on the basis of etbnicity as well. '!bey used this classifying process in a collectivist light, these different as a way to impose quota systems . If groups are playing a zero-sum game, you wanted to get into a university, for the rules of which promise brotherhood example, your admission depended on and tranquility yet ultimately guaranyour background. Was there sufficient tee only disunity and faction. room for you based upon your ethnic Social Disservices group? A quota system for Lithuanians, Ukrainians, Russians, Jews, and so Finally, on the topic of social serforth was thus constructed." vices, the United States has diminAlthough the details differ, "'!be same ished itself to a state of dependency, a type of thing [in principle] is happening state wherein the public views every in tlIis country," Ebeling added. good as a right rather than as a service. "Individuals are no longer judged on This thinking, however, is in direct the basis of who they are as individuopposition to the classicalliberallsm on als, but to what group they belong. which America was founded. "Under Your rights and your privileges in the the Soviet system," Ebeling cogently economic system are increasingly depointed out, "came the nationalization termined by that identification tag. of education, health care, retirement Your own capabilities are negated and pensions, the nationalization of everyyou are judged within your category as thing that is viewed as an essential to how the state defines you for its service. What was the consequence of public policy purposes. Is tlIis any the nationalization of social services? different than the Soviets saying, 'Sorry, The same consequences iliat followed from the central planning idea. The comrade, you don't get a position at the focus was not directed towards the conuniversity because you belong to the sumer, but towards the planning direcwrong class.' It is the Nazis, the fascists, and the communists who said 'do tor. As a consequence there was a disinnot view people as individuals, because tegration of medical and health serthat is a bourgeois, classically liberal vices, and of education." prejudice. Your ethnic class determines '!be United States is engaging in this what you are, who you are, and what we same type of process and has been for [the state) will do to you.' over half a century. Yet we ignore the "This is the future that America is mounting evidence - both domestic and international - against collectivheading towards, and it is creating hostility because everybody views memism and persist in believing that more bers of other groups as competitors. of the same will be effective. How long and how far are we going to take tlIis Because what they get I don't get and why don't I get it? Because if their parallel? Shall we make access to food group wins, my group loses, and ifmy and clothing a social service? To be group loses, then no matter what my intellectually consistent, if one is to make one service or good a right granted individual capabilities and competenby the state, then all services should be cies are, I lose! Tribalism is the paili which America is following." treated in a similar way. The only effecRecently on the national level we tive way to dotlIis would be to set up a have seen this notion of group rights system to make all services privatized. and the eminent problems it poses all The latter would undoubtedly be more too frequently. From the cabinet selec- I effective and efficient, yet we have betiona of Bill Clinton, where notlIing less J come accustomed to believing that some .' tha.Jot a quota system was implemented, ' serviceS' Should only be handled by the "_' _ _

'''~'' ~'' ~ "'' '_ ' '''_'~

__ '_

w~ _""""_ ._ , ,,_,,

â&#x20AC;˘..

, ,- - , > _ _,,",,,,.~,..,.,,., ....

cialism and fascism. [Under fascism] ilie state did not nationalize production and it did not make the businessman an employee of the state. However the private businessman's behavior was determined solely by the state. What the fascist regimes of Italy and Germany did was to establish precisely iliese government-business partnerships. It was Soviet--type socialism with the veneer of capitalism." That is exactly what the current administration is proposing. It is painfully ironic that the group of people who have been throwing around the term fascism without caution or reason - liberal Democrats including Mario Cuomo and Jesse Jackson - are the ones who would perpetuate collectivist policies premised on the same ideas offailed regimes. Perhaps these people need to reacquaint themselves with elementary economic theory and contemplate seriously the ties Ebeling made between Clinton's policy and eco, nomic fascism .

and Hitle~ came a clos.e "partnership" between buslness and government, a pl~ dangerously similar to Clinton's. On iliis topic Ebeling stated that "[Clinton's plan] won't result in the brutality, the cruelty, and the viciousness of the Soviet economy, but it will be nothing less than government planning of the entire economic structure oftlIis society. This will lead down the road to the other variant of collectivism in the twentieth century - fascism. In tlIis century, collectivism Aaron Steelman is a freshman in LSA has taken two forms economicaJ).y: sO--Âˇ~ and circulation director of the Review. .

Main Bookstore:

549 East University Art/Engineering Store and Electronics Showroom:

1117 South University Ann Arbor, MI 313-662-3201 Mon-Fri 9:00-6:00 Sat 9:30-5:00 Sunday Noon to 4:00

THE MICHIGAN REVIEW

March 24, 1993

o APHORISMS, ANECDOTES, AND EPIGRAMS .. ;i

Man Comments 'o n God

he nature of the Divine is a mystery which has engaged the curiosity of mankind since the dawn of recorded history. In addition to being the object of worship, God, in one form or another, has been the subject of unceasing speculation. Offered here is a smattering of quotations, some from religious scriptures of various origins, others from theologians, poets, and philosophers. Make of them what you will. -compiled by Adam Garagiola

"God does not play dice with the universe ." Albert Einstein "If Christ be outside the realm. of truth, 1 will nonetheless opt for Christ."

"All those contradictions which seemed to take me farthest from the knowledge of any religion are what led me directly to the true religion." Blaise Pascal Pensees

[Ivan Karamazov:] "It isn't that I reject God; I am simply returning Him most respectfully the ticket that would entitle me to a seat." Foyodor~oevsky The Bothers Karsmszov

"There is no creator other than one's own mind." Kyabgon Sakya Trizin Rinpoche Essence of Buddhism

"As for the unbelievers , it will be equal to them whether thou admonish , or do not admonish them; they will not believe."

The Koran, ch. II

"Who sees God's face , that is self-life, .must die ; What a death were it then to see God di e.? " John Donne "Good Friday, 1613. Riding Westward"

"Not their love of men but the impotence of their love of men keeps the Christians of today from - burning us." Friedrich Nietzsche Beyond Good ,nd Evil

Fyodor~oevsky

"Philosophy cannot and should not give us an account offaith .,. God's love is for me, in both an inverse and direct sense, incommensurable with the whole of reality." SOran Kierkegaard Fear ,nd Trembling

"And God said unto Moses, I AM THAT I AM: and he said, 'Thus shalt thou say unto the children of Israel I AM hath sent me unto you." Exodus 3:14

"He's not the kind you have to wind-up on Sundays." Jethro Tull Aqualung, ''Wincklp''

"1 may assert Eternal Providence, And justify God's ways to men." John Milton

,.,PLo路 f"" ........路'.,..-...... .",,....

"The devil has the broadest perspec- I Paradise Lost tives for God; therefore he keeps so far "Malt does more than Milton can away from God - the devil being the To justify God's ways to man." most ancient friend of wisdom." A.E. Housman Friedrich Nietzsche "Terence, This Is Stupid Stuff ... " Beyond Good ,nd Evil "Do not be astonished to see simple people believing without argument .. . , God makes them love him and hate themselves. We shall never believe, with an effective belief and faith , unless God inclines our hearts , and we shall believe as soon as he does so." Blaise Pascal Pensees "He felt as ifhe could raise a monstrous fist to the Heavens and tear God down and drag Him through His clouds; as if he could grind the world together with his teeth and spit it out into the Creator's face ." Georg BOchner Lenz "And all must love the human form, In Heathen, Turk, or Jew. Where Mercy, Love , & Pity dwell There GOO is dwelling too." William Blake "The Divine Image" "For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life." John 3:16 "By me kings reign ... " .' Proverbs 8:15

"When God goes, everything goes." Georg BOchner

Woyzeck "Around the hero everything turns into a tragedy, around the demi-god, into a satyr play; and around God - what? perhaps into 'world,?-" Friedrich Nietzsche Beyond Good ,nd Evil

"Prayer, the church's banquet, angle's age, God's breath in man returning to his birth, The soul in paraphrase, heart in pilgrimage, The Christian plummet sounding heaven and Earth" George Herbert "Prayer (Q" "Praise be to God, the Lord of all creatures; the most merciful, the king of the day of judgment. Thee do we worship, and ofthee do we beg assistance." The Koran, ch. 1

"One more curious trait must be noted in the worship of Jahweh. Not only did he rejoice in human sacrifices, but he also demanded especially an offering of the first born." Grant Allan The Evolution of the Id6II of God "God said to Abraham, go kill me a son, Abe said, Man, you must be puttin' me

"How could one with no religion at all j on. God said you can do what you want, be able to come to any justifiable judgAbe, ment when the possibility of reaching a But next time you see me you'd better judgment depends upon a personal atrun. titude issuing from from an inner expeWell, Abe said, where do you want this rience of religion? ... (Such a person) killing done? may not be fitted to say the significant God said, do it on Highway 6l." about the thing which religion is unBob Dylan derneath everything else, namely, a "Highway 61" relationship of the human soul to God." Edmund Davidson Soper "I am Alpha and Omega, the beginning The Religions of Mankind and ending, saith the Lord, which is, and which was, and which is to come, "If life is merely a joke, the question the Almighty." still remains: for whose amusement?" Revelation 1:8 A8hIeIghBrilUant

"If the maker of the world can all that he will, he wills misery, and there is no escape from the conclusion. The more constistent of those who have deemed themselves qualified to 'vindicate the ways of God to man' have endeavored to avoid the alternative by hardening their hearts and denying that misery is an evil ." John Stuart Mill Nsture ,nd Utility of Religion "For what portion of God is there from above? and what inheritance of the Almighty from on high? Is there not destruction to the wicked? and a strange punishment to the workers ofiniquity? Doth not He see my ways, and count all my steps? If I have walked with vanity, or if my foot hath hasted to deceit; Let me be weighed in an even balance that God may know mine integrity." Job 31:H

').

"He who speaks the word God and really has Thou in mind (whatever the illusion by which he is held), addresses the true Thou of his life, which cannot be limited by another Thou , and to which he stands in a relationship that gathers up and includes all others. But when he, too, who abhors the name, and believes himself godless, gives his whole being to addressing the Thou ofhis life, as a Thou that cannot be limited by another, he addresses God."

Martin Bubel' IIIId Thou ~:;:..

- - 路 - . ~

. ... . _ _ _

.~.~

___

_ _ __ _ _ _ _ _

~. w.,

~ .-

_ __ _

_ _ _ _, r

l1li '"

...

.. ~._,

_ _

. , . " ' ' ' ' ' _..!I

.. _

'u,l" ~.e.v."IIIt!I?l:b.<:""'N

1MI

_ .

F--

". " Jf

THE MICHIGAN REVIEW

March 24, 1993

o MUSIC \"\

Dinosaur Jr"s Talent Lives On . i for Slip, Quicksand was offered the

BY DREW PETERS

HE FOUR MEMBERS OF Quicksand are all veterans of some of New York City's bestknown hardcore bands. Citing groups from Abba to Joy Division, Fugazi and the Smiths as influences, they have now escaped the epidemic of garbage vocals and developed some gnarly yet

Slip Quicksand Polydor melodic tunes. "We just wanted to be a band that wasn't straight-edged or hardcore or anything that people could put a label on," says bassist Sergio Vega . "More people liked it than we expected." Their 1991 self-titled EP on Revelation sold a whopping 20,000 copies and led to their signing onto Polydor. While Betting down some basic tracks

Drew Peters has replaced Dick Clarke on American Bandstand.

opening slot on Helmet's U.S. Tour. In fact, it seems as if a little bit of Helmet rubbed off on Quicksand. Slip possesses the same style of chunky riffs and intense lyrics, yet they differ in the realm of vocals. It may sound silly, but vocalist/guitarist Walter Schreifels has melody in his scream. Quicksand has also thrown in a touch of twang to the musical stew. "Fazer" and ''Head To Wall" pave the way for an album filled with heavy riffs and hoarse, climaxing vocals. Quicksand will be performing with Surgery on Saturday, March 27, at St. Andrew's in Detroit. You have nothing better to do. Go.

Where You Been Dinosaur Jr. Sire Records

HE LATEST ALBUM FROM Dinosaur Jr. shows, to no one's surprise, more of the same musical mastery found on their previous

work. For those of you who haven't On the Cross of Commerce been exposed to these dudes, put your U2 away for a minute and check it out. low Pop Suicide Where You Been continues the tradiWorld Domination tion of quirky songs that move from FEATURING FORMER MEMmelodic to disbers of Nine Inch Nails, Minissonant in a try and Shriekback , Low Pop matter of secSuicide spurts out intense hate-rock, with climaxing vocals a- plenty. Their onds. On the second release, On the Cross of Comfirst track, entitled "Out merce, features the same negative voThere ," the cals, but a cleaner, less industrial sound. "After The Disengagement EP, Rick vocals of J J Mascis Mascis posBoston and I got all excited about recording our songs fairly live," says basssess a melancholy, desperate feel. "On ist Dave Allen. the Way" shows Dinosaur Jr.'s up-beat element, complete with fast drums and Though the blasting track "Disengaged" was already on the EP with the sing-a-Iong vocals. The most intriguing song on the algliding "Crush," Low Pop Suicide has added a few more foot-stompin' tracks. bum, however, is "Not the Same." Eerie guitars laced with Mascis' falsetto make "My Way" and "Imagine My Love" the song extremely disturbing. crank; "All in Death is Sweet" floats into a Swervedriver-like dreaminess. Dinosaur Jr. has mastered the art of writing memorable songs, and regardIgnore the packaging - a Crucifixion scene with "Your God Can't Feel My less of Mascis' tendency to hit sour notes, there isn't a lame song on the -'---Pain" printed on the side - and Low album.' Pop Suicide delivers. l\R

S . Do IOU ..... . •Ple~~ Your -..egtance. ~

·~·

The United States was founded on enduring principles, drawn from the "Laws of Nature and of Nature's God:' Today, these same principles are stoking the fires of freedom in emerging democracies around the world. In this world of revolutionary turmoil, your 'allegiance to eternal truths counts more than ever. The graduate School of Public Policy at Regent University aims to equip those called to restore the qualities that made America great and good, and to renew the Christian witness in public affairs. In addition to positions in public affairs and government service, the master's program in public policy prepares individuals for leadership positions in the private and nonprofit sectors. For example, among the school's alumni are: elected officials, congressional staffers, attorneys, doctoral candidates, family lobbyists, public affairs communicators, policy makers, church leaders, school administrators, and city managers. Put your allegiance to work with a master's degree in public policy. Call now!

.'":'1

RECENT UNIVERSITY) Vrrginia Beach, VA 23464-5041 . 1-800-677-7858

. , .", _~,':::~_":::-":"_ ._ ..,_ ",~,_.... ~""",~_~.e;,~= ",~ .. ,w:....~_.w<_._",, "., .. ~;,::,~=.,=,:::-....~~=::;;;::;:;:;.;;'(:;""""-;""-:;",;;".",,_;~~_,,,~,,,. ~.