- Learn what needs to happen.
- Stare confusedly at the screen.
- Learn individual classes while wishing for robust and unnecessary comments to help noobs.
- Write first piece of code meant to contribute to a serious project.
- Realize that one particular piece of it requires you to be familiar with scripting languages you do not know.
- Start again at step 2.
Archives for June 2015
Charisma, Rhetoric, and Maintaining Personal and Audience Frame of Mind
One of the most important philosophers to read for your personal development is Aristotle. Also, read the book of Proverbs. It has hints for becoming charismatic, managing your money, flirting, being happy, and even going to heaven.
In his rhetorical manual, Aristotle observes this (just read the bold to get the main point):
But since rhetoric exists to affect the giving of decisions—the hearers decide between one political speaker and another, and a legal verdict is a decision—the orator must not only try to make the argument of his speech demonstrative and worthy of belief; he must also make his own character look right and put his hearers, who are to decide, into the right frame of mind. Particularly in political oratory, but [25] also in lawsuits, it adds much to an orator’s influence that his own character should look right and that he should be thought to entertain the right feelings towards his hearers; and also that his hearers themselves should be in just the right frame of mind. That the orator’s own character should look right is particularly important in political [30] speaking: that the audience should be in the right frame of mind, in lawsuits. When people are feeling friendly and placable, they think one sort of thing; when they are feeling angry or hostile, they think either something totally [1378a] different or the same thing with a different intensity: when they feel friendly to the man who comes before them for judgement, they regard him as having done little wrong, if any; when they feel hostile, they take the opposite view. Again, if they are eager for, and have good hopes of, a thing that will be pleasant if it happens, they think that it certainly will happen and be good for them: whereas if [5] they are indifferent or annoyed, they do not think so.
W. Rhys Roberts, “RHETORICA,” in The Works of Aristotle, ed. W. D. Ross, trans. W. Rhys Roberts, E. S. Forster, and Ingram Bywater, vol. 11 (Oxford: The Clarendon Press, 1924).
The point Aristotle is making is about speech giving, but I think it is also a useful point for things like making friends and avoiding unnecessary conflict. Aristotle is noting the importance of maintaining and producing a certain frame of mind when you have social goals (in this case debating or convincing a crown during a speech).
But is it possible to apply these principles outside of the categories to which they are traditionally applied? I think so.
For instance, if in a conversation you make a joke and people treat it immediately like its offensive and that you are a bad person. You have a few options based on the idea of people’s frame of mind:
- Immediately and profusely apologize (thus admitting that you really meant what you said to offend), thus making the social event about you and your bad character.
- Act hostile and thus make the situation about you and your bad character.
- Find some way to take the joke further or in a different way so that people realize that the point is to be funny, not cause hurt feelings. One could, if it is perceived that genuine harm was caused, apologize as well.
As a younger man, I had no idea how to do these things. And it is difficult, because keeping a group’s frame of mind friendly when one is insulted is the least of your worries when your social fight or flight response is going a mile a minute in your head. But, like the man said, “[w]hen people are being friendly and placable, they think one thing…”
A skill that is very important for pastors, debaters, evangelists, spouses, or nerds looking to make friends is to maintain a calm state of mind under social pressure. When this is accomplished, one can more easily be friendly (do unto others) while still refusing to capitulate to a false idea, a bad argument, or responding unduly to a playful insult. This does not mean anything like, “never admit fault.” Admitting fault when wrong is perhaps the first step to virtue (1 John 1:9). The example of the joke was just an example, not a principle. Rather, I mean to illustrate that maintaining a positive and amicable thought pattern in the midst of disagreement (which most people take for hostility these days) or hostility is very important for being an intellectual as well as a social and pleasant human being.
Evangelical Myth: God’s Love is Unconditional
Now, this post could be controversial, but that’s okay.
Three things:
- God’s love for the world (thus for all of humanity) is unconditional and precedes the sending of Jesus (John 3:16). So when people say things like, “God would hate you if it weren’t for Jesus’ work on the cross,” they are literally being ridiculous. Even if they refer to statements concerning God’s hatred for people and so-on, John’s gospel makes the claim that God’s way with humanity is more exactly described by its exposition of Jesus than the Old Testament’s exposition of Moses (John 1:1-18).
- Nevertheless, it is false to say that every form of love God shows to human beings is unconditional. For instance, John 3:16 says that God loves the world in such a way that he sent his only son, so that whosoever believes in him might not perish but have everlasting life.” So, God’s love is for the whole world, but the results of said love are conditioned upon ones response to Jesus Christ. One might say, “But, what about universalism? If God saves everybody, then God’s love is still unconditional.” Though I’m not a universalist, it would still be the case that God’s receiving everlasting life as a quality of life now, is conditional upon faith. Indeed, in John 17:1-3, everlasting life is described as living life with a knowledge of God and of Jesus Christ.
- There are other passages which make it clear that God’s love in sending Christ and initiating the redemption of humanity is not the same as God’s reciprocal love for believers.
- Joh 14:23 Jesus answered him, “If anyone loves me, he will keep my word, and my Father will love him, and we will come to him and make our home with him.
- Rom 1:7 To all those in Rome who are loved by God and called to be saints: Grace to you and peace from God our Father and the Lord Jesus Christ.
- 1Jn 2:4-6 Whoever says “I know him” but does not keep his commandments is a liar, and the truth is not in him, (5) but whoever keeps his word, in him truly the love of God is perfected. By this we may know that we are in him: (6) whoever says he abides in him ought to walk in the same way in which he walked.
Now, none of this has to do with earning. It also is not about saying that God does not love everybody. It is about being careful with our words. For the Christian who is walking in sin, having God’s love perfected in you is conditioned upon obeying Christ’s commands. For the person who wants forgiveness of sins, 1 John 1:9 says to confess your sins.
In conclusion, God’s love for the world is unconditional. God’s love for his saints is conditioned upon becoming a saint. God’s love perfected in the saint is conditioned upon the keeping of Christ’s commandments.
Evil is an argument for Christianity, not against it
Though not a main or even the main point of Sunday school last week we discussed 1 John 5:19:
1Jn 5:19 ESV We know that we are from God, and the whole world lies in the power of the evil one.
When horrible things happen on the earth and when people do horrible things, the Christian message says, “Yes, it is so and to be expected. But Christ offers forgiveness for your collusion with such powers and joy on the day such powers are defeated.”
It is not that there are not philosophical issues that run deeper than this particular piece of the Christian faith (why would God allow ‘the evil one’ to exist, do miracles really happen, and so-on?). But for those who accept such propositions as true, the argument from evil seems so childish. It sounds like somebody saying, “See, the owner of your apartment complex isn’t real because the manager is doing a bad job.”
Don’t Typically Care
Two incidents over the last couple years that are actually insignificant were blown out of all proportion.
- A famous man who used to be considered the greatest athlete in the world was surgically shaped to look like a skinny woman and spent loads of money and time to do it and people laud him as a hero and champion of the human form.
- A non-famous woman with a fitness blog lost weight after her pregnancy (presumably via hard work) and challenged other women to care for their bodies and large numbers of people shamed her for challenging other women to exercise and for “endangering her baby” by exercising through her pregnancy.
Normally if a male idealizes skinny women, it is called objectifying or sexualizing women. But if a man looks like a skinny woman, then it is considered heroic.
I think that we live in bizarroworld.