Minding Our Humanity

Mind: “the element or complex of elements in an individual that feels, perceives, thinks, wills, and especially reasons” (Webster's Dictionary)

Marilynne Robinson's third chapter from Absence of Mind analyzes the thought of Sigmund

Nietzsche, Marx, and Freud: The Three Atheists of My Undergrad Years

Freud (1856-1939), who clearly positioned himself as a "scientist," analyzing the depths of humanity. The mind is central to Freud and to Robinson's book and naturally represents a topic of considerable interest in the dialogue of theology with science, particularly with neuroscience and cognitive science. Robinson takes on the topic primarily from the angle of philosophy and the history of ideas.

Here is a representative quotation from the chapter. 

"If there is one thing Freud asserts consistently, from which every theory proceeds and to which every conclusion returns, it is just this--that the mind is not to be trusted.” Marilynne Robinson

Robinson's point in Absence of Mind is that modern thinkers--through people like Freud in the past as well as Stephen Pinker and E. O. Wilson today--have led us to an absence of mind, which represents a serious reduction of what it means to be human. (In that previous sentence, I wrote that "modern thinkers" were critiquing our trust in human thought, which of course is oxymoronic and probably a striking example of "sawing off the branch you're sitting on.")

I think Robinson's right in many ways, and yet I have to add the theological categories of

doubt and sin. Put another way, is the mind a single entity? For example, we might say, “I’m of two minds on that issue.” And the Bible describes doubt, as in James 1: 8 as being “double-minded." Moreover, Paul in Romans 7 seems torn up by warring minds,

"I do not understand what I do. For what I want to do I do not do, but what I hate I do." Romans 7:15, Paul

And yet, Jesus clearly believed that the mind is essential in responding to God,

“‘Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind.’" Matthew 22:37, Jesus

This indeed, is the "greatest commandment," which when added with love of our neighbor, summarizes God's will for us.

That leaves some questions to ponder because I think many Christians today don't trust the mind and consistently propose that we need to listen to our "hearts"--by which they mean emotions (which is not the biblical definition by any stretch) and thus reject the mind. Note above that Webster’s definition includes “feels, perceives, thinks, wills” and not simply “reasons.” 

Do you trust your mind? To what degree why or why not? Is your mind a gift from God? What gets in the way of a trustworthy mind? What makes it trustworthy or untrustworthy? 


P.S. If you're interested in viewing and/or hearing Robinson's fourth chapter, "Thinking Again," it was also the fourth of her 2009 Terry Lectures on Religion in the Light of Science and Philosophy at Yale, which appears in her book with the title.

Re: Writing. The Buckshot Approach

One of the scenes I often see in Hollywood movies that I don’t also in real life is the writer absolutely taken with an idea, in fact a being so consumed with a passion that she can’t help but write. Not only that—but the ultimate product after those torrid hours of creativity is absolutely stunning, a miracle of inspiration and genius. 

The fantasy of inspiration and genius

 Can I burst Hollywood’s bubble? Writing hardly ever works like that. Now, if it does for you, please don’t tell me or your friends who are writers because we might become incredibly angry. It’s just not nice. 

      

For most mortals, I’ve got the sound piece of advice: Write on a schedule.

That’s the only way to produce something good. You have to create a rhythm in which you write at a certain each day. Or every other day. What is that time? You can answer that better than anyone. But most writers I know practice their craft early in the day. I find that as early as I can get to the computer after workout and a good breakfast—and before answering emails and cluttering my brain—that’s the time to create something.

Writing means rewriting

This leads me to more advice: Write and rewrite.

Please—if there’s anything I can implore you to avoid—Don’t fill the world with more bad writing! Anybody with a cell can tweet. We can even dictate to Siri and post to Facebook with anything like rewriting. Or fact checking. Or clarifying your meaning. Those are sins I’m hoping we all avoid.

      

Now, to be clear, I’m not sure you have to be as obsessive about writing with clarity as what I’ve heard about the brilliant novelist Marilynne Robinson (who wrote one of the greatest American novels of our time that also won a Pulitzer, Gilead). I’m told that she writes only on those people for whom she’s read their entire body of work. (Twenty-three years separate Gilead from her first novel, Housekeeping.) If Robinson's rubric sounds just a bit extreme and way too fanatical for most of us earthlings.

      

Nonetheless, we can still write. And re-write. How? I find that journaling a good practice because those entries exist just for me, and thus my brain turns off the edit switch. 

     

Clearly not using buckshot here

Blogging is another valuable practice. I look at my blog like visual artists view their “studies” do before they proceed fill the canvases. This blog is filled with my essays. And I mean that word in the sense of its roots. The “essay” comes from a Middle French word that means “to try.” So try some ideas out. Create a blog. Write for a local paper or small website. Or for your friend’s newsletter. 

The buckshot approach

In a way, I’m outlining a buckshot approach. I’m no hunter (see the picture of the first time I shot a handgun for evidence). Still I do know that you can put a single bullet in a gun and take one shot to hit the target. Or you can pack it with buckshot, which sprays around eight pellets. That way you don’t have to be as accurate. Or you can be more extreme and use a number 10 birdshot with its 848 pellets. 

In any event, I think my point is clear enough: Keep writing and rewriting. Fill the paper or your screen with enough attempts and you’ll hit something at some point. Or at least you’ll have tried.

      

So just write. And do it on a schedule.