Little did I know that when my intentions were to try to sketch-out an uncertain methodology for political discourse that I would be confronted by larger questions of logic, metaphysics, and theology.
I am delighted that things turned out this way since I have been avoiding the bigger questions in order to try and give something more concrete. As it turns out, there seems to be a genuine desire for this kind of topic so I will try to present some thoughts that will hopefully stimulate further dialogue.
Is God logical? Or, is logic Godly? This juxtaposition renders a series of questions. For me, it brings to mind the order of things.
Logic seems to refer to a certain universal order that cannot be surpassed by human reasoning. Logic has devastating things to say and argue. Logic seems to provide for our need to be rational beings that do not live our lives willy-nilly. But, I wonder, what is the meta-order? What makes this order truly orderly?
I am of the belief that the Divine is beyond order. This is not to say that God is disordered. It is to say that God is beyond the scope of logical order to the extent that what we take as orderly might be shown to be disordered when put under Divine light. In other words, God is the measure of things, not logic.
These two are not in pure conflict with each other. Revelation seems to become the case when something enters the realm of logical order and we can speak it, think it, consider it, imagine it, and so on. Logical order renders some (but not all) things visible to us. This harmony is important. What is also important is that the core of revelation is enchantingly mysterious.
In my view, a God who must be logical in order to be is not God at all. Such a ‘God’ is nothing but a jaded and disenchanted object rather than an excessive subject Who is beyond not only logic but, as Jean-Luc Marion argues, perhaps even beyond the realm being itself.
This ‘realm’ is better found in love than in logic, as I see it. This is not only a theological observation. We can say much of the same things about the human person. As Pascal put it in the Pensees, “The heart has its own reasons of which reason knows not.” Cultivating this ‘logic of the heart’ may offer us a great deal in being able to contemplate the mystery of God and the ordo amoris that flows from God—and ourselves.
Logic is a great asset to itself and the things that desire its brand of order. But beyond the order of logic is the order of love and the order of God.
Returning to politics, we ought to try to find ways to think of a social order in similar terms, I think.
Or, to remain in theology, we might ask what God truly is—if, in order to exist, God must be.
Sam, I did not get past the statement “This is not to say that God is disordered.” Nothing exists in isolation as far as I know. It seems that everything that appears to be in chaos is actually creating order.
In order for us to exist, and I think you stated it above when I saw the word love, is that love creates an observable order out of what seems to be chaos and thus, life as we know it exists only due to love.
I will read what you wrote above now. It’s been a long day and my eyes want to close early tonight.
One of these universities should be hiring you.
St.Bernard of Clariveaux vs. Peter Abailard (Abelard) was a matchup in this very same arena. Bernard saw the logic that Abelard trusted with such vigorous confidence (Abelard saw himself as the greatest master of logic since Aristotle) as little more than a ‘child’s toy’. He often referred to Abelard’s thought as stutilogia, or ‘stupid-ology’. Bernard believed that the lofty truths of the divine were so far above the order of logic that to elevate this human art (logic) to the highest mode of mediation was a dangerous and erroneous maneuver. Of course, what the premodern mind understood as ‘logic’ is far from our Modern fetish, which reduces it to ‘determinate intelligibility’. For the premodern mind, it was the ‘art of arts’, but always merely a tool to the noble truths of faith. Anyway, I merely offer the debates between Abelard and Bernard as an example to anyone who would want to see two erudite, refined minds discussing this same topic (not that Mr. Rocha’s piece is not also worthy of being read.)
You are aware of this FUNDAMENTAL bit of knowledge, are you not — that Jesus is the Logos???
(logos, a Greek word meaning “reason” and from which we get the word “logic”)
Ronald: I take you views of chaos and order to be meaningful and yet I think I may be using the term ‘order’ in a slightly different way—I do not mean to deny the chaos of the cosmos.
Sammons: Thank you for that wonderful and instructive account. It is much richer than what I could possibly offer here (or elsewhere), to be sure.
Bender: Yes, I am aware of that. In fact, the ‘logos’ of Christ is itself a reason that one might take my view here seriously. We cannot expect that the logic of God is our own (God’s ways are not our own), or, for that matter, that it would reveal itself within or according to the order of logic that we presume to follow. For this reason, the ‘logos’ is revealed in the love that John tells us is God—if we insist that God must be, as I mentioned.
While we certainly get the word logic from logos, that doesn’t mean logos is the same thing as our logic.
Logic is merely a method of getting from what we think we know to what we want to know. In the realm of things we know, there is no need for logic; I do not have to use logic to prove my shirt is blue. (I do have to make a nod to Descartes and admit that “knowing” my shirt is blue requires several assumptions, but that is a digression.) However, I have to use logic to show that healthcare reform will make our lives better, because I do not know that, but believe I can show it by using several forms of logic.
God, however, lives in the realm of “all knowing” and “all being.” We may try to use logic to prove he exists, but I find most of these attempts fail. What God reveals is what we would have concluded had we sufficient knowledge and perfect logic. Almost anyone who works in any field knows we never have sufficient knowledge and everyone else’s logic is a little flawed. I believe this is what the last to Popes have talked about when talking about the way science and religion can work together. The goal of science is to gain more complete knowledge from our limited knowledge through observation and logic. There is a point, however, where we cannot know enough to adequately come to the correct conclusion; this is where religion (or the revelation of God) comes in. Many scientist would deny this and say this is a “God of the gaps” filling in what we don’t understand or can’t observe yet. But I think the church is saying these things (the moment of creation, the reason for life etc.) are beyond observation and our ability to know or determine from logic.
Nah, logic is fundamental to everything we say. Without logic, nothing we say makes sense. Indeed, creation does not make sense without logic. Especially if logic is “a human construction”.
And of course God transcends the limits of human logic. This does not mean that God is unreasonable, but that the depth of His logic is not within our grasp. This does not mean our logic is negated or any less true, but that He sees infinitely more than we do. This is another way of saying we cannot see God’s reasons, but we know they are there. God is not anarchical because love is not anarchical. This also does not mean that Love is not passionate or fiery or unpredictable. It just means that love is reasonable and just and all of the aforementioned things too!
A well written article. I agree wholeheartedly.
Thank you Sam. Many errors and confusions are founded in poor epistemology so I applaud your efforts here. I wonder what might turn up if you put your ideas about logic into conversation with how the Christian tradition has understood the category of ‘mystery’ (i.e., not that which is unknown or unknowable per se, but that about which more can always be known). I think it might be very fruitful.
Sam, What I was attempting to get at is the human being comes into being as all other life forms from this chaos. So we have within us the seemingly observable chaotic opposing forces that have resulted in our creation and an instinctive response to form bonds within this chaos that give us a better chance for survival. In that instinctive response to create bonds there seems to be a logic formed from the basis of our most primitive survival mechanisms. This logic would seem to be linear, concrete, black and white with laws that are designed to keep everything in a “logical” order–predictable. The intellect is then engaged to support the logical reality of these survival instincts.
There are 7 basic primitive neuropathways that have been identified within the primitive structures of the brain that are associated with socialization. These same pathways exist within all mammals. They are the circuits of rage, fear, separation distress, nurturing, lust, fun and drive. The names given these pathways are simplified and their functioning is also simplified so as to attempt to keep this brief. These pathways have their own particular drive based on primarily survival instincts and consequently these are the most powerful emotions we will experience and which will influence us unless there is an internal or external force which regulates their expression.
I must stop for now because there is too much that needs to be explained to make a clearer statement. Suffice it to say that any tradition or logic that imposes law as a form of structure operates from the unknown fear that forms the basis of these powerful primitive survival pathways. Most of the people I know in positions of power operate from the safety of the left prefrontal area of the brain which specializes in logical, linear, concrete thinking with the added ability of language to solidify the unknown instinctive foundation of unresolved fear that drives the higher thought processes of the brain.
This is the attempt to create order out of chaos. There is very little tolerance for ambiguity.
God’s Love changes everything. That is it for now.