Category Archives: Uncategorized

COVID-19, Uncategorized

Covid-19: Lessons  from Isaac Newton.

Leave a comment

 

The Bubonic plague broke out in England in 1665.  Cambridge University sent its students home.  Sound familiar? One of those students was Isaac Newton.

Isaac Newton was admitted to Trinity College at Cambridge University in June of 1661.  He  started his master degree and, bang, he has to leave because of the plague.  Waiting out the plague, Newton spent 18 months at Woolsthrope.  In those 18 months Isaac Newton laid the groundwork for some of his greatest works. 

I am thinking about Newton as we enter the phase of “social distancing” with the Covid-19 pandemic.  Did Newton write to his friends, all disbursed from Cambridge?  Today I can call someone on my cell phone, message them on Facebook, send an email, or video chat on Zoom or Skype.   It was pointed out to me on Facebook that we are really not called to practice “social distancing” but physical separation.  Avoiding someone on Facebook will not prevent Covid-19, even if defriending improves mental health.  In Newton’s day physical separation was largely social separation.  Today we are blessed with many ways of staying in touch.  So don’t disappear, stay in touch.

Newton didn’t sit around bemoaning his separation from school.  Newton was productive and engaged, laying the groundwork for what would become his theory gravity, his version of calculus, and his theories of optics. 

Returning  to Cambridge in 1667, Newton receives his master’s degree, is elected a fellow of Trinity College, becomes a professor, and is elected to the Royal society of London, all in about 5 years.  

Can we follow Isaac Newton’s example?  Try and use the time in preparation so that when we emerge from this period, great things can happen.    Unlike Newton’s 18 months away from school,  physical separation doesn’t have to be social separation.  Let’s also pray that our leaders are smart enough to get it over with in a few months, rather than 18 months Newton spent away from school.

Uncategorized

Should we put our hope in science?

Leave a comment

At the 2017 New York City March for Science.

“Science is hope” read one of the signs at the 2017 NY city march for science. It was also a chant during part of the march. I understand the sentiment… perhaps; just perhaps, some scientist might find a painless path through the future that avoids trashing the planet. This is very unlikely. If it were to come to pass, then most likely the effect would be to simply delay the day of reckoning. “Science is hope” raises the questions where should we place our hope for the future?

Science is a form of knowledge, and technology is the craft that draws on the knowledge of science. Both can be practiced without wisdom. Both science and technology are useful tools that can help us with the problems we face today and in the future. But science and technology can also be used in a way that destroys the planet. The internal combustion engine is an example of an invention that has radically altered our culture. It has brought both great benefits and great harm. Science without wisdom is as likely to destroy the planet as save it.

Today we need wisdom. More science and better technology can help, so long as we have the wisdom to use them well. You can earn multiple PhD’s in many disciplines, and still not find wisdom. You can study philosophy, literature, religion, etc. and still not find wisdom. All too often our cleverness is a way of delaying the enviable, avoiding the agony of the hard decision that requires wisdom, at least for now. Wisdom is not found in a textbook, in an equation or in a logical argument.  Where then is wisdom found?

“Science is hope” passes from the realm of science towards the frontiers of faith. “Now faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen” (to quote the King James).  “Science is hope” places faith in science.  Put more concretely, it is the hope that scientists will “find a way”, suggesting that we need to give enough funding, with better education, better laboratories, etc. to increase the chances of a “solution.”   I too want increased science funding, better educational opportunities, and better equipped laboratories. But I am under no illusion that this will solve our problems.

Such an eschatological hope pinned on science passes from the realm of science into the realm of eschatology, of things hoped for, of what ought to be. At the very least such eschatological thinking lies at the edges, if not the heart, of religion.  To put ones faith in science is to put ones faith in both human ingenuity and to have faith in the wisdom of humans to make the correct use of that knowledge and craft. There is precious little historical evidence to back up such a hope.

One common thread among many religions is the rejection of putting our faith and hope in human effort.  The alternative is to kick humankind off the pedestal of the demigods, and to seek out that which is truly divine. Wisdom is not simply harmonizing knowledge and heart, but also includes a divine spark. The path to that spark starts with humility.  It allows us to see the image of God in the face of those we oppress and marginalize, if not directly, then by our participation in a culture that does.  Perhaps, if we can come to acknowledge that we have put ourselves in a position from which there are no painless solutions, we can start to have the humility to seek the wisdom necessary to find a way forward.  Part of the way forward is coming to understand our role in the problem and seeing reconciliation and forgiveness.

Perhaps the best thing we can do is to pray for wisdom, not the wisdom found within human efforts, but the wisdom that comes from seeking out the divine.

Uncategorized

An open letter to President Elect Donald Trump

Leave a comment

Nov 17 2016

Dear President Elect Donald Trump,

First let me congratulate you on your election victory.   During your victory speech  you said

“Now it is time for America to bind the wounds of division, …. To all Republicans and Democrats and independents across this nation, I say it is time for us to come together as one united people.”

I will take you at your word that you truly believe this to be a desirable goal of your future Presidency.    Bringing our very diverse country together is a noble thought, a worthwhile goal, and would be an amazing achievement.  As you transition from President Elect to President of the United States I hope you see this goal as your responsibility, an obligation to the people of the United States and do whatever you can to facilitate this noble goal.  The national protests over your election victory illustrate how difficult the task of bringing the nation together will be.  I also trust you recognize the divisive nature of your appointment of Steve Bannon as your chief strategist, which will make this task all the more difficult.

During your victory speech  you also stated:

“For those who have chosen not to support me in the past, of which there were a few people, …  I’m reaching out to you for your guidance and your help so that we can work together and unify our great country.”

I am one of those who did not vote for you in the election. You asked for guidance and help in working together and unifying the country.  I am taking you at your word and would like to offer you some advice as to how you could start down the path toward reconciliation.

I found many of your statements during the election highly offensive, fanning the flames of hatred, and creating deeper divisions within an already deeply divided country.  If your desired goal is unity, you could start by leading the country on a path toward reconciliation.  Good leadership starts by setting an example.  Therefore, I humbly suggest that you could set an example by acknowledging your role in deepening the divisions among us and then proceed down a path toward reconciliation.  Such a path starts with repentance, followed by apology, change in behavior and restitution.  Only then does reconciliation become a realistic possibility.

The first step is to acknowledge, publicly and to God, the role your statements have in dividing the country.   If you do not feel a sense of responsibility for your divisive speech, or contrition for your words, then I do not see how you can be effective in leading the country down a path of reconciliation, rather your words will continue to embolden those who choose hate over love.

After accepting responsibility, the next step is apology.  As just one example, the  NY times  made a list of the 282 people places and things that you have insulted on twitter during the course of the campaign; in my opinion you owe each of them an apology.  Generally, apologies need to be specific, addressed to the appropriate audience and include a promise to stop the destructive behavior.  It would help if you made a commitment to complete these apologies in the first 100 days of your Presidency.  The sincerity of apologies is often judged by seeing if there is a change in behavior.  You could condemn the current rise in violence against Americans based on their race, gender, ethnicity and sexual orientation as well as a pledge to use your future office as President to combat such violence.  Another suggestion is to require that your staff and advisers have not and will not engage in divisive behavior.

After an apology and a change in behavior the next step is restitution, an attempt at mitigating the effects of the wrong.  The nature of the restitution is not determined by the offender, but is something accepted by the offended or hurt individual(s).  If you choose to apologize to the 282 people, places and things that you offended on twitter, there could be 282 different forms of restitution.

Once acknowledgement, repentance, apology, and restitution are accomplished, then and only then is reconciliation a realistic possibility.  Reconciliation is a gift offered by those who have been injured, not something that the offender demands.   Apologies do not eliminate the hurt and harm that has been done; the words and injury do not disappear because of an act of contrition.  Restitution does not make the harm disappear; rather it speaks to willingness of the offender to take responsibility for their actions.  Reconciliation is based on an evaluation by the offended that a continued relationship is warranted despite the wounds that have been inflicted.  Not everyone will be willing to accept reconciliation, but that does not eliminate the moral requirement on the offender to proceed toward this goal.

Perhaps during this process you will come to understand why some of your proposals have created such division, emboldened increased violence, and lead to the protests of your election.

The willingness to repent, apologize, change behavior, offer restitution and hope for reconciliation is not a sign of weakness; rather it is a sign of good moral character.   The decision to not go down this path could be interpreted either as a sign of weakness, or a sign that you do not see anything wrong with your words, behavior and proposals.  If you do not see anything wrong with your words, behavior and proposals over the course of your presidential campaign, then in all likelihood this country will remain highly divided during your Presidency.

Now that you are the President Elect of the United States, I hope and pray that you will choose to lead the United States toward reconciliation by example, heading down a path that acknowledges the hurt and harm done by your campaign, offers apologies for that harm, changes your future behavior, offers restitution and seeks reconciliation.

Sincerely,

David A. Larrabee

Also posted in my Huffington Post Blog

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/david-a-larrabee/open-letter-to-president-_5_b_13138638.html