The Crisis of Modernity
May 15, 2018
Apprentice Jonathan
Judge not, that ye be not judged.
Matthew 7:1
Know ye not that we shall judge angels? How much more things that pertain to this life?
1 Corinthians 6:3
Matthew 7:1
Know ye not that we shall judge angels? How much more things that pertain to this life?
1 Corinthians 6:3
1
One of the hallmarks of Modernity is liberality. As with any living language, “liberal” has various meanings and the correct understanding of the word is dependent both on the context and on the historical period. In our research of famous Hautens, we recall that Chauncey Rose was described in a newspaper article from the nineteenth century as “liberal” , which sent us scurrying to the nearest dictionary. Rose donated money to organizations for orphans, the sick, and for education. In the context of Rose’s giving, “liberal” means “freely”, which is similar to the meaning of “liberal” as found in “liberal education”, that is, an education for freemen or gentlemen, not slaves. In our time, liberal is frequently understood as being the opposite of conservative. It seems that the political meaning of liberal has overshadowed its historical meaning.
The later half of the twentieth century bears witness of the rise of applying the Master’s words of “not judging”. We note that in the modern usage the Master’s words are devoid of context and are, in fact, opposed by the Apostle’s rhetoric that “we”, presumably the elect, can and should offer judgments. It is evident that those individuals who take the Master’s words out of context want to create a permissive environment where “everything goes” and all reasoning and subsequent judgments are suspended. Those individuals must appeal to the generally recognized authority of the Master, since their agenda cannot stand on its merits, as their explicit goals can correctly be described as strange, bizzare, unnatural, and, ultimately, without reason.
According to the Blue Letter Bible, the Greek word κρίσις [“krisis”, a noun, Strong’s Number G2920] is found forty eight times in the New Testament and is translated as “judgment” (41 times), “damnation” (three times), “accusation” (two times), and “condemnation” (two times). Unlike other, more challenging words in the New Testament, “krisis” seems to offer little difficulty to translators.
The first definition of “krisis” in the Blue Letter Bible is “ I. a separating, sundering, separation” and in the context of Christianity, the Gentle Reader should readily envision the Final Judgment, with the image of the Master separating the sheep from the goats.
Continuing in the Blue Letter Bible, [κρίνω, “krino”, a verb, G2919] is found 144 times and translated as “judge” 88 times, indicating that words associated with “krisis” does not cause much difficulty for the translators. The various definitions for this word are:
The later half of the twentieth century bears witness of the rise of applying the Master’s words of “not judging”. We note that in the modern usage the Master’s words are devoid of context and are, in fact, opposed by the Apostle’s rhetoric that “we”, presumably the elect, can and should offer judgments. It is evident that those individuals who take the Master’s words out of context want to create a permissive environment where “everything goes” and all reasoning and subsequent judgments are suspended. Those individuals must appeal to the generally recognized authority of the Master, since their agenda cannot stand on its merits, as their explicit goals can correctly be described as strange, bizzare, unnatural, and, ultimately, without reason.
According to the Blue Letter Bible, the Greek word κρίσις [“krisis”, a noun, Strong’s Number G2920] is found forty eight times in the New Testament and is translated as “judgment” (41 times), “damnation” (three times), “accusation” (two times), and “condemnation” (two times). Unlike other, more challenging words in the New Testament, “krisis” seems to offer little difficulty to translators.
The first definition of “krisis” in the Blue Letter Bible is “ I. a separating, sundering, separation” and in the context of Christianity, the Gentle Reader should readily envision the Final Judgment, with the image of the Master separating the sheep from the goats.
Continuing in the Blue Letter Bible, [κρίνω, “krino”, a verb, G2919] is found 144 times and translated as “judge” 88 times, indicating that words associated with “krisis” does not cause much difficulty for the translators. The various definitions for this word are:
to separate, put asunder, to pick out, select, choose
to approve, esteem, to prefer to be of opinion, deem, think, to be of opinion to determine, resolve, decree to judge |
When confronted with an issue, whether moral or legal, one will “separate” facts from opinions, “prefer” facts to opinions, and will form an “opinion” from the facts. Finally, the issue is “resolved” and a judgement is reached. Of course, moral judgments are under no obligation to be stated, otherwise said, “knowledge has no obligation to ignorance”. Morality is not theoretical, but practical.
Without a “table of values” [Fred’s wording] or a hierarchy of values, no judgments can be given. All outcomes have the same value, no goal is more worthy than another goal, regardless if its attainment is highly unlikely or impossible; no action is heroic; no behavior, cowardly.
In conclusion, we now know that the “krisis” of Modernity is due to the lack of a hierarchy of values; where all judgements are suspended.
Without a “table of values” [Fred’s wording] or a hierarchy of values, no judgments can be given. All outcomes have the same value, no goal is more worthy than another goal, regardless if its attainment is highly unlikely or impossible; no action is heroic; no behavior, cowardly.
In conclusion, we now know that the “krisis” of Modernity is due to the lack of a hierarchy of values; where all judgements are suspended.
2
Perhaps Apprentice Jonathan’s behavior can best be described as reticent. We have long speculated both that Apprentice Jonathan had a value system and that his parents were a positive influence in his formative years [and remain so], yet we lacked any confirmation of our conjectures, until last Sunday. We had the distinct pleasure to witness Apprentice Jonathan offer his impassioned opinions on certain subjects; topics, we feel freed to add, of an entirely mundane character. Of course, neither passion nor convictions are evidence of either possessing the highest values or valuing correct reasoning. However, these impassioned statements, rarely interrupted by Yours Truly [as we have waited years for this confirmation], combined with certain insights [social, psychological, and astrological], provided the long sought for confirmation concerning the existence of Apprentice Jonathan’s value system; we were not disappointed.
We may say that to have values on everyday topics is different by degrees, not by kinds, from possessing and applying values upon esoteric or abstract subjects that Apprentice Jonathan will encounter during his formal study of Political Science. It is evident that Apprentice Jonathan is an adult by Nature’s standard, however, as with all youths, he lacks experiences, sometimes described as “life experiences”. Of course, everyone will agree that “high school” is an artificial construct, never again to be encountered. Even at “the school to the south”, Apprentice Jonathan and other students are there because they want to be enrolled, that is, they have given their consent; whether or not these students will seriously pursue the available opportunities is another matter.
Oftentimes, college life allows students to find themselves or reinvent themselves. However, to state that some students find themselves implies that they are so unaware that they do not who they are until college. On the other hand, to suggest that some students reinvent themselves implies that they did not like, or approve, of their persona in high school. We wonder why they did not change themselves during their high school years and we can only answer: the lack of values or the lack of the will to change.
While we expect personal growth from the HighSchoolers™ during their college experiences and encourage it throughout their lives, we do not foresee the HighSchoolers™, generally, and Apprentice Jonathan, specifically, to radically change into barely recognizable caricatures of their former selves. The reasons for our conclusion are twofold. Firstly, these individuals have experienced challenges and hardships [wholly unknown to Yours Truly and anterior to their accidental meeting with Yours Truly] and they were the result of these experiences when we met and, secondly, they have, in the technical jargon of modern psychiatry, at least one, if not two, “systems of support”. Therefore, we predict the behavior of the “Cool Kids” to remain more consistent than their peers and this consistency will be due entirely to their values. In conclusion to this part, although externals will change, sometimes dramatically, and, accordingly, the reaction of the HighSchoolers™ will, during these unexpected events, unfold in unforeseen directions, we have no concern that the fundamentals of their respective value systems will remain intact and continue to provide guidance for their actions.
We look forward, firstly, to the day when individuals are not reluctant to compare their hierarchy of values with individuals devoid of values who are actively promoting modern morality and, secondly, to a time when the sufferings, the challenges, and the long and painful experiences will lead to the creation of a hierarchy of values and, finally, when this system becomes a source of accomplishment and of pride.
G.D.O’Bradovich III
We may say that to have values on everyday topics is different by degrees, not by kinds, from possessing and applying values upon esoteric or abstract subjects that Apprentice Jonathan will encounter during his formal study of Political Science. It is evident that Apprentice Jonathan is an adult by Nature’s standard, however, as with all youths, he lacks experiences, sometimes described as “life experiences”. Of course, everyone will agree that “high school” is an artificial construct, never again to be encountered. Even at “the school to the south”, Apprentice Jonathan and other students are there because they want to be enrolled, that is, they have given their consent; whether or not these students will seriously pursue the available opportunities is another matter.
Oftentimes, college life allows students to find themselves or reinvent themselves. However, to state that some students find themselves implies that they are so unaware that they do not who they are until college. On the other hand, to suggest that some students reinvent themselves implies that they did not like, or approve, of their persona in high school. We wonder why they did not change themselves during their high school years and we can only answer: the lack of values or the lack of the will to change.
While we expect personal growth from the HighSchoolers™ during their college experiences and encourage it throughout their lives, we do not foresee the HighSchoolers™, generally, and Apprentice Jonathan, specifically, to radically change into barely recognizable caricatures of their former selves. The reasons for our conclusion are twofold. Firstly, these individuals have experienced challenges and hardships [wholly unknown to Yours Truly and anterior to their accidental meeting with Yours Truly] and they were the result of these experiences when we met and, secondly, they have, in the technical jargon of modern psychiatry, at least one, if not two, “systems of support”. Therefore, we predict the behavior of the “Cool Kids” to remain more consistent than their peers and this consistency will be due entirely to their values. In conclusion to this part, although externals will change, sometimes dramatically, and, accordingly, the reaction of the HighSchoolers™ will, during these unexpected events, unfold in unforeseen directions, we have no concern that the fundamentals of their respective value systems will remain intact and continue to provide guidance for their actions.
We look forward, firstly, to the day when individuals are not reluctant to compare their hierarchy of values with individuals devoid of values who are actively promoting modern morality and, secondly, to a time when the sufferings, the challenges, and the long and painful experiences will lead to the creation of a hierarchy of values and, finally, when this system becomes a source of accomplishment and of pride.
G.D.O’Bradovich III