Tuesday, September 30, 2014
Happy Feast Day to Me! | National Catholic Reporter
Happy Feast Day to Me! | National Catholic Reporter by MSW. MGB: You mean Happy Feast Day to Us! You are not the only Michael in the Catholic Church or even on your own blog. Still, I was looking for a venue to post our Feast Day and this post provides it. I celebrated with angel cake and peach ice cream (with a few Giradeli dark chocolate squares). I was going to celebrate with my daughter, but her mother begged off of her evening activity, so it was me and the gang from the Big Bang Theory.
Need a Laugh? Check out 'Gloria TV' | National Catholic Reporter
Need a Laugh? Check out 'Gloria TV' | National Catholic Reporter by MSW. MGB: Not funny, sad, and a bit icky. More Catholicism as a practice in partisanship from Opus Dei. The leadership of ISIL cannot compete. Where are the sociologists on their sacred quest when you need them?
The Next Big Fight in Education | National Catholic Reporter
The Next Big Fight in Education | National Catholic Reporter by MSW. MGB: For a New Republic piece, it is not so pernicious, although it is still very POV sensitive. I love that the College Board has found away around the power of the Texas State School Board, who has moved several curricula to the right and almost away from the truth. They can do nothing about the AP test, which is not really about advanced placement - its about advanced college credits (I wish they had AP history when I was in school, I could have at least come close to passing the test cold). With college costs as high as they are, a course at a public high school (or even a Catholic one) that yields three credits is magical - the students have every reason to be upset and should have a member on that board to speak to this.
Review: The Sacred Project of American Sociology,' Part III | National Catholic Reporter
Review: The Sacred Project of American Sociology,' Part III | National Catholic Reporter by MSW. MGB: MSW reports that modern sociology begins where absolutism ends, taking the mantle of ethics from philosophy departments and taking it into itself. Of course, the existence of a sociology department did not stop people from taking philosophy classes in my day, some 35 years ago. I suspect it depends on what is offered and required where one is in school. I had to take either philosophy or religion courses, and as a pre-law student (or so I thought), I had to take ethics (and accounting - which I have used more). Of course, before sociology existed, there was anthropology, whose main aim was justifying the mastery of the white race. Sadly, the review did not mention that fact, and I suspect neither did the book.
The contention that ethics has gone to sociology is partly true - although everyone has some kind of ethical dimension, from religion and philosophy to political science to history to economics. Indeed, if you want to find out about Hume, you can go to most of those departments, since Classical social scientists were considered philosophers first, with the rest following - hence the title doctor of philosophy. Sociology has the same stable of classical thinkers - and unlike political science - when you publish, statistical regression (or worse) is not required (I hope). Sociology has sought to study ethical systems - sometimes from the perspective of what is right but more often on who is right and how such systems are developed. Feminist studies particularly look at the effect of the Patriarchy - especially when looking at religion - particularly Catholicism. Needless to say, the hierarchy of the Church does not like their gaze - especially on pelvic issues from ordination to the fortnight for freedom on contraceptive mandates.
As I stated in a previous section, one of the most effective tools in sociology and in all the social sciences is the Cultural Theory (Grid/Group) of Mary Douglas and Aaron Wildavsky. You can use their typology to map out both cultures and points of view in terms of what is proscribed (sacred) and its degree of group cohesion/power. Indeed, Smith and this book can even be pegged into the theory. Even religious authors use its tools, especially Elaine Paigels in her Abominations of Leviticus and her recent exploration into the Book of Revelation (turns out that the Pauline Church was the beast - and the beast won).
The state of sociology, and for that matter political science and theology, is due to the need to publish to get tenure - with publication dependent on peer review. In essence, it is determined by the professors themselves. While academic freedom exists once one is established, newbies do need to be orthodox for their discipline. Doctoral school is where people are weeded out, not deliberately, but by self-selection in terms of both the methods and ideas of the discipline. We can wonder whether a paradigm shift is possible. I believe they most certainly are, but such shifts are not usually led by assistant professors and graduate students. Undergraduates have a roll to. If the coursework interests them, they take it. If not, classes get canceled and professors must teach during the summer to cover workload requirements. It seems that the social sciences and academia don't lead the culture so much as reflect it (and their students mostly are marking time as undergraduates with a major they enjoy to give them the highest GPA possible so that they can get that MSW, MBA,. MD or JD). I left out the math and science students. They get their jobs, with or without graduate school - and take the social sciences for either an easy A or just to get division requirements met.
So, what about Christian thinking? As I said, the Church is a human institution which teaches about human conduct (over and above any message of salvation). Should sociology, including sociology in its sacred project on equality and freedom, study the Church? Absolutely! To the extent that the Church is fairly lousy about studying itself, outside prophesy is essential - and probably inspired! Indeed, that is the question we can ask about sociology that it can't ask for itself - is God working through it? As a believer, I have to say yes - because God works through everyone, with or without their consent.
The contention that ethics has gone to sociology is partly true - although everyone has some kind of ethical dimension, from religion and philosophy to political science to history to economics. Indeed, if you want to find out about Hume, you can go to most of those departments, since Classical social scientists were considered philosophers first, with the rest following - hence the title doctor of philosophy. Sociology has the same stable of classical thinkers - and unlike political science - when you publish, statistical regression (or worse) is not required (I hope). Sociology has sought to study ethical systems - sometimes from the perspective of what is right but more often on who is right and how such systems are developed. Feminist studies particularly look at the effect of the Patriarchy - especially when looking at religion - particularly Catholicism. Needless to say, the hierarchy of the Church does not like their gaze - especially on pelvic issues from ordination to the fortnight for freedom on contraceptive mandates.
As I stated in a previous section, one of the most effective tools in sociology and in all the social sciences is the Cultural Theory (Grid/Group) of Mary Douglas and Aaron Wildavsky. You can use their typology to map out both cultures and points of view in terms of what is proscribed (sacred) and its degree of group cohesion/power. Indeed, Smith and this book can even be pegged into the theory. Even religious authors use its tools, especially Elaine Paigels in her Abominations of Leviticus and her recent exploration into the Book of Revelation (turns out that the Pauline Church was the beast - and the beast won).
The state of sociology, and for that matter political science and theology, is due to the need to publish to get tenure - with publication dependent on peer review. In essence, it is determined by the professors themselves. While academic freedom exists once one is established, newbies do need to be orthodox for their discipline. Doctoral school is where people are weeded out, not deliberately, but by self-selection in terms of both the methods and ideas of the discipline. We can wonder whether a paradigm shift is possible. I believe they most certainly are, but such shifts are not usually led by assistant professors and graduate students. Undergraduates have a roll to. If the coursework interests them, they take it. If not, classes get canceled and professors must teach during the summer to cover workload requirements. It seems that the social sciences and academia don't lead the culture so much as reflect it (and their students mostly are marking time as undergraduates with a major they enjoy to give them the highest GPA possible so that they can get that MSW, MBA,. MD or JD). I left out the math and science students. They get their jobs, with or without graduate school - and take the social sciences for either an easy A or just to get division requirements met.
So, what about Christian thinking? As I said, the Church is a human institution which teaches about human conduct (over and above any message of salvation). Should sociology, including sociology in its sacred project on equality and freedom, study the Church? Absolutely! To the extent that the Church is fairly lousy about studying itself, outside prophesy is essential - and probably inspired! Indeed, that is the question we can ask about sociology that it can't ask for itself - is God working through it? As a believer, I have to say yes - because God works through everyone, with or without their consent.
Monday, September 29, 2014
Affordable Care Act's anti-abortion rules need to be enforced | National Catholic Reporter
Affordable Care Act's anti-abortion rules need to be enforced | National Catholic Reporter by Fr. Thomas Reese. MGB: I do hope somebody holds the Department's feet to the fire, although, frankly, the extent to which people will be in exchanges when they were in employer provided insurance is the extent to which this is not an issue (since all, or almost all, employer provided insurance covers abortion - and most don't use the coverage, preferring to keep having this procedure off any insurance record. It is not hugely expensive unless hospital care is required - and then anyone should cover it because it is probably a life or death matter. Still, the bishops were obnoxious in their behavior regarding supporting the GOP in holding up this Law - and downright vengeful against those Sisters that helped it get passed. So, I will say now what I said then - those of us in the left wing of the Church are going to take a pass on getting excited about this issue. I know a few members of Congress and the Senate and where their web pages are. I campaign and have for years, so when I leave a message, someone sees it. Not on this issue. Anyone who agrees with me - repost this. Maybe the bishops will figure out that their hyperpartisanship in our names without our consent matters.
Sunday, September 28, 2014
Friday, September 26, 2014
Gerson on Resentment & Christianity | National Catholic Reporter
Gerson on Resentment & Christianity | National Catholic Reporter by MSW. MGB: Michael Gerson favors civility over rear guard action, and Michael Sean Winters think conservative Catholics should try that as well. Michael Gerard Bindner would even extend that to the Church hierarchy in dealing with gay marriage and different understandings of when Communion can be received. I also suspect that civility is being encouraged because it forces the left to be civil when we would really like to dance of the graves of the worn out ideas being defeated by those of us who are, as Justice Kennedy names us, moral libertarians. (did MSW miss that piece without commenting on it). Its not that we are libertarian as much as egalitarian - that we don't let hierarchs dictate to us (especially when the appear wrong) and actually go out and help those being damaged, like non-evangelicals at the Air Force Academy or women who need contraception though their employers don't want to buy insurance that funds it (even at the same price). I don't think either side will be listening to Michael Gerson. (especially when race is in the background, like in voting rights).
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)