The Hillsdale Forum May 2014

8/11/2019 The Hillsdale Forum May 2014

1/24

22 Humor: How to Liveo Campus, on Campus

Danielle Shillingstad explains

how to capture the essence

of o-campus living from the

comfort of your dorm.

Brett Wierenga and Martha

Ekdahl explain the pros and

cons to both sides of the

question.

14 Ring by Spring7 The Four Loves inHarry Potter

he illsdae

Forum

Should Christians be afraid of

Harry Potter? Micah Meadowcroft

says no.


2/24

{EDITORIAL}EDIORINCHIEF Chris McCaffery

MANAGING EDIORChelsey Schmid

EDIORALARGEWes Wright

CONEN EDIORMatthew OSullivan, Luk

Adams

FEAURED WRIERSNathan Brand, Micah

Meadowcrof, John aylor, Garrett West

SAFF WRIERSSarah Albers, Devon Izmirian

Andrew Egger, Danielle Shillingstad{DESIGN}

HEAD DESIGNERMeg Prom

DESIGN EDITORLauren Wierenga

PHOOGRAPHERNathaniel Meadowcroft{SPONSORS}

BUSINESS MANAGERRyne Bessmer

FACULY ADVISORDr. John Somerville

Intercollegiate Studies Institutes Collegiate

Network

CONSERVATIVE FEATURES4Letters: Politics MajorsDevin Creed responds to Luke Adams In Deense o Politics(March 2014), and Adams deends his position.

7

The Four Loves of Harry PotterMicah MeadowcroftShould Christians be araid o Harry Potter? Micah Meadowcrof says no.

8The Fight for Food and Freedom Nathan BrandRecently students have called into question the quality and necessity o Hills-dales meal plans. YAF president Nathan Brand outlines the argument or meal

plan reorm.

10Interview with Dr. Nathan SchlueterTe Hillsdale Forumtalks with Dr. Schlueter about moral ecology.

ESSAYS16 Mans Place in the CosmosJohn TaylorIn his work, Walker Percy criticized the growing scientism he saw in the 20th

century and deended an anthropocentric view o the Cosmos.

17 What is Metaphysics?Garrett WestGarrett West draws on Martin Heidegger, Aristotle, St. Thomas Aquinas,

and Emmanuel Levinas to explore historical conceptions of Being.

CAMPUS FEATURES12Spotlight on Triple MajorsAndrew EggerTe Forumlooks at three overachievers who couldnt choose just one.

14Campus Smackdown: Ring by Spring Devon IzmirianBrett Wierenga and Martha Ekdahl explain the pros and cons to both sides o

the question.

22

Humor: How to Live o Campus, on CampusDanielle Shillingstad

Danielle Shillingstad explains how to capture the essence o off-campus livingrom the comort o your dorm.

23Tragically Hip Sarah AlbersAlbers has ound something on the Internet, and she wants to share it with you.

C

Mission Statement:Te Hillsdale Forumis the independent, student-run conservative magazine at Hillsdale CollegeTe Forum, in support o the mission statemento Hillsdale College, exists to promote a return tolimited government as outlined in the Declarationo Independence and the Constitution. We publishconservative opinion, editorials, and campueatures. Te Forum is a vehicle to bring thediscussion and thought o the intelligent studentsand proessors at the heart o the conservative

movement beyond the classroom.

02

Follow us on Twitter

@hillsdaleforum and like

us on Facebook!


3/24

Anyone whos seen Te Pape in the Grewcock StudentUnion on Sunday afernoons knows that its campus least-re-liable news source. Its written in a terribly transcribed NewYawhk accent and details the adventahs and interests oJack Kelly and his staff o newsies. But as anyone who hastaken the time to get to know it will attest, Te Pape is one othe best things about Hillsdale College. It serves no purposeexcept the obvious enjoyment and love that goes into creating

it, and that shines through in every sensational headline andmisspelled word. Weve paid some homage to the newsieshere beore, to their great amusement, but now its time tosay goodbye to the campus publication that has a strongersocial media presence than us and theCollegian combined.

When seniors Katie Annett, Emilie Moore, and Arielorres sat down with me or my spotlight onTe Pape in lastweeks Collegian, it was immediately obvious what Hillsdalesmost sensationalist paper has been or them. Moore said itbest: Its a record o our college experience. She describeshersel as the metaphorical brains o the publication, toAnnetts heart and soul.

Te Pape is written by and or people who are verycomortable not taking themselves too seriously, and thatssomething more students at Hillsdale need. As seniorcolumnist Erin Mundahl noted in her insightul column inthe April 3 Collegian, Its a sorry thing to take a curious,hardworking student and push her to the point where allshe can say is Im tired. Our education can take everythingout o us. Reading and writing and studying and all that allover again the next day, schoolnight or weekend or ederalholiday, coursework piles up and can bury us under a churno papers and tests and reading until our eyes glaze over andthe only response to Whats up? is Im tired, i not a slowgroan and a thousand-yard stare.

Mundahl is right: Properly understood, a Hillsdale educa-tion must include an ample amount o silliness, o wonder, ounexpected moments. Without a sense o leisure, we couldbecome too tired to live out the education we have workedso hard to gain.

I all your days are spent studying, youll have a greatGPA, but you wont have anything good or true (improvedor otherwise) in your lie. Te only thing your education willhave really given you is the creeping suspicion that Macbeth

might have been exactly right about lie, old by an idiot,ull o sound and ury, signiying nothing. Studying thehumanities is useless i youre the only human you know, andi youre the only human you know, youre a poor one at that

Tis is something the women behind Te Pape have under-stood. Teyve taken their scant leisure time and made it intoa whole world o headlines and dime novels and adventuresOver 36 issues, theyve built a loyal ollowing and put the

improved truth in newsprint. Te Pape staff knows thatits essential to take a break rom the swirl o Spinoza andHayek and Aristotle so many students never stop spinningrom. Te Papeis a celebration o taking the time, o doingsomething silly and extraneous and poorly-spelled. Teyvetaken their adventuresthe story o their riendshipand made it into something that can leaven anyones day, itheyre open to it.

Te last issue o Te Pape is a love letter to our years atHillsdale, to riends and studies and the fictionalized diaryo seven girls who have learned that the greatest advice is toStay out all night lookin at da stars, talkin, dancin, and etc

on the cross country fields, and then just to top it off, get awarm breakast at the Finish Line and crash...hopeully afermakin it back to your room, and to leave the weather inSanta Fe as Everything you hoped itd be.

College is a strange, ephemeral time. Tere can be a strug-gle to find something lasting in the constantly-changingcommunity we move throughI hear ofen that its best notto bother. Tis carries no water or me. Cling to things here,because theyre good. You, Forum reader, are young. Lookor the grace to accept the youth o others and take your ownor what it is. Never allow whatever you think is importanteven i its or Dr. Jacksonget in the way o loving someonenext to you, or allowing them to love you. Souls unleavenedbecome bitter, and people learn to spit them out.

Have a great summer! Te Forum will see you first thingnext semester. Tanks to our abulous design editor LaurenWierengaher work is all around this letterand to RyneBessmer, who helps us to pay or these nice glossy magazinesWe wish you all the best in graduation. F

Chris McCaffery is a sophomore studying history.He is a member of the Dow Journalism Program.

Letter from the EditorWell leave all[sic]s understood here

April 28, 2014 The Forum LFE


4/24

In reply to Luke Adams In Defense of Politics

Devin Creed

Adams begins his essay by positing that Hillsdale is

amous or politics, and he goes on to imply that Hills-dales mission somehow relates to politics. While Hills-dale may have gotten significant press or the decisionnot to accept ederal unding, this does not mean that theschools mission in any way relates to the political sphere.Te colleges mission statement states in part that:

It pursues the stated object o the ounders: tournish all persons who wish, irrespective o na-tion, color, or sex, a literary and scientific educa-tion outstanding among American colleges andto combine with this such moral and social in-

struction as will best develop the minds and im-prove the hearts o its pupils.

It then goes on to note briefly that the college is a trusteeo the JudeoChristian and GrecoRoman heritage(which is most clearly expressed in the American exper-iment), and that the college wants to train its students tobe deenders o that Western legacy.

Te stated mission o the college is ocused on aneducation that develops both mind and soul and teachesstudents to preserve the legacies we have inherited. Tereis no mention o influencing the political sphere, or

attempting to effect broad institutional change. Rather,the college is ocused on its students as individuals, striv-ing to cultivate them in multiple ways and teaching themto value the past.

Russell Kirk drafed a statement o academic reedomor the aculty which was adopted in 1995, and it statesthat:

Hillsdale College affirms that all these reedomsare dependent upon the maintenance o a moralorder; and that academic reedom in particular

requires attachment to a body o truth, madeknown through the order and integration oknowledge. O such truths the College is the con-servator and renewer, and the primary unctiono the college is to transmit, through these truths,some measure o wisdom and virtue.

Tis statement also pushes political concerns to theperiphery, or the college is first and oremost interestedin conserving the truths passed down to us through theWestern heritage and transmitting them to the studentswho attend the college. Te college does not ascribe to

any particular political philosophy in this statement, andneither does it note any desire to implement the Goodin society, but rather to oster wisdom and virtue by theconversation o the truths o the past.

An example o Adams misunderstanding o the collegecomes in his throw-away comment concerning RushLimbaughs advertising or the school. Limbaugh lacks acollege education, which was made apparent in his 2011radio rant against classical education. He encouragedstudents to stay ar away rom classical studies becausethey were subjective and a tool o the lef meant to trickstudents into paying or worthless degrees. Hillsdale is

firmly rooted in the classical style o learning, however,requiring its students to take multiple courses in theclassics (Great Books, Western Heritage) and offeringmajors in Latin, Greek, and Classical Studies. ToughLimbaugh advertises or the school, he is clearly ignoranto what takes place in the classroom, so his misguidedmusings on Hillsdale and politics are very suspect. Teyillustrate a broader misunderstanding o the mission andpurpose o the school.

Adams then makes the claim that politics students arewell-equipped because they have to take political philoso-

April28,

2014

TheForum|

Conser

vative|04

Creed vs. Adams

Whilenot devoido validpoints,LukeAdamsarticle In

Deenseo Politics

(Forum,March

2014) missesthe mark

and demonstrates aundamental misunderstanding o the

liberal arts and Hillsdale College. He is probably correctin thinking that politics majors are not sell-outs and thatthey should not be unduly criticized or their choice omajor, but the flaw in his argument lies in his treatmento the purpose o the college and the purpose o liberallearning.


5/24

Creed vs. Adams

phy classes. Tese political philosophy classes mostly ocuson philosophy, so politics majors gain an excellent under-standing o the human soul. Te philosophy taught in thepolitics department, however, is a ar cry rom the philoso-phy in the philosophy department. Te politics departmentemploys an esoteric Straussian reading o classical politi-

cal and philosophical texts. Strauss thought that politicaltheorists masked their true ideas because o governmentcensure. Tereore, treatises o political philosophy have asurace level meaning along with a deeper, esoteric readingonly accessible to the intellectual elite. Esoteric readingsare ahistorical becausethey are usually devoido context. Tey areused in a circularashion to imposemodern ideas on oldtexts and then to claimthat the modern ideascame to us rom thepast. Eric Voegelinidentifies this kind oaulty hermeneutic asmodern-day gnosti-cism. When a politicsstudent (or any studentor that matter) claimsto have discerned thepath o history and where it is tending, they assume the

role o Voegelins gnostic prophet.I have experienced this gnosticism firsthand in a Consti-tution class where the proessor told us that AbrahamLincoln cannot be called a racist (in the modern sense o theword). Tis proessor argued that Lincoln used a laughingor joking tone in a speech in which he claimed that blackshad less rights than whites. How the proessor discernedtone rom a speech in which we only have a transcript isbeyond me. I would like to stress that this instance did notmake the class illegitimate, and I have the utmost respector the proessor who was teaching it. Nevertheless, it isimportant to realize that many o the readings done in

the politics department lack any historical context and areofentimes gross misinterpretations.

Finally, and most distressing, Adams claim that politicsmajors seek to achieve the Good on a government scalearticulates a mission o the most extreme hubris. Heassumes that an education through the Hillsdale politicsdepartment gives students such an extensive idea o theGood that they can go out and implement it in the politi-

cal sphere. I contend that the Good and other such senti-ments require a lietime o study to comprehend even inpart. Te hubristic project o seeking to bring about theGood through government alls prey to Voegelins concepto immanentizing the eschaton, o trying to bring about the

heavenly in the presentworld. Te Goodcannot be broughtabout on this earth,and it is misguidedor anyone to thinkthat it can be effectedthrough the govern-ment. In addition, thiskind o goal flies in theace o liberal educa-tion at Hillsdale, whichwe see maniested inthe individual risingto sel-governmentthrough a cultivationo the mind, soul, and

body. Tis missionthe very mission o our college and

liberal education in generalpresupposes that the wayto influence others is through personal relationships, oras Martin Buber posits, humans find their meaning in ITou relationships. Tereore, broad institutional changethrough legislation misses the aim o liberal education andthe purpose o Hillsdale College since it does away withpersonal relationships in lieu o trying to effect changequickly and by the orce o the laws.

While this essay was specifically a response to Adamsarticle, I believe that several o these arguments apply tothe politics department as a whole. I dont want to be seenas simply bashing a group o my peers and proessors,

however. Rather, I would like to encourage a continuingdialogue on the subject.

The stated mission of the collegeis focused on an education that

develops both mind and soul and

teaches students to preserve thelegacies we have inherited. Thereis no mention of inuencing the

political sphere, or attempting toeect broad institutional change.


6/24

In reply to Devin Creed

Luke AdamsIm happy that someone disagreed strongly enough

with my piece to write a rebuttal. Im also happy that thisconversation remains just that and that we are not devolv-ing into BurrHamilton-level debateat least not yet.

Also, thank you or your excellent outline o the defini-tion and purpose o the liberal arts, as well as their speci-ic application to Hillsdale College. I have two commentson your line o argumentation here. First, in reerenceto the mission o the college, you stated, Tere is nomention o influencing the political sphere, or attempt-ing to enact broad institutional change. I grant this as avalid, but significantly misleading, sentence. As you point

out earlier in the piece, the education we receive here ismeant to develop the mind and the soul. My question,then, is why would this growth o the soul and mind notapply to those operating in the political sphere?

While the college obviously does not make politicalchange part o its explicit mission (which, by the way, Inever stated or implied anywhere in my piece, contrary toyour claims), it would make sense that one who receivedthis type o education would be able to practice it inwhatever field he finds himsel. Tis is the purpose o thepolitics program.

Next, your argument regarding my Rush Limbaughcomment could only have been inspired by a seriousmisreading o my piece. While I wholeheartedly agreethat Limbaugh clearly does not understand at all themission o Hillsdale College, I was illustrating theconnection between the college and politically concernedstudents. For example, during the last election cycleHillsdale students did more campaigning or conserva-tive candidates than any other college in the state, includ-ing Michigan State and even the University o Michigan.Like it or not, Hillsdale has a relationship with conserva-tism, and it is ofen expressed through the political sideo that philosophy. It is simply inconsistent or a schoolo this character to be so acrimonious towards a group ostudents who merely want to urther their interests in thisfield in an academic or proessional manner.

You state that the political philosophy taught at Hills-dale College is misleadingly taught due to a Straussianmethod o ignoring historical context. Your main sourceagainst Strauss is Eric Voegelin. Voegelin wrote almostexclusively against major schools o historical revisionismsuch as Nazism and Communism, both o whom inten-tionally read history with a specific lens that changes actsand inserts a specific narrative where no particular oneexists. I have never come across this level o revisionism inthe politics department. Te political philosophy classesare philosophy classes first, without any kind o slant, andthen politics classes seeking only to understand i anyapplications to politics exist in the texts. Strauss was, aferall, the first American political philosopher in the 20th

century to place any kind o serious trust in the American

Revolution.W i t h o u thim, itsairly saeto saythat mostcons erv a -tives wouldland in theneocon catego-ry.

Finally, you

attacked the idea oHillsdale students pursuingthe Good in government by saying that once again itcontradicts Mr. Voegelins admonishment not to attemptto immanentize the eschaton. Also, you once againmisread my original argument. I did not say that Hillsdalepolitics majors were to seek to implement the Good on asocietal scale. I said that they try to implement the Goodin the governmental sphere. Teres a big difference. As toVoegelin, I think everyone here realizes that true perec-tion can never be reached while on Earth. Yet, at the sametime, it would be absolutely ridiculous and atalistic to saythat we must not do our best. Te liberal arts educationis meant to equip students to be the best people they canbe, always striving to better themselves and their work,no matter their field. All the politics major does is showstudents how to do this best in regards to statesmanshipand public service.

Adams vs. Creed

We welcome letters to the editor. Letters

appear in the issue afer the article towhich they are responding. Letters under400 words are preerred, and they may be

edited or length and clarity.

Please send them to:[email protected]

LETTERS

A

pril28,

2014

TheForum|

Conservative|06


7/24

The Four LovesinHarry PotterChristians should read

Harry Potter, not fear it.

BY MICAH MEADOWCROFT

Throughout its publication historyHarry Potter, as a series, has been oneo the most challenged and banned

books in America. While it has received lessand less attention in recent years due to itscompletion, both as books and movies, andits loss o global phenomenon status, it isstill approached with caution and hostilityin many conservative religious commu-

nities. While the Harry Potter generationgrew up reading the books as they cameout, maturing with the characters, the bookswere most ofen banned or challenged or

various anti-religious themes and material.Tat remains the primary reason or amiliesand communities to oppose the reading othe series. Tose amilies and communitiesgenerally cite the Bible and their Christianaith as their motivation or challenging theseries.

Harry Potteris a series all about love and,

as such, is prooundly Biblical. By borrow-ing conceptions o agape, philia, storge, anderos rom C.S. Lewis short treatise, TeFour Loves, we can examine Harry Potteras an exploration o love in all o its myriadexpressions. Tis article also reveals spoil-ersbeware.

Agape, unconditional love, powers thewhole series. It is primarily expressed inthree characters: Lily Potter, Severus Snape,and Albus Dumbledore. It is Lily Pottersunconditional love o Harry that makeshim the boy who lived in the ace o her

death. Her sacrifice protects him when hehas no other deenses. Lily Potters death isalso the crisis in Severus Snapes lie, whenhis romantic love or her becomes an uncon-ditional devotion to her and a promise toprotect what she loves, Harry. Every singlemajor action Snape takes in the entire seriesis motivated by his love or Lily. He expectsno reward, and none is coming, as he riskseverything or who she was. Albus Dumble-dore devotes his whole lie to loving andprotecting that which is good. He sacrificesprivate happiness or public good and leads

through selfless service. His love bringshim meek as a lamb to the slaughter as heprepares the way or goods triumph. Tesefigures and their sacrifice are the examplesthat lead Harry to his own agapehis willingdeath or the oolish wizards o the worldas he ulfills his call to be the Chosen One,a Christ-type who lived and lives, whowas loved and loves, deeating death, and

death-eaters, in death.Agape may have propelled the plot o

Harry Potter as a series, but philia, riend-ship, made each book a delight. Harry, Ron,and Hermione show close riendship, trueappreciation o the other person, and delightin who they are, ar more clearly than mostliterary heroes. Harry, Ron, and Hermioneare a triune Jonathan and David, a relation-al union harmonized by their love or oneanother. Conusion rom readers about thelack o sexual tension between them as atrio evidences the whole-souled compan-

ionship their riendship demonstrates. Teyfight, sure, but they value one another, havecommitted to one another. Teir riendshipis not natural. Tey are heart, mind, and soulbrought together by choosing one another.

Storgeis the affection o amily. Everyonewants to go to Hogwarts, not just becauseit is magical, but because o the communi-ty there. House rivalries may get nasty, butHogwarts is a big amily. Te Weasleys arethe uproarious amily ideal. Tey love eachother with a deep and abiding ondness and

acceptance everyone seeks. No matter howdark the world o Harry Potter gets, it glowswith riends and amilies honest affectionor one another. Sirius Black loves Harry notonly because Harry is his athers sonand Blacks godson, but also becausethey are truly ond o each other,truly kindred.

Any coming o age novelwouldnt be completewithout the early explora-tions o eros. But roman-tic love is never limited

in Harry Potter to theawkward snogging ohormonal teenagers. Ocourse Rowling spendsplenty o pages illustrat-ing both the positive andnegative possibilities obeing in love and exploringburgeoning sexuality, but she alsoillustrates mature romance in the

vivacious love o onks and Lupin. Inthe flashback accounts o the lie o Jamesand Lily Potter, immature teenage mutual

narcissism transorms into sacrificial loveBut best o all, and despite Rowlings recentregrets, Hermione and Rons relationship is abeautiul picture o growth and orgiveness.

Harry Potteris about love. So is the Bible.One can apologize or the series to concernedconservative Christians by emphasizingHarry as a Christ figure, or Dumbledore asa prophet, or Lily as a Marian figure. One

can point to the series as a war between cleargood and clear evil, with a community oaithul against whom the gates o hell willnot prevail. One can see it as a story aboutdeath and lie, the ear o death and lust orlie, or the love o lie that leads to welcomingdeath. Hell, Lily and James grave quotes 1Corinthians 15:26 with Te last enemy thatshall be destroyed is death carved in stoneor all time, looking orward to eternity.

It is, however, above all, an explorationo love, an examination o its orms andnature.Harry Potteris a story o magic and

the mundane, darkness and light, joy andpain, the human experience o love. As such,it is prooundly beautiul and prooundlyBiblical. It is not high art. Te writing is notgroundbreakingit will not be added to thecanon o great books. But the story is a storythat touches the story. o ear it is to ear thelie we are living. Christians, anyone who ishesitant, should read Harry Potter. F

Micah Meadowcrof is a sophomorestudyng history. He is a member o the

Dow Journalism Program.


8/24

Too ofen, students roam aroundthe dining area looking orsomething to eat and end up with

an unhealthy slice o pizza or a atty bagel.Tey start their stroll at the Hilltop Bistroto see what the main course is or that

meal. I it doesnt look appealing, theymay venture to the salad bar or the grillrepetitive afer a while. So i you are at alllike me, you find yoursel heading overto the bread and bagel shel or the cerealsection and walking away with just a bowlo sugar-filled cereal.

Tat bowl o cereal costs studentsanywhere rom $8.53 to

$15.00 a meal, depending on their mealplan.

Because o outlandish prices, limitedoptions, and ofen-poor ood quality,Hillsdale College needs to reconsider howit does ood service.

Tis is the most important issue acingstudents. Besides student housing and thecore curriculum, this is the one area o

campus lie that all students share in. Andit is in need o much improvement.Tis is the most private o private insti-

tutions. President Dr. Larry Arnn andthe schools administration do not takemarching orders rom anyone, so theyare ree to operate the ood service at thecollege in any way they please. But thisshould not stop students rom voicingtheir concerns and ideas.

Students are more than welcome tohave discussionsabout how the

ounding atherswould approachthe conflict inthe Ukraine orAristotles takeon immigrationreorm, but noneo it matters. o quote one o our avorites,Hillary Clinton, What difference does itmake?

No one with authority is goingto be reading your opinion on

these topics. No one o us

is an expert on nationalissues.

So it is importantto act and seek

reorms in areaswhere studentscan be effec-tive. Hills-dale Collegeprides itselon thecommunitythat it osters,and we

should look toimprove it.

Students havebeen creative

when coming upwith reorm ideas,

and the administrationshould take note. Reorms

such as allowing students toopt-out o having a meal plan or pay

or only what they are going to eat, offer-ing more meal plan size options, or hiringa different ood provider should all beconsidered.

Hillsdales Young Americans orFreedom chapter began a petition thismonth asking the administration toconsider the opt-out option o reormTe student group stands or many o the

same ideals as Hillsdale and believes thecolleges administration should live up tothe standard it holds the government to.

Te colleges widely read publication,Imprimis, deends ree markets andlimited government issue afer issuePresident Arnn and the college have goneafer the progressive government policieslike Obamacare, more than Wile ECoyote goes afer the Road Runner. Teseinstitutions orce everyone to pay or

substandard goodsand services they

dont need, whilethe guaranteedmonopoly makeshigh pricesand ever-lowerstandards thenorm. Fortunately

Hillsdale College knew these problemswould arise when government involveditsel in health care policy.

Yet students are orced to buy into ameal plan policy that creates many o thesame problems.

Tey are aced with the same restrictedchoice, high prices, and a school-sanc-tioned monopolyresulting in lowquality, high costs, and an absence oreedom and competition.

Te college reuses to allow a reemarket inside campus, and this violatesthe aims and the principles that Hillsdalepublically stands or.

Beore outlining reorm, it is import-ant to remember that this a private insti-tution that we agree to attend. Nor doesthe college market itsel as a place thatpractices these political and economicalprinciples internally. But these principleso reedom, and choice and competition,are the best way o organizing ourselves,and students should not be preventedrom speaking out on an issue that willimprove the quality o lie on campus.

Practical change starts with allowingstudents to opt-out o having a meal planTis will allow students choice and orcethe current monopoly to compete or

The Fight forFood andFreedomStudents deserve

more food optionsBY NATHAN BRAND

Hillsdale College pridesitself for the communitythat it fosters, and we

should look to improve it.

p

,

|

|


9/24

their dining business, hopeully improv-ing quality.

Tere are dozens o local business-es that would love to have Hillsdalestudents spending their money in theirestablishments. Imagine having that $15the college charges you per meal backin your pocket, and having the reedomand money to go buy a BBQ special rom

the Filling Station Deli, or a third o theprice. Better yet, make a nutritious mealor yoursel in your own kitchen.

Another practical option is to expandCharger Change. Instead o swiping intothe dining area and using one o yourmeals, walk in, grab what you want to eatand then pay or only what youre goingto eat. For example, a bagel and creamcheese and a glass o chocolate milk makeor decent breakast. Dont charge $15,charge $3 or the bagel and $2 or the glasso chocolate milk. Instead o Saga Steve

Casai swiping you in, he would check youout.

Tis alternative would allow students tospeak with their dollars, and would createthe opportunity or real choices.

I the college is resistant to these

avenues o reorm, maintain the currentmeal plan system, but offer to buy backstudents unused meals at the end o thesemester. Even i it is a partial buy-back,students will still have incentive to eat inthe Knorr Dining Room, but will havemore reedom over their own money.

Te ideas students have come up withare not limited to these listed above. Te

Hillsdale administration has concernswith these alternatives.In my meetings with the presidents

office, they made the point that anopt-out reorm may result in a reductiono the profit the school makes rom theood service on campus. Once studentsare allowed to opt-out o a meal plan, ithe ood quality does not improve, manystudents are going to quit paying into thesystem.

President Arnns primary concern isthe loss o community i students opt out

o buying a meal plan. I the ood qualityimproves, though, students will be moreinclined to eat in a convenient locationwith their riends. So community willthrive and the college will make money,assuming the ood improves.

As much as this has been a call toaction or administrators to reorm themeal plan policies at the school, they havebeen very receptive o students thoughtsand concerns. Students should continueto meet with administrators to add theirinput as to how the school could improvetheir meal plan policy. Te administrationprides themselves on their willingness to

schedule time to meet with any studentand hear their ideas and concerns.Students are the ones eating the ood

students should be encouraged to voicetheir opinions about the ood.

Whatever the administration choosesto do in the uture with ood service atthe college, they must take into accountthe principles o the ree market. I theyneed a reresher as to what those princi-ples entail, Hillsdale Colleges ree onlineEconomics 101 course is now enrolling. F

Nathan Brand is a junior studyingeconomics and minoring in mathematicsHe is the president o Hillsdales chapter oYoung Americans or Freedom.


10/24

Dr. Nathan Schlueter is an associate proessor o philosophyand religon. Te Hillsdale Forumrecently sat down with himto discuss the idea o moral ecology.

HF:In a number o your classes and public lectures, weve

heard you mention moral ecology. Could you talk to usabout that idea?

NS:Sure. Te basic idea here is that human behavior doesnot occur in a vacuum. Human beings never exist prior toand independent o their social order. Teir whole develop-ment (intellectual, moral, and physical) is prooundly shapedby their culture. Culture is not merely a sum or aggregate oindividual behaviors, as the individualist model would haveit; it is a dominant pattern o social expectations, judgments,and moral norms that either enable or inhibit human devel-opment and flourishing. Just as human beings have an

obligation in justice to avoid behavior that causes physi-cal harm to others, such as emitting toxic chemicals intoa common water source, so human beings have an obliga-tion in justice to avoid behavior that causes moral harm toothers, by undermining the cultural conditions or authenticreedom. Tis is an old idea, recognized in the common lawand in the laws o every state as public morality.

HF: How would you respond to the claim that this ideao public morality involves people imposing their privatepreerences on others?

NS:Tis claim reflects the kind o conusion C.S. Lewisidentifies in Te Abolition o Manbetween subjective values

and objective goods. Not all evaluative statements are merelysubjective preerences. Chocolate ice cream is good is asubjective preerence. It can easily be translated without lossinto I like chocolate ice cream (though others may not).Everyone immediately recognizes that it would be absurd

or someone to attempt to ban vanilla ice cream basedupon his preerence or chocolate. But rape is bad cannotbe translated into I dont like rape (but others might)without serious violence to natural language and intentionameaning, and every intelligent person can acknowledge whythe legal prohibition o rape is reasonable and justified.

HF:Whats the intellectual history o public morality?NS:Public morality has deep roots in the Western tradi-

tion, back to at least Plato and Aristotle. But it takes on aliberal meaning in the modern era. Put most simply, whereasmany classical thinkers argued that the law should makemen moral, the modern deenders o public morality argued

that only men can make themselves moral through theirown sel-constituting choices. But the law can assist men inmaking themselves moral by protecting the cultural condi-tions or authentic reedom, as noted above. According tothe modern idea o public morality, the law does not attemptto make all human beings conorm to a single idea o humanflourishing (such as participation in politics or contempla-tion), but recognizes the vast diversity o ways in whichhuman beings can flourish (through work, art, marriagelove, music, etc.). Te modern idea o public morality, there-ore, is more about preventing harmul action than promot-

ing good action. It is worth pointing out that not a singleone o the classical liberals (Smith, Hume, Ferguson, Burkeetc.) advocated or the abolition o laws on public moralityTe first philosopher to do this was John Stuart Mill, who, asHayek and others point out, was not particularly riendly tothe ree market.

HF: You mentioned moral harm above. What does thatentail?

NS: Good character is the source o personal integrityand the firm basis on which ree moral choices are madeCharacter is built upon the accumulation o small and ofendifficult choices over time. It is a wrong o injustice, there-

hepurposeof thelawis

but to promotehuman

April28,2014

TheForum|Interview|10 Faculty Interview:

Dr. Nathan Schlueter

Public morality and thesocial order

COMPILED BY WES WRIGHT


11/24

ore, to present human beings with powerul temptations toactions that contradict the order o objective goods. In theworst case, human beings seek to exploit such temptationsin others or personal profit, as with drug pushers, prosti-tutes, and pimps. Such activity is a source o moral harm

to the character and integrity o other persons, and thus aninjustice which might be prohibited by law. For a particular-ly illuminating study o this, read up on the Opium Wars.

HF: I hope most o our readers arent drug addicts ordealers. What might be a more common example?

NS:Well, we might start with the seven deadly sins: pride,envy, anger, acedia, prodigality, gluttony, lust. All o theseprovide an opportunity or some persons to profit at theexpense o others. I you dont notice the pervasiveness othis in todays culture, youre not paying much attention.

HF:So should all o these things be outlawed?NS:No. Im with St. Tomas Aquinas on this. Te purpose

o the law is not to prohibit all immorality, but to promotehuman flourishing. Legal prohibition, thereore, is subjectto three conditions: First, the action itsel must be immoral(no prohibiting acts which are not themselves immoral).Second, the action must cause moral harm to others (noprohibiting acts that are purely private, and have no effecton public morality). Tird, legal prohibition o the actionmust not result in worse harms than toleration (e.g. publicexpense, corruption o authority, corruption o personsthrough black market, etc.).

HF:Can you draw a specific line?NS:

We cant know without deliberation. We need dataand a pragmatic approach. Some things are obvious enough;murder (including abortion), or example, is a grave evil thatshould always be prohibited. Other actions depend upon acareul assessment o empirical data. Both Augustine andAquinas asserted that prostitution should be tolerated, notbecause it is moral, but lest the world be convulsed withlust. Tis strikes me as a rather bad argument, but I amopen to better ones.

HF: How has the U.S. moved away rom protecting ourmoral ecology?

NS: Tis is a complex story. As I suggest above, John

Stuart Millwas the firstphilosopher toargue that government should be neutral with respect tocompeting conceptions o the good (to use the phrase oJohn Rawls). But Mill relied or his argument on utilitari-an premises, which were notoriously weak. It is only when

Mills doctrine is combined with Kants notion o individ-ual moral autonomy that the idea starts to take hold. Tisattack on the traditional understanding o public moralitywas not part o the progressive movement. It is a late arrivalto America, and involves an interesting alliance o progres-sivism and libertarianism that is given its most influen-tial expression in the writings o John Rawls. Notably,whereas the goals o progressivism (i.e. the administrativewelare state) were largely achieved through the democraticprocess, the abolition o laws protecting public morality wasalmost entirely imposed on unwilling democratic majorities

by unelected judges, rom the contraception and obscenitycases in the 1960s, to the abortion cases in the 1970s, to thesodomy cases in the 1980s and 90s, to the marriage casesin our time. Euthanasia and transgender equality are thenext rontier. F

Wes Wright is a junior studying political economy andspeech with a minor in classical education. 1

t to prohibit all immorality,

ourishing.


12/24

when I got here I took one o the health and wellness classes just out o puinterest and ended up enjoying it so much that I took other classes in that as wI ended up with an English major and a couple other areas o study that I wocusing on, and when I became interested in becoming a teacher I added classical education minor because I would be teaching in classical schools. Athen when I started looking at the interview process I started realizing I wanto teach history as well. And to do that I would need context knowledge whwould require at least a minor, and when I really thought about it, i I want

really be competitive or a teaching position in history I need a major. So whehad planned all that out this past summer, I realized I needed a fifh year to finiand then I realized that the gaps that I had in my schedule were perect or finiing out the exercise science major. And so that one came along out o surprisebeen taking those classes out o pure interest.

Chelsea Kilgore

What have been some of the challenges oftrying to juggle these three majors with a minor?

Academics isnt the only thing Ive been involved in,so its kind o hard to say: Ive been involved in musicensembles, cross-country, and track my entire timehere. Without these, I would have so much more time.It probably would have elt easy. One o my first lessonsI learned was time management. So i you get to a class

early, do a little bit o your reading as you wait or theproessor to come in. Probably one o the hardestlessons has been saying no to things. Oneo the reasons Im a triple major is thatIm interested in so many things,which extends to clubs andother things I want to getinvolved in, so youhave to be careul toknow where yourlimits are and not tooverstep those.

What were thecircumstances thatled you to pursuethese majors?

Well, Ive alwaysbeen interested inEnglish, because it wasmy avorite subject inhigh schoolEnglishand history both,really. In high school,I became a runner, so

Chelsea will be graduating in May 2015 withmajors in English, history, and exercise science, with

a classical education minor.

Kokko graduated in May 2013 and majored in

history, latin, and music.

Didyou come in intending to pursue thoseparticular majors?

No, not at all. I came in recruited or the

orchestraIm a violinist. I came in and toldProessor Holleman I did not want to major in music.I wasnt really sure what I wanted to do, but I wasinterested in American history, and was consideringan American studies major or a little bit o time. So Ididnt come in with any intention to triple major.

Are you glad that is where you ended up,or was it unduly burdensome?

Im not sure. Ive had a couple students ask me,Youve triple majored, would you have done it anydifferently? Im not sure I would have done it anydifferently, but Im not sure I could recommend it

either. One o the things thats very difficult as a triplemajor is making sure all the core requirements are inplace, and not being able to take classes outside thosedisciplines because o time constraints. I would haveliked to take more English classes, or instance. Sothere are many downsides to triple-majoring. Terestime constraints and the stress o trying to juggleeverything. Im not sure I would have done anythingdifferentI probably would be the same idiot again

Kokko Tso

as I was back then. But having three very diffeent disciplines and enjoying all three o themused to say that music kept me sane, latin was steadying influence on my lie, and history wathe love. Looking back, theres so many pieces

college education, and you should get that libearts experience. I would probably encouragestudents to find out what they really like and tthemselves ully into that.

So how did that develop?With music, mostly by accident. I started t

music classes because we have a unique mprogram here. I youre a music student at other colleges you have to be ully committedcant do anything but music, and thats what I dwant. When I ound out here that you canmusic classes as well as other classes and experthe ull liberal arts without being pigeonhol

Dr. Kalthoff graduated in 1984 and majored inmathematics, biology, and history.

What led you to choose those particular majoI did not come to Hillsdale College intending to tri

major. I didnt know or sure what Id major in, but I was inested in math and science. I was kind o one o those gwho hung out over in Strosacker. I was interested in biolobecause I love the outdoorsplants, animals, backpackithings like thatand I thought, well, lets do some biologdidnt really think career path, I was just ascinated by the glo Gods creation. But I had to take classes in the core currilum, and I was in the Honors Program. My junior year I toocourse in the history o science. It was really ascinating. Mand science ask a really big question: How do human beinthink about the world and how everything in it works? A

Mark Kaltho

Spotligh

t: Triple Majors

14

Comp

iledby

Andre

wEgge

r


13/24

Will you be involved with allhree of your majors after

college?

In addition to teaching, I coulduse my exercise science majoro teach PE I plan to become aross-country and track coach, sot will help or that as well. Having

all o these subjects prepares mevery well to fit into any niche a schoolmight need me in, which is nice.

Would you have doneanything dierently?

Most certainly Im grate-ul to be graduating withwhat I have. I guess myonly regret is that I cantbe here more years andpursue more subjects. I

would warn people i theywant to try or a triple major:dont do it or the triple majors

sake, do it because you lovethe subjects.

usic, I said, Oh, well Ill take a couple, andver stopped taking music. Still didnt thinkmajor or the longest time, but I ended uping enough classes that it seemed natural. I

cided to take latin my reshman year, partly

cause I was araid o doing oral exams,I thought, Hey, Ill take latin, its a deadguage. So I took three semesters or the

re and really just ell in love with it. I thoughtwas a really neat language, and I had a really

at pro too, Eric Hutchinson. Seeing hise or the language I just decided Id consideratin minor, and kind o like music I neverpped taking latin classes. History was thee where I made a conscientious decision tojor in history. I liked reading through allgreat works and especially American history

erested me. I really liked the way the history

department approached historyas one o the humanitiesinstead o as a socialscience. O coursethey all disagreed

on how to inter-pret history,but it all wasascinating tome. I was veryinterested inAmerican intel-lectual historyits just so muchcrammed into twohundred years. Its alsoeasier to keep track o thanEuropean historytoo many

kings dying, things like that. Butsince I was thinking about

doing American studies,but decided English

wasnt something that

interested me verymuch, I decidedmy sophomoreyear that Id dohistory and spenda lot o time doingAmerican history

classes. Tey saythe more you learn

the more you learn youdont know, and thats one

o the biggest things historydid or me.

story o science, I ound out, asked anen bigger question: How has maner thought about the world and howerything in it works? And in order toswer that question I came to realize thatatters o philosophy and economics and

olitics and religion all brought to bear one kinds o questions a scientist asks ande way they sought to answer them.Well, by that point I was ar enough

ong with my math [and biology majors],

it didnt make sense to stop either oose. I was thinking what to do was toursue graduate work in the history oology or the history o science, and itade sense thereore to have an under-aduate major in it, so I added a historyajor and ended up graduating withree majors.I didnt come in with the idea o doing

it. I would never advise anyone to planto do three majors, the only reason I didthat was because I knew I was going onto graduate school to study history. SoI declared that and it worked. I got intoevery grad program I applied to, so I gotmy masters and Ph.D. in the history andphilosophy o science. . . . But majorsreally arent that important. Most peoplewho go to a college like Hillsdale, whenthey graduate, prospective employers or

opportunities are going to look and say,Oh, you have a degree rom a liberal artscollege. Most o what you studied is thecore curriculum and your electives. I youput those together, its much more thana major. Majors are a modern invention,and theyre a modern invention thatcame about through a quirky set ocircumstances. But we live in a world

that demands that we havethem. So I just took allthe courses I wasinterested in alongthe way, and bythe time I wasdone it lookedlike I waspretty close tothree majors,so I graduated

with three. ButI didnt comein planning tomajor in threethings, and I wouldnever advise a student todo that.

April 28, 2014 The Forum

| Spotlight | 15


14/24

Ring By

Do you think college students are too young to get

married? How would you respond to people who

say that they are?

I think the age at which people are ready to get married varieswidely on a case by case basis, depending on background, maturity,etc. Ive known high-schoolers who could be married. Ive knowngrandparents who probably shouldnt be. People who say that collegestudents are too young to get married are ofen right, since I thinkthat the current culture has pushed back expectations o maturity tolater ages, but Im not sure this is a good thing.

As a man, getting married shows that you are

able to make a long-term commitment and that

you desire to care for and provide for your spouse

and put her life before your own. That said, is it

possible to reach the pinnacle of manhood withoutmarriage?

Absolutely. I could draw anecdotes rom my ownexperience, but it might be better to point

to more commonly knownBiblical figures, such as

Paul, Jesus, or any oneo his Apostles. Tere

is a reason manychurches require

celibacy romtheir priests.

Did you ever feel pressured into getting married, or

ever feel inuenced by the Hillsdale ring by spring

mentality?

I dont think ring by spring is a uniquely Hillsdalian expressionmany college students decide to get married afer they graduate, andthink a lot o it has to do with the obvious changes in living situationand occupation. Tat said, Im not sure I have ever elt particularpressure rom Hillsdales culture. I I had to speculate, I would say thwomen on campus would be more likely to experience such pressur

Did you ever feel the overwhelming desire, or ever

feel some sort of societal pressure to nd the one

to complete you?

Actually, one o my pastors avorite things to say is, I yourediscontent now, marriage sure isnt going to help. Im not sure its

good to think about marriage in terms o completion, because thatseems to imply unmarried people are incomplete, which is clearly ntrue. But I do think there are certain realms o experience that onlymarriage affords, and I have long hoped to someday be married.

Do you think that the post-college real world is

going to be more, or less dicult with a spouse?

Probably both. It certainly makes the uture more complicated, bI cant really imagine a happier thing than a permanent best riend,someone with whom I can share everything, rom aith to love todisagreements.

Were you desperately unhappy being single? Do

you feel like youve nally just now started living

since youve become engaged?

Sorry, can you repeat that? Its difficult to hear you over thHallelujah Chorus sweeping through my soul. Everything hchanged. Te grass is greener on both sides, and the birds asinging harmony with the ice cream trucks. Did I just see a certaSouthern Caliornia girl walk by in a blue floral dress? Be still mbeating heart! (Tat last comment being completely serious.)

SPEAKING FOR THE RINGS: BRETT WIERENGA

April 28, 2014 The Forum| Smackdown | 12


15/24

Spring

Do you think its a good idea to get married in

college?

Its different or everyone, obviously, but theres a lot to be saidor waiting until youre about 25 and have developed ully, bothbiologically and mentally. Its not impossible to find the one,but its alarming the number o couples here who eel like theyrealready at that point.

Do you feel pressured to get married or nd your

soul mate in college?

Not really. My parents definitely want me to find someone I canshare the rest o my lie with. Tey got married at 23, but it was adifferent time. Tey also didnt go to college and had jobs. As ar asHillsdale goes, I never thought Id find someone to marry here. I still

dont. Hes not just going to show up. So I havent elt pressured, butits more just . . . it can be too much. As confident o where I amin lie, when you see so many couples all the timeas happy as youare or themit makes you think. Why dont I have that, what is itIve done that I dont have that? It doesnt elicit eelings o envy, justconusion. I know thats not where I want to be right now. Everyonespath is different. We wont all do the same things at the same time.

Why is single life superior? What are the benets?

Im going to have the rest o my lie to worry about someoneelses thought and eelings, and I dont want to do that i I donthave a good grasp on mysel. Knowing mysel and Gods will or

me will make me an even better person or the one I marry.Surace level reasons are: going to bars and flirting is a great

confidence boost. You meet so many people that way. Its import-ant to meet people just or the sake o meeting people. Itll help youin the real world. It doesnt matter what vocation you havethemore experience you have, the more outgoing you are, the better.As a single person you tend to go out more. I a couple is superoutgoing theyll do that, but its so easy to just stay home with theperson you love instead o getting out to see the world. Also, I cantell the companies I work or that I can go anywhere.

Ive elt separation anxiety even just with riends. Its not goingto be like Hilldale where everyones on the same page and you can

instantly make 10 riends. Youll have to work or it, but itll makeyou a stronger person. Youll get to travel . . . it just gets muchharder with another person involved, much less kids. Being able

to pick up and leave is one o the best things about it.Cats can only be lef alone about two or three days beore they

get a little nutty.

Which is better: Husbands or Cats? Why?

Cats dont help with the bills, so probably husband. I haveloved cats or a long time, but its not like I got to college, couldntfind a man, and decided cats were the answer. As a baby, I sleptwith cats in my cradle. Ive loved cats or a long time, but Im ared-blooded American emale. Id rather have a husband in mybed than a cat.

Compiled by Devon Izmirian and Lauren Weirenga

SPEAKING FOR THE SINGLES: MARTHA EKDAHL

April 28, 2014 The Forum

| Smackdown | 13


16/24

The southern novelist Walker Percyattempted to decipher the natureo man in the Cosmos, critiquing

modern sciences reductionist and natural-istic alse anthropology o man, insteaddemonstrating the non-contradictoryrelationship between science and aith.

In his college years, the wandering WalkerPercy looked to science or the truth o theuniverse. While maintaining his great loveo literature, he trained to be a physician,specializing in pathology. Percy eventuallybecame disenranchised with his days perva-sive, hubristic scientism, the belie that onlythe proper use o the scientific method canbring one to knowable truths. Percy discov-ered that scientism ails to offer a consis-tent definition o man as man, a convictionwhich ultimately led to his own conversion

to Roman Catholicism on St. Lucys Day,1947. Finding his calling as a novelist andsemiotic philosopher, Percy diagnosedthe ailments o 20th-century modernity,replacing his stethoscope with a typewriter.Te writer lef his career in medicine andpublished Te Moviegoerat the age o 45 andcontinued drafing novels and essays untilhis death in 1990. A significant amount o hisintellectual pursuits responded to and criti-cised the rampant 20th-century scientism,emphasizing its ailure to honestly accountor human consciousness and existence in

the Cosmos, particularly in light o religiousaith. His biographer notes, As Percy wouldinsist, science properly understood was nota contradiction o aith. Percy never turneda hostile eye toward science and technolo-gy...But he would use his understanding toresist the view that science could account oreverything, including everything about thehuman creature. Tis was Walker PercysChristian Humanism.

Walker Percy offered a congruent under-standing and sound critique o scientific

objectivism throughout his literary output.He ound its project insufficient in itsattempt to explain away mankind by meanso methodological empiricism. Tis trium-phalist spirit o modern science lords overlaymen, writes Percy, the argument thatonly science can utter a true word aboutanything. Such scientists, according to Percy,with all their understanding o interactions,

energy exchanges, stimuli, and responses,could not seem to utter a single word aboutwhat man did and what they themselves weredoing. Although they theoretically uphold apure rationale in pursuing truth, the pursuitdislocates the person o the scientist rom hispicture o the Cosmos.

Since objectivism requires a specifiablyunctioning mindless knower, the individ-uals personal acts o knowing become bothmeaningless and nonexistent. Tis actionremoves man rom the very universe he willsto understand. owards the end o his satiri-

cal sel-help book, Lost in the Cosmos, WalkerPercy writes:

Te earth-sel observing the Cos-mos and trying to understand theCosmos by scientific principles

rom which its sel is excluded is,beyond doubt, the strangest phe-nomenon in all o the Cosmos, arstranger than the Ring Nebula inLyra. It, the sel, is in act the onlyalien in the entire Cosmos. Te

Modern objective consciousness

will go to any length to prove thatit is not unique in the Cosmos,and by this very effort establishesits own uniqueness. Name an-other entity in the Cosmos whichtries to prove it is not unique. Teearth-sel seeks to understandthe Cosmos overtly according toscientific principleswhile covertly ex-empting itsel romthe same understand-ing. Te end o theenterprise is that thesel understands themechanism o theCosmos but by thesame motion plac-es itsel outside the Cosmos, analien, a ghost, a vast machineryto which it is denied entry.

Here Percy shows the absurdity o objec-tivist science demonstrating the insignifi-cance o and superiority over man. Walker

Percy demands consistency in the sciencscientists should not claim total access to knowledge and truth, or science can nevoffer definitive conclusions. Very mathings cannot be accounted or by the empical method. Claiming the opposite brinorth grave consequences. Percy exprescritiques the deconstructive tendencies scientific objectivism, writing, Te scie

tist...has abstracted rom his own predament in order to achieve objectivity. Hobjectivity is indeed nothing else than removal rom his own concrete situatioNo sentence can be received by him apiece o news, thereore, because he does nstand in the way o hearing news. Modescientism claims the capacity to objectivanalyse and understand rationally all truwithin the universe through its empirimethodologies. But when it accounts the incommensurable, mystical, mysteous, and metaphysical entities like G

sel, consciousness, language, and sigits project ails, becoming reductionisdead ends. Regarding the idea o God aits relationship to science, Percy explai[W]hile the scientific method may officially neutral toward God, scientisan attitude which extrapolates rom tobjectivity o the scientific method, cannbe neutral. Te modern scientific outlodemands visible and quantifiable prooWalker Percy critiques this popular notioor not everything can be accounted through visible and quantifiable proos.

Since scientism supplants the anthpocentric vision o the cosmos, specificaregarding mans unique and inexplicaconsciousness and rationality, man finhimsel void o meaning and purpose. Pewrites, [S]cientists find it natural to dwith matter in interaction and with enerexchanges and dont know what to ma

o such things as consciousness, sel, asymbols and even sometimes deny ththere are such things, even though ththe scientists, act or all the world as i thwere conscious selves... Te laws o physand chemistry do not and can not accouor this obvious act. Tus the positivis

Mans Place inthe CosmosWalker Percys

Critique of

IdeologicalScientism

BY JOHN TAYLOR

Modern scientism claimsthe capacity to understand

rationally all truth throughits empirical methodologies.

p

,

|

|


17/24

scientific project misunderstands person-hood and what determines man qua man asopposed to beasts, and improperly theorizesconcerning it. Percy links the projects ailureto adequately place man within contempo-rary cosmology to the heightened alienationo man in the 20th century, a time whenscience supposedly should (or eventually

will) grasp all truth and when man concur-rently finds himsel lost, with no place in theCosmos. According to Percy, the growingscientism o the last 300 years led to thepuncturing o mans inflated claims touniqueness in the Cosmos. For it proves manto be beyond doubt an organism amongother organisms, a species in continuity withother species, a creature existing in interac-tion with an imminent Cosmos like all othercreatures, like all other elements, molecules,gaseous clouds, novas, galaxies. I all things,including scientists, in the universe can be

objectively accounted or solely throughphysical and chemical interactions, scienceplaces man within a hemisphere void opurpose. He must create his own purpose.For man has no significant character whenthe material reactions o his brain are treatedand insignificant and scientifically under-standable. Percy deems this event the losso the creature. He finds the account oboth mans existence and behavior in theuniverse insufficient and incoherent. WalkerPercy contends that more pragmatic andrealistic scientists must understand that totalempiricism cannot account or the actthat with the appearance o man there alsoappeared or the first time in the Cosmos...language, mind, sel, and consciousness.Darwinian evolutionary science cannotaccount or the appearance in the Cosmoso a triumphant, godlike, murderous alien,the only alien in the Cosmos, Homo sapienssapiens, e.g., the scientist himsel. Whenthe individual persons unique existence,behavior, and consciousness is accounted orsolely through physics, chemistry, material-

ist Darwinism, Freudian psychology, andmaterialist utilitarianism, humanity itseldisappears. Humans lose humanity. Wemust recognize man, according to Percy, asmore than the mysterious but insignificantcreature o the pale blue dot and thus orgoscientisms errors.

Critiquing the modern ages rampant andideological scientism, Percy

ound the vacuum o modernscience incapable o providinga sufficient account o mansplace in the world, particular-ly concerning his relation toGod, his consciousness, andhis existence. He insists that weinstead find and promulgate atruly humanistic and consistentanthropology, and shy awayrom the naturalistic reductiv-ism which leaves man lost inthe cosmos. F

John Taylor is a junior studyinghistory.

Why are there beings at all,and why not rather nothing?

Heidegger asks this question through-out his oeuvre. Tis questioning doesnot allow the simple answers God

or necessity. In act, it is unclear whetherwe ought to find an answer. Instead, to situateonesel in such a questioning is to openonesel up to radical finitude. Te questionerrejects the world as given and puts it to thetest, and in so doing, he puts himsel to thetest. In the entire course o Western civiliza-tion, according to Heidegger, man has ceasedto question. Man has taken on this or thatquestion about this or that being, but orgot-ten the question o Being as such. In takingup beings in the inquiry, humanity is turnedaway rom the mystery. Heidegger gives

himsel a particular task: He wants to reawaken man to the question o Being. In this paperI will attempt to briefly recreate the attunement and the mood that one must havebeore truly doing metaphysics. Tis will bepropaedeutic. It will introduce certain neces-sary aspects o Heideggers philosophy. Tenthe paper will become more discursive.

I will begin with the ancient Greeks and

their understanding o phusis (nature) adiscussed by Heidegger. Next, I will engagewith Aristotle and the narrowing o phusisthat occurs there. Ten, I will turn to TomaAquinas, who implicitly introduces Heideg-gers undamental question o metaphysicsyet, he asks it only superficiallyas a mano aith. Tis question o the possibility o aChristian philosopher will, in turn, openup Heidegger to the criticism that he remainsstaunchly within the Western philosophicatradition that had supposedly reached itsend; Levinas will levy this critique. I under-

stand the breadth o this paper; I under-stand that I will not do justice to the topicNonetheless, I have here the opportunity tocraf a grand narrativebear with me. So, webegin: Why are there beings at all, and whynot rather nothing?

I dont quite know how to proceed with thequestioning; it seems too general or me tohold it all together. Ill start with this book inmy hand, Introduction to Metaphysics. Whais this being? Its made rom paper, whichcomes rom trees cut down and turned topulp. Tere is ink here, too. When I drop it

it makes a thud, and I eel its weight in myhand and the breeze on my ace as I turn thepages. But this seems superficial. It is a bookA man thought, and judged his thoughtsmeaningul, and so he wrote them downand they ound their way to me. Tis bookcould potentiallyah, theres somethingTe book has possibilities. I can read it orburn it or let it rot through the ages. It is not

just a brute act out there in the world. Inact, I cannot think o it except in terms oits possibilities. As something I can speak oI always reerence the possibilities o what itis; as something I can hold and eel. When Ilook at it, I already think o it as a thing thacan be read. I recognize that the manipulat-ing makes it bedifferentlyor me. Yet, I donot think Ive answered the question. Why isthis being? Well, Ive explained why it is; itwas thought, and written down, and printedor someones benefit. More than that, thibeing persists as a possibility. It has a past anda uture that already imbue it with meaning.

Still, Ive not answered the question. Ivetaken the book or granted, as already here

According to Percy, thegrowing scientism ofthe last 300 years ledto the puncturing of

mans inated claims touniqueness in the Cosmos.

What isMetaphysics?

An inquiry into the

history and nature

of Being

BY GARRETT WEST


18/24

What is Metaphysics?

with me. Ive talked about it only afer itsappearance on the scene has happened. Here,I recognize the importance o the wholequestion that Heidegger asks: Why are therebeings? is a different question i we addand why not rather nothing? I I ask thiso the book in this way, I question it moreundamentally. Why is this book here, and

why does it continue to exist or me? Well, itwouldnt make sense or it to just disappearin ront o my eyes. Its here and wont not-beuntil it rots away or is stolen or given awaybut these only exercise potencies. I cannotmake this not be or me without recoursetoWait: It is sustained by the context. Itcannot ade into nothing because it is heldup by the beings that surround iteven thetime-space-continuum-being that surroundsit. No, I must release the whole context. Everybeing must be allowed to ade away into theNothing. So, I will let them adebut I cant.Why wont they ade?

Te context sustains itsel, somehow. Tebeings, the sum total o all beings in myworld, sustain themselves in a web o intel-ligibility and meaning. Yet, I want them toade into the Nothing. How does the Nothingappear to me? Heidegger claims that theNothing itsel reveals itsel to man in particu-lar moods, particular attunements. In partic-ular, the Nothing reveals itsel rarely enoughand only or a moment in the undamentalmood o anxiety. Tis still doesnt help me.

What the hell does that mean, Heidegger?When I experience anxiety, Imanxious or something. In anxiety, Icommit the same intentionality thatI did when I questioned the booksnot-being. Indeed, I elt anxiety

just yesterday when I was runninglate or class, but that anxiety wasa specific one: that the particularpossibility o being-late would berealized instead o the particularpossibility o being-on-time. No,that anxiety does not put me ace-to-ace

with the Nothing. Yet, I remember once,as a child o five or six, I went stargazingwith my cousins. Out there in the darkness,we lay on our backs and stared off into thestars, and my cousin said: You know, earthis going around the sun at a billion miles anhour. And I thought about that, and I staredoff into the depths o space, and I realized

just how small I was. Ten, right there, I eltear orwhat? I earedI do not know.I elt the radical contingency o the earthsexistence, and thereore the contingency omy existence on it. Ten, the Nothing itsel

was present beore me. Ah, now that I have

remembered this mood towards existence,I canperhapsbetter do metaphysics. Iknewcontingency because it implicated mein it. Te beings that I took or granted in myaverage-everydayness lost that indisputablepurposeulness. Tey became susceptible tointerrogation in a way that they never hadbeen beore. Heidegger affirms this thought:

Human existence can relateto beings only i it holds itselout into the nothing. Goingbeyond beings occurs in the es-sence o Dasein. But this goingbeyond is metaphysics itsel.Tis implies that metaphysicsbelongs to the nature o man.It is neither a division o aca-demic philosophy nor a field oarbitrary notions. Metaphysicsis the basic occurrence o Das-ein. It is Daseinitsel. Becausethe truth o metaphysics dwellsin this groundless ground itstands in closest proximity tothe constantly lurking possi-bility o deepest error. For thisreason no amount o scientificrigor attains to the seriousnesso metaphysics. Philosophycan never be measured by thestandard o the idea o science.

In the above quote, Heidegger discuss-

es both what metaphysics is and what it is

not. It is nota science, nota strenge Wissen-schaf. It cannot be achieved with exactingrigor and methodological orthodoxy. Yet, itis a part o my nature. It is a undamentallyhuman endeavorand a distinctly person-al one. Te investigation o Being demandsthat I take hold o mysel as radically contin-gent. Ten, the meaning o Being bursts ontothe scene in its most robust sense. I have,perhaps, prepared mysel to do metaphys-ics in my encounter with the Nothing thatundermines, and at the same time grounds,any totality. Now, I will begin my real interro-

gation o Being. Historically, when and how

did Being reveal itsel to Dasein?Te ancient Greeks had insight into Be

that has long since been covered over, ein Aristotle. Teir understanding o ph(translated too narrowly as nature) onally captured the depth o the humexperience o Being in beings:

Phusis as emergence can beexperienced everywhere: orexample, in celestial process-es (the rising o the sun), inthe surging o the sea, in the

growth o plants, in the com-ing orth o animals and hu-man beings rom the womb.But phusis, the emerging sway,is not synonymous with these

processes, which we still todaycount as a part o nature.Tis emerging and standing-out-in-itsel-rom-itsel maynot be taken as just one pro-cess among others that we ob-serve in beings. Phusisis Beingitsel, by virtue o which beings

fist become and remain ob-servable.

Phusis, first and oremost, is experienIt is not something that we analyze pinpoint, as that would do violence toInstead, it happens in our experience o

worldofen in our experience o natYet, it is not just another happeninnature, but it happens beyond natursimultaneously transcends and groubeings. Because it only ever happenand through beings, it is never peresel-identical. It is never just somethout there that we study. It is a staing-out-in-itsel-rom-itsel becausimultaneously emerges in beings conceals itsel in beings, but it noneless brings beings to light as intel

ble. A deep understanding o phusis wo

indeed depend upon a certain attunemenbeings that catches the happeningthat ungirds them in that moment that it emerTe ancient Greeks first experienced phon the basis o a undamental experiencBeing in poetry and thought. In this abidcomportment towards Being, the Grewere ree, historical, and authentic men;Greeks were great men. Heidegger revhis romanticism. Do you hear Nietzsclament? What happened to this attunemIt came to an end in greatness with Arisle, Heidegger writes. Te meaning oph

began to narrow immediately. It began

The book has possibilities.I can read it or burn it or let

it rot through the ages. Itis not just a brute fact out

there in the world.

TheForu

m|

18


19/24

1Heidegger writes, Te possibility o beingdrawn along the blackboard and used up is notsomething that we merely add onto the thingwith our thought. Te chalk itsel, as this being,is in this possibility; otherwise it would not bechalk as a writing implement. Every being, inturn, has this Possible in it, in a different wayin each case (Introduction to Metaphysics 32).Beings must be understood in terms o theirpossibilities; they persist as beings in theirparticular possibilities.

2Heidegger writes o the scope o interro-gation: We are not interrogating this being orthat being, nor all beings, each in turn; instead,we are asking rom the start about the whole owhat is, or as we say or reasons to be discussedlater: beings as a whole and as such (Intro-duction to Metaphysics 2-3). Te questioningnecessarily implicates the totality o beings.

3I cannot vouch or the veracity o this claim.4 Heidegger writes: Te great begins great,

sustains itsel only through the ree recurrenceo greatness, and i it is great, also comes to anend in greatness. So it is with the philosophyo the Greeks; also, As a counterphenomenon[to phusis] there arose what the Greeks callthesis, positing, ordinance, or nomos, law, rulein the sense o mores. But this is not what ismoral but instead what concerns mores, thatwhich rests on the commitment o reedomand the assignment o tradition; it is that whichconcerns a ree comportment and attitude, theshaping o the historical Being o humanity,thos, which under the influence o moralitywas then degraded to the ethical.

5 Heidegger suggests that Aristotles work,in a sense, reverberates with the deep sense o

phusis: An echo o knowledge about the origi-nary meaning still survives in Aristotle, whenhe speaks o the grounds o beings as such

(Introduction to Metaphysics, 17).6 In Heideggers texts, he ofen suggests that

his work is written or the moderns, writtenor his present day. Te Germans are caughtbetween the twin pincers o the Russians andthe Americans, and they must re-discover theirhistorical rootedness.

7 In this way, Aquinas philosophy picksup on the distinction that was covered over inAristotle. Heidegger discusses the ambiguityin the Greek language that, perhaps, contrib-utes to Aristotles obuscation o the questiono Being: Heidegger discusses this ambiguityin the Greek language: In this way, Aquinasphilosophy picks up on the distinction that wascovered over in Aristotle. Heidegger discuss-es the ambiguity in the Greek language that,perhaps, contributes to Aristotles obuscation

o the question o Being: Heidegger discussesthis ambiguity in the Greek language: What,or example, is the being in this piece o chalk?Already this question is ambiguous, becausethe word being can be understood in twoways, as can the Greek to on. On the one hand,being means what at any time is in being, inparticular this grayish-white, light, breakablemass, ormed in such and such a way. On theother hand, being means that which, as it were,makes this be a being instead o nonbeing, thatwhich makes up the Being in the being, i it is abeing. In accordance with this twoold meaningo the word being, the Greek to on ofen desig-nates the second meaning, that is, not the being

Footnotes

reer to nature, to beings, not Being. It reerredto the surging sea and the birth o animalsnot the Being that gave itsel to man in thesethings. Yet, even in this narrowing, an echo othe originary knowledge survived in Aristotle.

So, how was this meaning obscured? Letus turn to his Metaphysics. His project seeksto study being quabeingi.e, the causes and

principles that belong to being as such. Inparticular, the project seeks to elaborate thenature o substance: Obviously that whichis primarily is the what, which indicatesthe substance o the thing. Here we havenothing that directly undermines the origi-nary meaning o phusis, but we should noticethat the emphasis is on whatness. AristotlesMetaphysicsis a study o beings, and it seeksto examine the causes o beings, not Being. Anexamination o substance does not necessarilyundermine a questioning o Being, but Aristo-tle treats the issue o substance as the unda-mental questionindeed, as the only questionreally worthy o asking: Since we musthave the existence o the thing as somethinggiven, clearly the question is why the matteris some definite thing. Here, or Aristotle, thequestion o whatness does not only take ona reserved priority over Being, as a biologistmight bracket certain chemical questions inthe study o lie. Instead, i the study o beingsis to proceed at all, the existence o the thingmust be taken or granted. We must pass overthe mystery o Being. In this way, Aristot-

le never asks the undamental question ometaphysics. Why is there something ratherthan nothing? must be lef unasked so thatscience can proceed. Now, to temper the criti-cism, perhaps Aristotle meant the questionto remain unasked to protect the mystery, ina sense. I Aristotle was aware o the origi-nal Greek meaning o phusis, then perhapshe ignored that questioning as somethingobvious. Nevertheless, the questioning obeings that discloses Being does not explic-itly appear here in Aristotle. His questioningis not the questioning o Heidegger, even i

Aristotles Greek comportment made suchquestioning superfluous. Historically, he lefus his text and not his attunement, and so wecan see the way in which the narrowing scopeophusisobuscates Being.

We have briefly discussed Aristotle. Hismetaphysics covers over the originary conceptophusis. He never asks the question o Being;he takes existence or granted. Let us turn toTomas Aquinas. Tough he is ofen paintedas nothing more than a somewhat-Chris-tianized version o Aristotle, it becomes clearthat Aquinas largely reinterprets Aristotle; he

brings in new terminology to the Aristotelian

ramework, and he subtly shifs the meaningo old terms. While Aristotle privileged ormas the best candidate or substance (thatwhich is primarily), Aquinas unequivocallyclaimed that substance is a being. Further,according to him, material substances arecomposed o matter and orm: We use theterm a being absolutely and primarily o

substances; orm and matter are ound incomposite substances. Immediately, Aquinasdeepens Aristotles account. Tat which isprimarily is no longer the orm o the matter,but rather the thing, the being-in-the-world,ens. In order to accommodate such a change,Aquinas makes a distinction between essenceand existence. When we examine a thing, wecan ask two sorts o questions about it: Whatis it, and is it? What is its essence, and has itreceived esse (Being)? For Aquinas, whenwe know a thing, we know it by means o itswhatness, its essence. Yet, the essence itseldoes not account or the Being o the thing.Te essence o a natural thing cannot cause itto exist, and so i it is to exist it must receiveBeing. Tus, in experiencing ensin the world,it is not only something instead o somethingelse: It is also something rather than nothing.Unlike with Aristotle, who primarily inquiredabout whatness, Aquinas allows us to discusswhatnessand thatness. Even urther, Aquinasaccount o creation discusses beings in similarlanguage to the way in which Heidegger does.He writes in De Aeternitate Mundi:

But a creature does not haveexistence except rom another;regarded as lef simply to itsel,it is nothing; prior to its exis-tence, thereore, nothingness isits natural lot. Nor, just becausenothingness does not precedebeing in duration, does a thinghave to be nothing and being atthe same time. For our positionis not that, i the creature hasalways existed, it was nothing

at some time. We maintain thatits nature is such that it wouldbe nothing i it were lef to itsel.

Te lot o creation, then, is to be nothing.Aquinas suggests that the nothingness issomehow undamental to things. It undergirdsthem, and they continue to persist as potential-ly Nothing. For Aquinas, one can ask why thereare beings, and why not rather nothingat leastsuperficially.

Yet, Aquinas account also implicates a creator,something that Heidegger would think problem-

atic. For Heidegger, to answer in such a way is

TheF

orum|19


20/24

What is Metaphysics?

to answer cheaply and to avoid the legitimatequestioning o Being and the Nothing:

On the other hand, Chris-tian dogma denies the trutho the proposition ex nihilonihil fit and thereby bestowson the nothing a transormedsignificance, the sense o thecomplete absence o beingsapart rom God: ex nihilo fitens creatum [From nothingcomescreated being]. Nowthe nothing becomes the coun-terconcept to being proper, thesummum ens, God as ens in-creatum. Here too the inter-

pretation o the nothing des-ignates the basic conception obeings. But the metaphysical

discussion o beings stays onthe same level as the questiono the nothing. Te questionso Being and o the nothing assuch are not posed.

Te Christian doctrine o ex nihilo creationdoes not properly understand the Nothing.Instead, it understands it as the counter-concept to being, as not-being. When Godcreates, it is not that He has somehow crafedbeings rom the Nothing; the Nothing doesnot belong to beings. Rather, in the Chris-

tian account, the nothing is excluded romGod and thereore never ully involved inthe act o creation. Te creation ex nihiloreers rather to the not-being o beings andthe coming-to-be o beings. I the nothingis nothing more than the logical negationo beings, the not-being o beings, then wehave not truly conronted the Nothing assuch. Tus, Heidegger claims. We are notsaying that citing the words o the Bible,In the beginning God created heaven andearth, etc., represents an answer to ourquestion. Quite aside rom whether this

sentence o the Bible is true or untrue oraith, it can represent no answer at all to ourquestion, because it has no relation to thisquestion. Te concept o creation excludesthe Nothing rom the constitution o beings,and so it never truly questions them. Tequestion o why is there something ratherthan nothing? is answered, but it is neverasked. Te why? loses its significance in thecheapness o the answer o aith. God andbeings are made wholly present and intelligi-ble in their absolute explicability.

Is this claim air? Is a Christian philosophya round square and a misunderstanding, or

has Heidegger somehow misconstrued thereligious dimension o the human being?

In an interview with Richard Kearney,Levinas responds directly to Heideggersclaim that the man o aith cannot do philos-ophy. He seems to question the hard-and-astbreak that Heidegger makes between doingphilosophy and being a man o aith. Heagrees that philosophy does assume, or themost part, a specifically Greek way o think-ing. Western philosophy is shot throughwith Greek conceptssuch as morph, ousia,nous, logos, or telos. But although philoso-phy is essentially Greek, it is not exclusivelyso, he writes. Aspects o the Judeo-Christiantradition have been incorporated into thepredominately Greek philosophical tradi-tion, and in the same way, Greek tendencieshave influenced the religious tradition. Tisseems quite obviously true. So what is the

specifically Greek tendency? Levinas clari-fies:

Perhaps the most essentialdistinguishing eature o thelanguage o Greek philosophywas its equation o truth withan intelligibility o presence.By this I mean an intelligibil-ity which considers truth tobe that which is present orcopresent, that which can be

gathered or synchronized into

a totality which we would callthe world or cosmos.

Tis makes sense in terms o what we sawin Aristotle. Tat which is most primarily isthe orm, which is the substance o the thing.Te orm, as actuality, is supremely intelligi-ble, and it explains the whatnesso the thingsin the world. Further, AristotlesMetaphysicsis the study o being quabeing, wherein wefind the highest principles o beings. Tatwhich is primarily is substance, which isknowable in the utmost. It can be made

present to us. Even the substance that is theunmoved mover can be understood as thecherry on top o our metaphysical sundae.

Levinas claims that Heidegger, thoughcritical o much o (read: all o) Westernmetaphysics, fits within this tradition. Alongwith the distinctly Greek way o thinking,Heidegger continues to think o Being aspresence. Levinas characterizes this ironyin Heideggers project: Tus, while Heide-gger heralds the end o the metaphysics opresence, he continues to think o Being asa coming-into-presence; he seems unable tobreak away rom the hegemony o presence

which he denounces. We can, perhapthis metaphysics o presence in Hegers discussion ophusis. He writes: Pmeans the emerging sway, and the eing over which it thoroughly holds Tis emerging, abiding sway includesbecoming as well as Being in the naer sense o fixed continuity. For Heidman experiences phusis, and he incorpthis experience into his historical DHe experiences the coming-into-presenbeings by virtue o the primordial encowith Being. In the surging sea and theo animals, Being presents itsel and dies itsel to the totality that Dasein constor itsel. No matter how primordiaoriginary my experiences o beings, bare alwaysor me.

What is the alternative? I the Gphilosophy o presence excludes some

then what does it exclude? Levinas sugthat there is a double axis in the hexperience o the world that consists

juxtaposition o phenomenological intbility and ethical responsibility. Tis daxis is ormed by the horizontal totalitis human experience and the radical ruption o the Other. Indeed, this juxtation can be understood as analogous tearlier-reerenced tension

Documents

The Hillsdale Forum May 2014