As I write this paper on Pinker this morning, I reflect on the day ahead. I will be serving as guest minister at the Paw Paw Presbyterian Church today (thank you for this opportunity, Jacob!), babysitting my beautiful grandmunchkins this afternoon, and dinner plans this evening. So, my heart and mind are conflicted at this time\u2026because of a busy day to come but also because of Pinker\u2019s book, Enlightenment Now. More to come about that.<\/p>\n
So, as I rehearse my message for this morning while writing this blog, I find myself both excited and a little nervous about today\u2019s ministry. The Transfiguration is an exciting Sunday to be serving, but also one for reflection. As I think about Jesus\u2019s Transfiguration, I am in awe. As Mark tried to grasp a way to explain the brightness of Jesus\u2019s clothing, he actually has no words other than to pull us all along with him to his laundry room as he tries to explain the \u201cbleach white\u201d appearance. Sometimes, words cannot express what we are trying to say.<\/p>\n
I found that Pinker also pulls us along on a journey with him that sometimes seemed a little too unexplainable for words. Science-driven reason and progress can be a double- edged sword at times. Although Pinker stays on a positive pathway with regards to his adventure through the book, he also discounts faith and religion. The author\u2019s focus is based on reason. \u201cForemost is reason. Reason is nonnegotiable. As soon as you show up to discuss the question of what we should live for (or any other question), as long as you insidious that your answers, whatever they are, are reasonable or justified or true and that therefore other people ought to believe them to, then you have committed yourself to reason, into holding your beliefs accountable to objective standards.\u201d[1]<\/a> Yet, is that enough?<\/p>\n According to Webster, reason is \u201cthe power of the mind to think, understand, and form judgments by the process of logic.\u201d But what if our logic is skewed because of past experiences and\/or trauma? Then, reason also becomes skewed. Working in the counseling world has opened up the door to me to hear many people \u201cexplain their reasons and choices.\u201d And many of their \u201creasons\u201d have led to their destructive patterns.<\/p>\n In Get Out of your Own Way<\/em>, the authors note that reasoning can be dangerous when it takes on a form of its own. In contrast to Pinker\u2019s beliefs in reasoning, the authors explained that reason should most definitively be negotiable. Without negotiation, reasoning becomes a concrete divide, which is often a stumbling block in today\u2019s society.[2]<\/a> So, my conflict with Pinker is his basis on reasoning being the solid ground we should always stand on. Because, when reasoning is skewed, it can become quicksand for those who do not have solid ground for their reasoning.<\/p>\n In the end, I do appreciate Pinker\u2019s optimism about the world and where it is heading. He argues that, while there are risks to be aware of, there is reason for optimism in a world that seems to be bombarded with bad news.[3]<\/a> \u00a0Amen!<\/p>\n [1]<\/a> Steven Pinker,\u00a0Enlightenment Now: The Case for Reason, Science, Humanism, and Progress<\/em>\u00a0(NY, NY: Penguin Books, 2019).<\/p>\n