Ethics, Culpability and the Human Brain – Part 7
January 30, 2012
Dear Friends,
Is the pursuit of knowledge a good thing? Some people are going to respond with something along the lines of “pursuing the knowledge of good things is a good thing.” How do we know what good things are unless we explore knowledge to a greater extent than what we would deem “good” and then back off to the boundaries of goodness? In Bible terms we are to seek for wisdom. How can one seek wisdom without also encountering through trial and error at least some foolishness? Do we only limit our knowledge to Biblical things? Can we even understand the Bible without having knowledge of other things as well? Is understanding mathematics good? Is pursuing knowledge of world history good? How about understanding other religions? How about understanding the ins and outs of modern day slave trafficking?
There is a natural tension between the danger of picking up viruses in the pursuit of knowledge and the danger of ignorance. In fact, there might not even be such a thing as “balance” in this regard. One cannot at the same time remain completely ignorant while educating oneself.
We tend to be critical of religious people in the world who don’t question the basis of their faith and compare it closely to the Biblical and historical record. Yet, at the same time, we would also tend to be critical of people in our own faith who have the same degree of questioning and inquiry about our own tenets. We would applaud a church that welcomed in a speaker to present the idea of the Christian hope as resurrection, but aghast that an ecclesia welcomed in a speaker to present the concept of heaven-going. This is not, by the way, a criticism of our practices in so doing, it is simply pointing out the fact that this problem of ignorance versus the pursuit of knowledge is complex and nuanced for which there are no quick and easy answers.
Every parent who wants to raise a godly child has to deal with this issue. How many ideas do you introduce to them? Certainly, the Bible says “Train up a child in the way he should go: and when he is old, he will not depart from it.” (Pr. 22:6) From this verse we would glean that it is a parental mandate from God to instruct our children in the Bible and proper moral conduct. Yet, it really doesn’t address the issue at hand, does it? Does a child need to be exposed to the ideas of humanism, for example, so that they can recognize it when they see it? Does a child need to be exposed to those things we would consider false theology so that they can refute it? If so, doesn’t that present an inherent danger?
You may recall the strange case of John Walker Lindh. This California boy was detained after being captured fighting for the Taliban. It all began with a single thought when he watched the movie Malcolm X when he was 12 years old. He saw in the movie Malcolm X’s trip to Mecca and as a result became interested in Islam. When Lindh turned 16, he converted to Islam and regularly attended mosque. Lindh continued his studies in Yemen and eventually ended up in Pakistan where he attended an Islamic fundamentalist school. According to Lindh, “I was in [Pakistan's] Northwest Frontier Province. The people there in general have a great love for the Taliban. So I started to read some of the literature of the scholars and my heart became attached to it. I wanted to help them one way or another.” (quote from CNN interview)
Maybe we don’t have quite as dramatic stories where our children end up in the Taliban, but many brethren can tell heart-wrenching stories of how their children were exposed to ideas which resulted in them making bad choices to the point of losing their eternal and/or natural lives. Similarly, most of us can, if pressed, dissect our own bad decisions into the underlying viruses that caused us to make those bad decisions.
As a parent, what can we learn, if anything, from the case of John Walker Lindh. The lesson for many parents would be to control the access of thoughts and ideas to their children. At some level, we all agree on this. Children should have limited exposure to potentially harmful language, images, ideas and so forth. The key questions are how great the restrictions are and for how long do we exercise control.
Let’s look at the home school versus public school debate. There are parents who will argue that they don’t want their children exposed to certain ideas and behaviors so they teach their children at home. Other parents feel that in order to fight a virus, you have to be exposed to it – a sort of mental vaccination. Which idea is right? We have probably seen many kids shuffled off to public school who come home with very bad ideas or behaviors. On the other hand, if we home school our children are they going to be prepared when they eventually do meet up with these ideas in their adult lives. We’ve also probably all seen very odd parents home school their children to produce very odd kids. If the parents are strange with strange ideas, there is no moderating influence on the kids if they are not around others who might provide some balance. My point is not to evoke a debate on home school versus public school. I know many feel very strongly about this topic. My point is to use this issue as an example to get us thinking about the value of exposure to ideas versus isolation from ideas. What is the right approach for our kids, for our ecclesias, for our friends and for ourselves? What is the right amount of risk of both ignorance and information that we should consider acceptable?
Have a great week,
