Strengthening Constitutional Self-Government

No Left Turns

Rat Choice Theory--Part 3

Mr. Crunchy Con Rod Dreher notes that for the NEW YORK TIMES and the French that the pope’s speech was mainly Islam bashing. That odd approach to content analysis may get more of you interested in it, for one reason or another.
In any case, going to the link will give you a refresher course in the strengths and weaknesses of Crunchies or even cause you to acquire a new worry--about the urbanization of the intelligent. We who live in Ashland or Floyd County Georgia aren’t that worried.

Discussions - 1 Comment

"The press writes about what it understands, and as some among us tirelessly and fruitfully point out, the press doesn’t get religion. I recall that when John Paul would issue an encyclical, the press would tend to evaluate it on what it had to say about sex and women’s rights. As if the concerns of a secular liberal journalist were the universal concerns of the wider world, and the religious community to whom the message was primarily intended." Very true but in what way doesn’t the press get it?

"The Islam part of Benedict’s speech, however, was especially important, because in it, he indicates that the differences between Islamic and Christian concepts of God make dialogue difficult. Not impossible, but difficult, because the way we understand God’s nature has everything to do with how we interpret reality and our own duty to Him."

Now perhaps I can’t see it any other way to look at this but this is my ontological kicker...the press can’t cover Benedict for the same larger reason that Islam and Christianity have difficulty with dialogue. Namely the pope is 100% correct in saying that "the way we understand God’s nature has everything to do with how we interpret reality and our own duty." Our understanding of God’s nature securalized translates into a debate over ontological assumptions...the press in discussing sex and women’s rights is really saying that these are the most important aspects of being...But in what sense is it really possible to speak outside of an ontological structure? I would argue that it isn’t and that furthermore the pope’s universal point is the difficulty inherent in spreading truth to the world given the modern day ontological tower of bable.

Leave a Comment

* denotes a required field

No TrackBacks
TrackBack URL:

Warning: include(/srv/users/prod-php-nltashbrook/apps/prod-php-nltashbrook/public/sd/nlt-blog/_includes/promo-main.php): failed to open stream: No such file or directory in /srv/users/prod-php-nltashbrook/apps/prod-php-nltashbrook/public/2006/09/rat-choice-theory--part-3.php on line 417

Warning: include(): Failed opening '/srv/users/prod-php-nltashbrook/apps/prod-php-nltashbrook/public/sd/nlt-blog/_includes/promo-main.php' for inclusion (include_path='.:/opt/sp/php7.2/lib/php') in /srv/users/prod-php-nltashbrook/apps/prod-php-nltashbrook/public/2006/09/rat-choice-theory--part-3.php on line 417