Malthusianism and Scientism

The overproduction of people may lead to an overwhelming burden upon the earth. Science will answer for this concern.

The 19th century Protestant theologian, Thomas Malthus proposed that at some point in the foreseeable future, the world would likely be overpopulated and resources would not be readily available for its inhabitants. Therefore  man's fecundity, his most creative output should be tamed and births controlled. These ideas in part led to the modern drive to limit man in the sexual, procreative arena; it limits women especially. While Malthus was a theologian, today he is primarily remembered for his ideas regarding global and personal economics. He was influential in the incubation of  Darwinian ideas, "natural selection," especially.

Malthus wrote a seminal treatise he entitled, The Essay on the Principle of Population. In this he asserted that: the population forces of earth are so great that in some shape or form, death must be visited upon;  war, sickness and forms of extermination must be permitted. If however, this proves to be insufficient, then the population must be otherwise controlled. Whom is he speaking of, what is the means of control? Who will decide? Is the human of Creation an animal, and should we struggle, to kill for the resources of the world? Is our 'carbon print' poisonous to everyone? While many other 19th century soothsayers died along with that century, Malthus persists in other forms and other names, covertly influencing and directing our actions.

Scientism may be thought of as an exaggerated trust in the absolute empiricism of reasoning. It is partner to the Enlightenment theories arising at about the same century. Scientists engage in empirical reasoning throughout all aspect of life, personal, social, faith, medical, mathematical, humanities, etc. It leads in progression to a "church of Science" or Scientism. The American writer, Robert P. Lockwood notes that Scientism is the product of "two fallacies." First, there is no truth other than that which may be scientifically verifiable, and secondly science is the only acceptable means of running a society. Lockwood notes, "we live in a world where the ethos of the times is reflected in the media."

While both of these thoughts may be in opposite extremes, and both may or may not resonate with everyday spirituality, they are 'out there.' Their influence is lasting and far reaching: into politics, economics, science, and spirituality. Maybe into your head and mine. Where did that come from-- who was Malthus? What do I or do I not support with my everyday faith and beliefs? Some answers are surprising, if you take a look.

Imagining Heaven

“Heaven goes by favor; if it went by merit, you would stay out and your dog would get
in.” Mark Twain

Does heaven exist; if it does, what’s it like, how do you get there? What is more thought  provoking, curious and confusing than the subject of heaven? Many faith communities have a teaching on this subject. It is known variously by names such as: paradise, enlightenment, majesty, nirvana. With names such as these no wonder it inspires.

“Americans have described heaven’s wonders as luscious, stunning, spellbinding, exhilarating, captivating,” writes author Gary Scott Smith in his new book, Heaven in the American Imagination. While most often depicted as a wonderful and desirable place, most Americans find the notion attractive but at the same time are in no hurry to visit the place. And while due to the limits on size of his book, Smith gives little attention to eastern spirituality, he does acknowledge that there seems to be an almost universal affinity to the idea of this kind of place.

Many, if not most, of us have at least a passing interest in what happens after death. We are curious about a life after death. In the everyday, temporal place it is a sad testament that the world is littered with graveyards of one type or another. This life as we know it is not survivable beyond a given time span. For most Americans that time inches to upwards of 78 years or so about now. So regardless of how well we live our lives, what food we eat or what illnesses do or do not befall us, life is limited. From the First Great Awakening of the 1730s, to the Civil War era to present day, especially during turbulent times Americans speculate upon the life in heaven. From pop music to popular literature, to religious sermonizing, and “end-times” prophesy, as many as 90 per cent of modern Americans believe in the place.

While Karl Marx may have derided heaven as some place for those poor souls longing for comfort in an imaginary place, which in his view, gives the oppressed false hope that their travails will be rewarded and justice finally meted out; heaven, he thought, only prevents them from working for remedies and justice here on earth. Others disagree, remarking that the imagination of heaven gives rise to a view of hope for a better place, a better world and the courage to move forth to that world. They may better cope with sorrow,
disappointment and loss of loved ones. And while some argue that heaven is here on earth, others advocate for access by faith and deed; still others by faith and good works alone. The debate rages on.

What Part of Me Believes That?

"Sometimes we are startled. Where did that come from? I didn't know I felt so strongly." -- Robert Johnson, writer, Jungian psychologist

As a student and one associated with the late Carl Jung, Robert Johnson carries on Jung's work. Jung, unlike many of his generation, was one who believed that the base root of most all personal problems is not functional, some described such as "toxic", "games," "setting fences and boundaries," but rather spiritual challenges or crises that are not limited solutions or positions; instead they are potentially limitless and as unique as the persons who pose them. These other terms have no place in the spiritual world; they are 'pop psychology' and not terribly helpful. Sometimes they are denigrating; often they indicate power seeking by the one who utters them. The Simple mind avoids thoughts like these because people are greater than the sum of their mistakenness and sometimes confusion.

We can learn by examining our issues closely. What is it about me that feels this way? Why do I think that? What part of it sets off this (intense) reaction in me? Robert Johnson takes up a small part of this issue writing, "We remember getting worked up in a conversation and blurting out some strong opinion that we didn't know consciously we held." And we are startled by this sudden revelation not only to those listening but in our self equally! There is this sudden surge of emotional energy and maybe we suddenly find we are being our self, because what constitutes our self is the totality which necessarily includes our unconscious pronouncements. These "hidden parts of our self have strong feelings and want to express themselves."

Sometimes the hidden or unconscious part of our self is zany, sometimes its out of sync with social norms; sometimes it's embarrassing, violent, or humiliating when these facets of the self, parts of our personality, abruptly emerge. Other times, points of talent or strength arise, suddenly surprising us with their skill and clarity. As we grow, we may conclude that we are a different kind of person than we previously thought. Complicating matters, our qualities both positive and negative, emotional and intellectual may or may not arrive at precisely the most appropriate moments. This can leave us feeling strongly for or against someone or something and having the intellectual thought, Why? We may not yet understand.

Into the mix, our self definition is called into play; we are challenged by it. The unconscious is a huge energy system. Like others have famously observed the heart has its reasons, and the reception of its images and messages can be deeply informative to our spiritual and growing selves.

Eros Is a Verb

"It was Sappho who first called eros "bittersweet."  --Eros Bittersweet by Anne Carson

While hard to translate when applied to ancient gods, for the woman poet, Sappho who wrote the surviving poem Sweetbitter, the Greek word glukupikron translated into English might be thought of as bittersweet. Meaning a sort of sweetness when applied to eros and then a disappointment, or "first sweet and then bitterness in sequence," writes Carson. She says, "Many a lover's experience would validate such a chronology, especially in poetry..." In Sappho's poem, she does not seem to be recording the history of a love affair as much as she seems to be speaking of its geometry.

Desire is from without; it "creeps up upon its object irresistibly."  Recording in her poem, not the love but the instant of desire, Sappho sees the desire as "neither inhabitant nor ally of the desirer." And often poets write of the resulting crazed feeling of the one who most ardently pursues the beauty of another. "Foreign to her will, it [desire] forces itself... Eros is an enemy. Its bitterness must be the taste of  enmity. That would be hate." The convergence of both love and hate in the same pole constitutes a paradox. It is somewhat cliche to say that hate begins where love leaves off. And yet hate is not the opposite of love.

"There is something pure and indubitable about the notion that eros is lack." In Sappho's fragment 31 she writes of this. Here the poetess creates a stage, mise en scene where the writer herself seems to step mysteriously into the situation, between the lover and the beloved, forming what is a triangle. An obvious answer is that this poem is really about jealousy. Many have thought this about it, while others have thought not. The word 'jealousy' comes from the Greek zelos, meaning zeal or fervent pursuit. "It [jealousy] is a hot and corrosive spiritual emotion, arising in fear, fed upon resentment." The jealous lover fears that another is preferred over them, and that their primary place in the beloved heart is under threat by another. "This," writes Carson is "an emotion of placement and displacement."  Thus the jealous lover covets a placement in the beloved affections, and is filled with anxiety that another will take it instead.

In Italy during the Renaissance period a dance became popular called Jealousy in which pairs of dancers separated during parts of the dance to join with others; at several stages in the dance, one of the dancers must stand alone while others move on. They then rejoin the others. "Jealousy is a dance in which everyone moves, for it is the instability of the emotional situation which preys upon a jealous lover's mind." In Sappho's poem, she does not covet the man's place, nor fear for her own. And she directs no resentment at him. She is simply "amazed at his intrepidness." Yet it is the beloved beauty that so deeply affects Sappho as one in the triangle. And while jealousy may be implicit in this poem, it does not explain the geometry of the piece.

Finally jealousy, it becomes evident, is not the point: "the normal world of erotic responses is beside the point." It is, says Carson, "about the lover's mind in the act of constructing desire for itself." No claim beyond that does the poet make. Sappho perceives desire as a three point function, a triangle. She argues that it's a radical, necessary construction of desire. "For where eros is lack, its activation calls upon a three part structure--lover, beloved, and that which comes between them. Desire moves, and eros is a verb.

Aristotle and the Akratic

"Weakness of the will is something we all think we know; many feel that we experience it ourselves."  --Weakness of Will by William Charlton

The good that I would feel to do; the good that I would not feel and do... is the subject of a talk by Saint Paul in one of his biblical letters to the Romans (Romans 7:15), is often attributed by modern commentators to a 'weak will.' Modern philosophers such as William Charlton take up this notion in his book, The Weak Will. So called 'weakness' he explains, is often an attempt to explain either behavior or the effects of behaviors. The behavior he describes and explores is that of 'going against one's better judgment,' and the result of that action.

In an effort to be concise, Charlton takes up the discussion of the greatly influential Aristotle's ideas on the the Will, and uses the Greek term, the Akratic. Translators of Aristotle have sometimes used the English term "incontinent" to indicate slips or mistakes in the will of persons. Delving into his topic, Charlton writes that there are several views on Akrasia. Some, like John Calvin, argue that there is no Akrasia, no free will; others argue that it wholly exists, such as the philosopher Emmanuel Kant.

The questions which Charlton seeks to expound are those of strength. Are there various strengths of will? Does that person in Akrasia consciously choose, and how so? What about the modern ideas of psychologists, like Sigmund Freud? Charlton notes, in counter-face to the established Roman hierarchy of the ancient times, that the first person thought to bring "the idea of the Will into philosophy (of the West) does indeed appear to have been the Christian Bishop, Saint Augustine of Hippo.
Augustine writes of the Will sometimes as 'a faculty of the mind,' sometimes as the mind itself in its role as a thing which issues commands... Augustine asks, how can the mind give orders which are not obeyed?"
Later thinkers of the Medieval age were confronted with the texts of both Aristotle and Plato; comparison of these with these texts by writers such as Saint Paul of the Bible caused them to ponder, "when I act against my own will, it means that I have self knowledge..."

Today the inquiry into the Will, volition and motivation is taken over largely by science and the theories of psychology. The spiritual component has been thus voided.  Moving far away from the ancient Greek conception of the will as having two parts,  modern philosophers like Descartes often see it as strength or force. Such strengths, weak or strong, are therefore practical problems to be solved.
Leaping forward, and the 'human potential' movement emerges. Desires, as weakness, now are at the forefront for thinkers such as Russell; men are then just at the whim and mercy of their desires.

Finally, Charlton weighs in after examining the thoughts of others. He says, "weakness of the Will is puzzling, insofar as we think our behavior is determined by our view of what is best; it's not so puzzling if we think our behavior is determined mechanistically by our physical environment."

The Secret of God's Heart

"You are the secret of God's heart."

The most valuable thing you can offer is your possible or potential spirit. This is what you have always available to offer, what you need to live your own love story. Like the seed watered, your love is without beginning and without end. Watering the seeds of your love, is a practice that makes you grow-- but it is only a practice, not an end. For, if your focus becomes the notion of "growing," then the end becomes just that--a pursuit and the way is obscured by what you pursue.

As Deepak Chopra relates in his book, The Path to Love,"... [it] is something that you consciously choose to follow, and everyone who has fallen in love has taken that first step." Pope John Paul II in his first public gathering, exhorted the crowd with the Bible verse, "Do not be afraid, for I am with you always."
Deepak continues, "In India, the spiritual path is called Sadhana, and as I've mentioned though a tiny majority of people give up normal life to wander the world as seekers of enlightenment, these monks, Sadhus, everyone, from those in the most ancient civilization of Vedic India until today, considers their life to be a Sadhana, a path to the Self. Although the Self seems separate from us, it is actually intertwined in everything a person thinks, feels, or does... 

As long as the Self has yet to be found, sadhana exists. The "goal" is to change your awareness from separation to unity." And while the inner work takes place, it must have something exterior to sustain it.
"In India, a person's nature leads him to the style of path appropriate to reaching fulfillment. Some people are naturally intellectual, and therefore are suited to the path of knowledge or Gyana. Some are more devotional and are suited to the path of worship, Bhakti. Some are more outwardly motivated and are suited to the path of action, or Karma. The three are not mutually exclusive; rather they may form a wholly integrated path.

"Ideally there are periods of study, worship and reflection, and service in a person's day." It is possible to be so taken by a particular practice that ones' whole existence centers upon that practice. Perhaps it is reading the Scriptures, contemplation or scholarly debate, living the life of Gyana; perhaps spending time meditating, chanting and participating in Temple rituals as the life of a Bhakti. Or you may focus yourself doing social work, teaching, serving, applying yourself to mental and physical purification doing God's bidding in daily life, the work of Karma.


"A path is just a way to open yourself to spirit, to God, to love. These are aims we may cherish, but our culture has given us no established way to reach them. Indeed, never in history has a seeker been confronted with such a disorganized and chaotic spiritual scene." Today what we are left with is the desire to love and be loved, a force and a power in the world too great to be extinguished; thus the path to love is not simply a pretty metaphor, it is a reality. And you are the greatest secret of god's heart. In India, the most ancient version of this is bhakti or devotion, from Vedic India in which all love is in the search for God. The Sufis of Islam, and the great teacher and poet, Rumi, testify to this.

Christ initiated another version of the Way in his teaching "Love your neighbor as yourself." He did not simply say like, rather he passionately intoned the word love as his great commandment. The Christian idea of the Way is about the relationship between a parent, a creator,  for his beloved child. God is seen as the great mother/father. In the Hebrew scriptures, there is the great love of God for his creation in the Song of Solomon.
However "since the advent of Freud, psychologists have assured us that falling in love is illusory; the sense of ecstasy that is part of falling in love isn't realistic. We must learn to accept the temporary nature of romance and disregard the "projected fantasy" that we might be as immortal and invulnerable as lovers often feel."
On the other hand, Chopra among others insists, the sense of uniqueness, blessing and delight felt by lovers has its own reality, but it must be found within; the world wishes no such part. The mystery that is love, joins us to a reality that we yearn for, and despite the "differences of a Sufi master, a yogi, a Christian saint, and a Chinese martial artist, all perceive spirit as clearly as seeing the earth and sky."