Book Reviews and Recommendations - Entry #6

 Book Review of "Prayer" by Ole Hallesby

              This is a review that is 40+ years in the making!

             If one measure of the importance of a book is "has the book made any real tangible change in the way you live your life?", then the book simply titled "Prayer", written by Ole Hallesby in the 1931 is absolutely important.  In fact, for me personally, this book might be at the top of the list (excluding the Bible).  The weird thing is that I think I read it only once or twice (until recently - April 2023).  Rereading it recently made me realize how deeply embedded in my psyche some of the points in the book had become.

             I read this book some time during my first year in college (1979-1980).  I do not recall how I came across it, but I'm guessing someone gave me their copy because I had no money to buy books.  At the time, I was interested in learning about prayer and reading all of the books I could get my hands on.  So, of course, I read a lot of books by E.M. Bounds and so on.  But I think the one by Hallesby was one of the first I read, probably because of its simple title.  His main point is unique among any teaching on prayer I read then and any teaching I've heard since.  His fundamental point is that "prayer is helplessness."  For me, it was a revolutionary starting place.

             The funny thing is that the book faded into almost an "ancient text" quality in my mind.  By that I mean that I have always remembered the main point of the book and I knew it came from that book (although I thought the author's name was O'Hallesby until very recently), but I never went back and read it again.  There have been a few times in the 40+ years since I read it the first time that I said "I should go back and read it again."  But, I could never find it in my collection of books and so I would eventually forget again and move on.  Also, oddly, I've never heard anyone else mention this book and I've never heard anyone else present prayer the way it is presented in this book.  Yet the book has had multiple multiple printings and has sold many copies.  I did, recently, come across a podcast where this book was reviewed and the reviewers on the podcast also kind of marveled that the book was not more well known among Christians.  Also, in the podcast they also mentioned that they thought the author's name was O'Hallesby too, which is kind of funny.

             What's so great about it?  First, it will deepen your understanding of prayer and second, it will motivate you to pray.  I sometimes teach lessons on the principles of prayer and I often find myself asking the question "isn't it more important to just spend time actually praying than to spend time learning about prayer?"  But then I hearken back to an illustration I heard somewhere about using a shovel.  If you're using the wrong end of the shovel, you'll eventually give up on the tool as useless, but if someone shows you how to use it, you find it is quite effective.  The same is true for prayer - it is worth learning how to use the "tool" of prayer properly.  Oh, and by the way, when I recently re-read the book, I discovered that the analogy I have been using of the shovel came directly from the book.  I remembered the analogy for 40 years, though I had long forgotten where it came from.

             The one thing I really can't figure out is why the idea of "prayer is helplessness" isn't brought out or emphasized by anyone else (that I know of).  The question is:  why pray?  Isn't God going to do what He's going to do?  Is prayer about convincing a reluctant God to do something He'd rather not do?  Or is it just that prayer is one of those things God tells us to do, so we should do it and not ask why?  No - as Hallesby shows from scripture - prayer is the cry of an infant to which it's mother responds.  We have too high of an opinion of ourselves when we bring deep theological discussions of predestination into prayer.  In prayer, more than anything else, we have to "become as little children."  Prayer is not for those who can take care of things themselves.  Prayer is not for independent adults.  Prayer is the cry of the helpless.  If you're not that helpless, then maybe your only real prayer should be "God, help me to realize how helpless I really am"!

             There are some aspects of the book that seem a bit dated - after all, it was written almost 100 years ago.  But Hallesby has a series of excellent and insightful thoughts about prayer - different types of prayer and impediments to prayer.  His thoughts are always very directly practical and he plainly addresses many questions that many of us have had about prayer.

             It's a pretty short, clearly written book.  For Christians seeking to understand the basic principles of prayer, I consider it a must read. 

 

 

                                                                              

Consciousness, Free Will and Roger Penrose

[Note:  since I first wrote this entry, I've worked on developing a new theory of consciousness and free will that starts here.]

          I just finished reading a book called “Shadows of the Mind” by Roger Penrose.  It was written in 1994, and I see he has some more recent books out now, so I might check those out.  This book had some pretty interesting sections to it and brought together a few of the thoughts I have expressed in some of my previous entries.  Therefore, I thought it would be worth discussing the ideas in this book a bit.

          First of all, I have to admit that this book was the most technically-challenging book I can ever remember reading (excluding, I suppose, various textbooks from my college courses, but I don’t remember those anymore!).  I wouldn’t say the math is extremely advanced, but I found it very very difficult to follow.  On the back of the book there is a quote from the Los Angeles Times: “Elegant…beautifully written and argued.”  I seriously doubt that the average reader would understand the middle 80% of the book.  I mean, I’m not a mathematician or physicist, but I do have a PhD in engineering so I figure I’m at least an average reader with respect to a mathematical and scientific background, and I found this to be extremely difficult to follow.

          Despite the difficulty, there are some very interesting ideas put forward.  But what I’m mostly interested in is how this book perfectly illustrates a point I often try to make about our preconceived notions.  The theme of the first half of the book has to do with whether computers (or “Turing Machines”) will ever be able to achieve human consciousness.  Ultimately, Penrose shows that humans can understand certain things about mathematics that can be “proven” to be non-computational.  Since computers can only operate on computations, then they can never achieve the same level of understanding.  I’m not sure that our non-computational understanding of mathematics is the same as consciousness (!), but the point he is trying to make is that computers will never be able to duplicate what humans can do in this particular instance.

          Penrose proposes four viewpoints regarding this issue that I would like to copy here because I think they are worth considering:

“A.  All thinking is computation; in particular, feelings of conscious awareness are evoked merely by the carrying out of appropriate computations.

B.  Awareness is a feature of the brain’s physical action; and whereas any physical action can be simulated computationally, computational simulation cannot by itself evoke awareness.

C.  Appropriate physical action of the brain evokes awareness, but the physical action cannot even be properly simulated computationally.

D.  Awareness cannot be explained by physical, computational, or any other scientific terms.”

          Penrose fully supports Option C, and the rest of the book is about defending that option.  His point is that A and B cannot be true (based on the proofs he goes through, among other things) and therefore a “new science” is needed.  The subtitle of the book is “A search for the missing science of consciousness”.  He shows that there is nothing in science that can possibly achieve some of the key aspects of consciousness, therefore we will need some new approach.  Ultimately, he suggests that this new science might be found somewhere in the mysterious connection between the quantum world and the Newtonian world and suggests this might occur in the cytoskeletons of neurons.  But this is only a vague perception of where this new science of consciousness might begin to be found.  It’s not a real suggestion of a solution – it’s just a possible direction to start looking.

          Although I fully support Option D, I do appreciate Penrose’s approach to trying to figure out a scientific answer to this issue.  What Penrose does show is that there is a fundamental difficulty in answering the problem of consciousness using current scientific understanding, but he fully expects that there will, ultimately, be a scientific explanation.

          I argued for Option D <*here*> - that was before I read Penrose’s book.  I was focusing on free will, but the issues related to consciousness are the same in this case [1].  I argued that, since science had no explanation for free will, and no clear hope of ever being able to explain free will, the logical conclusion was that there was a non-material (i.e. supernatural) explanation for free will.  What Penrose clearly illustrates is what I have pointed out elsewhere:  no amount of evidence will ever be sufficient to cause a committed materialist to allow a supernatural element into his/her thinking.  Penrose admits that Option D is a possible option in this case.  He shows that Options A and B cannot be true.  But when it comes to Option D, all he can say is “give me a chance to show you that Option C is a reasonable option.”  This is because he can’t rule out Option D – all he can do is just eliminate it on the basis of his a priori biases against any supernatural explanation for anything.  This is what I have referred to as “locking and bolting the door” with respect to belief in anything supernatural. 

          I am not at all proposing that it is wrong to diligently seek for a scientific explanation for consciousness and free will.  In fact, I’d like to explore that area in my own research (if I had the time…which doesn’t seem likely these days).  I like Penrose’s approach and his search for ideas and I, personally, think he has some pretty interesting proposals.  All I want is for the materialist to be honest.  The materialist rejects God a priori, not because of any logical argument.  And, not only that, but the materialist locks and bolts the door against any possible intrusion of anything “supernatural.”  As a result, the one thing that the materialist cannot say is “if God wanted me to believe in Him, all He would have to do is appear before me.”   As I have argued before, that is simply not true.  If you really want an honest experience with God, you will first have to unlock your committed materialism and allow for the supernatural (i.e. miracles) to at least some degree.

          There are a small minority of committed materialists – those who are called the “new atheists” – who shake their fists at God and say “if I don’t believe, it’s Your fault.”  Some of these individuals have become famous and their views make the popular media.  I don’t believe they represent the vast majority of scientists and academics.  But these extremists do make it seem as if they are giving God a chance when, in reality, they have locked Him out.  If, instead, they were honest and said “there is no God and there is no amount of evidence of any sort that will change that fact”, then I could accept their position as being logically consistent.  I must admit that I have come to believe the opposite:  “there is a God (Jesus) and no amount of evidence of any sort will change that fact.”  I have come to that conclusion based on my own experiences, some of which have convinced me of the reality of Jesus.  But I didn’t start out that way – I didn’t start out with the conviction that Jesus was real.  However, as far back as I can remember, I always did allow for the possibility of the supernatural.  I always left the door open. 

          As far as I can tell, the consciousness that Roger Penrose imagines seems fundamentally random and void of a real will.  He proposes a new science will be necessary to even create a theory of consciousness.  Yet that still leaves us far short of achieving anything resembling a will - especially a free will, responsible for its own actions.  What will that require???

[1] Actually, since writing that sentence, I've changed my mind about this statement.  I now believe that free is such a unique and different problem when compared to the problem of consciousness that the two should not be lumped together.  See here to get a sense of that line of thinking.

My 1000 Page List Explained

In the previous entry, I presented my list of “1000 pages that I think everyone should read”.  Please send me your own lists as well.  In this entry, I’d like to go into a bit more detail about why I chose the 7 books I chose.

“Ecclesiastes”, written by Solomon

          I don’t imagine that a lot of Christians would choose Ecclesiastes on any of their lists of “Books of the Bible to read.”  I struggled myself as to whether to include it because, to be honest, my later selection by Tolstoy is essentially an expanded, more intense version of Ecclesiastes.  But, if Solomon really was the wisest man ever to live, as the Bible claims, then it seems worth reading something he wrote.  Even given that, most people would have picked Proverbs and even Song of Solomon over Ecclesiastes.  But Proverbs is a “middle” book in my mind:  it presents kind of the middle of the road thinking.  I prefer to go to the extremes and get to the point.  I always want to quickly run ahead and find out where a line of thinking is going to lead me.  The reductio ad absurdum really appeals to me.  Ecclesiastes is the extreme of thinking “if I remove God, what’s the point?”  Some people think that the Bible is outdated and out of step with the times.  To that I say: read Ecclesiastes!  Besides, it is by far the shortest book on my list, so it’s a simple read.

“Gospel of John”, written by Apostle John

          Some will say “why should everyone read that fairy tale?” and others will say “why just John – why not the whole Bible or at least the whole New Testament?”  Well, first of all, the whole Bible is more than 1000 pages by any normal-sized page count, so that wouldn’t fit my criteria.  But, more importantly, I focused on the part of the challenge that ways “…everyone should read.”  I think that most of the Bible is written for those who already believe.  I definitely think that every Christian should read the whole Bible – in fact I think they should keep reading it over and over.  But not much of the Bible is really written for “everyone”, in my opinion.  But the Gospel of John was specifically written to describe and present Jesus to the masses.  Certainly, if everyone wants to read the whole Bible, that is fine – that’s great, really…but I’m pretty sure everyone does not!  But I think – and again, this is just my opinion in answer to the question – I think everyone should read the Gospel of John.

          The Gospel of John is, in many ways, one of the most attacked books of the Bible (I suppose outside of Genesis).  But, the bottom line is that it is either:  true and the most important book in the world, or it is a false and intentionally deceptive book.  I think everyone should be forced to make their own decision about it, and I don’t know any other way to decide between those two extremes other than to read it for yourself. 

“Epistle to the Romans”, written by Apostle Paul

          There are two reasons I chose Romans.  First, it most clearly lays out the basic principles of Christian beliefs.  The first eight chapters, in particular, present the logical progression of Christian thinking.  I think everyone should understand that progression, whether they agree with it or not, and so I put it on my list.  Over the ages since it was written, this book has been the most instrumental to many Christian thinkers.  If you were to make a list of the most important books ever written, Romans would surely be on any reasonable list.

          The second reason I put Romans on this list is because it is so unassailable in terms of its history.  Is there any scholar who doesn’t believe that Paul wrote this book somewhere in the 60’s AD?  People frequently argue about the Gospels and who wrote them and when they were written (especially John’s Gospel), but you don’t see arguments about Romans.  Everyone agrees that this is what Paul wrote.  Because of that, I got interested in a line of arguing I called “Paul in 4D” that I put somewhere on this site <*here*>.

          Finally, this is a short book as well.  Just read it.

“Penseés”, written by Blaise Pascal

          I did not come across this book until I was in my 40s, and it was like a lightening bolt.  I have talked about this book elsewhere <*here*>.  Pascal was a contemporary of Descartes (a little younger) and Newton (a little older).  I think he might be smarter than either one of them!  Unfortunately, he died quite young and never finished this book.  So, what you really have in Pensees is a collection of some fairly finished thoughts, some completely unfinished thoughts, and everything in between.  That makes it harder to read than most – it’s more like reading a series of very short essays than a cohesive book.  Maybe just think of it as reading a blog!  The thing is, it was written in the mid-1600s, and is as relevant to today as you can imagine.  I don’t agree with all of what Pascal wrote, but there are some passages there that are just spectacularly deep and important.  It’s well worth the effort to read.

“A Confession”, written by Leo Tolstoy

          No, not “War and Peace” – it’s too long for this list anyway!  “A Confession” is Tolstoy’s brutally honest view of his life up to that point.  It is his summary of the meaning of life.  I hesitated to include this for “everyone” to read because it can be taken as extremely depressing.  If you are depressed before you read this, it might push you over the edge.  However, in my opinion, the antidote for this book is the Gospel of John, which is also on my list, so you should be reading both.  If you’re depressed already, maybe you should read John first…then Tolstoy…then maybe John again!

“Miracles”, written by C.S. Lewis

          I knew that I had to include at least one of CS Lewis’ works in my list.  He was a fantastically clear and accessible writer, in my opinion.  His book “Mere Christianity” is certainly the most well-known of his non-fiction work.  Of course his allegorical “Narnia Tales” are certainly very well-known as well, but I don’t think any fiction should be on a list that “everyone should read”.

          This book is not about whether miracles have happened, but rather it is about whether they could happen.  As I have said elsewhere in this blog, I think that very fundamental issue has to be settled first for every person.  Is that door locked or unlocked?  I don’t know of many books that directly address this very fundamental issue.  Maybe, if you know of one, you should put it on your list.  I’ll definitely read it.

          I think this book is probably the most difficult to read from a purely academic standpoint.  By that I mean that, for many, it’s the kind of book you can’t read all at once and you may have to re-read some passages to understand the point he is making.  But the issue is so critical that it is worth the effort. 

“Being Mortal”, written by Atul Gawande

          I think this is the longest of all the books I chose and it is certainly the most recent.  This book is less than ten years old.  It is also probably much more relevant to Western cultures, and especially the U.S. than anything else on my list.  So, should everyone read it?  Maybe I stretched it a bit with this one.  But if you are alive today and you live in the U.S., I think you should read this book.  It is about how we practice medicine with those who are elderly and dying.  At some point I will do a more proper review of this book in this blog.  But it was a book that really got me to thinking and one that I just had to talk about as I was reading through it.  It is very relevant to today. 

So, now you have my reasons for the books I picked.  I might change my mind tomorrow – who knows!  Anyway, as I said before, I’d be very interested in hearing any such lists that others might have!  Please share them.

1000 Pages Everyone Should Read

I’m always interested in lists of the most popular books, or books people have read, etc.  Usually it’s a list of something like 100 books – something that would take a really long time to get through (unless you are a speed reader, and I am not).  So, I thought it might be more interesting to identify a list of books that was small enough that any reader could reasonably read through the list in a year.  There are a lot of ways to do this, but I came up with a plan that I think is pretty workable.  It is basically a list of “1000 pages that I think everyone should read”. 

The rules of the list are as follows:

1) Identify 1000 pages (give or take ~50 or so) of reading that you think everyone should read.

2) You can’t break up a book, i.e. you can’t pick and choose passages from one book and passages from another.

For my personal list, I only picked one book per author, but I’m not sure that should necessarily be a rule.

Also I broke up the Bible because it is a book of books.  Therefore, I could choose one or more books out of the Bible without violating rule #2.

One technical issue that confronts us is “how long is a page?” or “what defines a page?”  I know that is vague and varies – especially if you decide to pick a book from the Bible and use one of those microscopic print Bibles!  But, I wanted to make this easy for everyone to do.  It’s easy to find out how many pages are in a book on your shelf.  It would have been more technically accurate to define the list by “number of words” or “number of characters”, but those details are not as readily available as the number of pages.  So, when it comes to “how many pages”, I just looked at whatever copy I had, or I looked on Amazon at the first copy that popped up, and determined the total number of pages.  This is just for fun anyway – so no reason to make it difficult.  Also, the list doesn’t need to add up to 1000 pages – just something close.

I figure 1000 pages is an amount that anyone could easily read in a year with just reading a few minutes a day.  If you’re serious about it, you could complete this reading in a month or so even in the midst of a busy schedule.  That seemed about right to me.

So…here is my list (in order by date written):

“Ecclesiastes”, written by Solomon, ~24 pages

“Epistle to the Romans”, written by Apostle Paul, ~42 pages

“Gospel of John”, written by Apostle John, ~72 pages

“Penseés”, written by Blaise Pascal, ~169 pages

“A Confession”, written by Leo Tolstoy, ~64 pages

“Miracles”, written by C.S. Lewis, ~294 pages

“Being Mortal”, written by Atul Gawande, ~304 pages

That’s a total of 969 pages.

I didn’t pick any fiction because I figure that fiction is a matter of taste and so I couldn’t come up with any fiction that I think “everyone should read.”  I’m a big fan of Tolkien and so on, but I would only recommend it if you like that sort of thing.  I also ended up picking books that were written at vastly different time periods.  That seemed kind of cool to me, but really it just worked out that way.

The idea is to share such lists and agree to read each other’s lists of 1000 pages.  Therefore, I’d be very interested in hearing other people’s lists following the rules I laid out above.  I think it would be a good challenge among us all to agree to read each other’s book lists.  After all, 1000 pages doesn’t take that long to read.  I wonder how many of us might have the same books on our list – or will any book make anyone’s list more than once?

By the way, it would also be interesting to create a similar list that consisted of specific passages from each book.  For example, Penseés, which is really an unfinished collection of writings by Pascal, certainly has some sections in it that are too unfinished to really be that useful, so there are some of the 169 pages that you could skim over.  Also, there are other books, especially biographies, that I have found very moving, but biographies tend to be longer.  If you try to make your own list, you’ll find that you have to struggle with what to do with some of the longer books.  For example, I asked myself if I should delete the first four books of my list for an autobiography by Nabeel Qureshi, but that just didn’t seem like a good trade.

So, there it is.  I’d be very interested in hearing any such lists that others might have!

Book Reviews and Recommendations - Entry #5

Coming to Peace with Science

by Darrel R Falk

          As I have discussed elsewhere <here>, I am not particularly interested in the “evolution-creation” debate, even though it must certainly be the most popular debate topic in the arena of faith vs. science.  However, the book “Coming to Peace with Science” provides what I consider to be an excellent review of the topic from a Christian perspective.  I recommend this book to anyone who is a Christian who wants to gain a scientifically credible view of this whole topic.  I also appreciate Dr. Falk’s call for unity in the Christian community.

          The basic premises of the book include the following:

1.  Well-accepted scientific theories, such as evolution and the origins of the universe, do not disprove the existence of God or destroy Christian principles.

2.  The existence of the universe, or of complex life-forms, or any other natural event, does not prove the existence of God.

3.  Therefore it is entirely reasonable that a Christian can fully support and use theories such as evolution and still fully believe in the fundamental principles of Christian faith and in the Bible.  Further, Christians can and should recognize the work of God in the universe, regardless of the timeframe over which that happened.  But creation itself is not the linchpin of apologetics that many Christians consider it to be.  Efforts spent by Christians to disprove theories like evolution are misguided and deter us from our real purpose.

          I feel that the book provides an excellent review of the scientific evidence as it relates to this issue, particularly with respect to the age of the earth.  In my opinion, this evidence was presented in a scholarly, yet readable, manner.  Dr. Falk reviews the data from multiple fields, showing how the evidence points to a universe and earth that are much much older than 10,000 years.  His background is biology, so fields such as the fossil record, diversity of species, and genetic lineage are treated in much more detail.  He has had a lot of experience teaching these topics to students and I feel that he really excels here.  If you already have a strong background in these fields, then I doubt you will learn anything new – but the book is not written for that purpose.  It is really written for Christians who seek to have a solid, academically-based understanding of the data and evidence that has been collected over the past 200 years or so.  If you are looking for that, I think this book is an excellent place to start.

          Dr. Falk also spends some examining the interpretation of scripture as it relates to these topics – primarily the first few chapters of Genesis.  He believes in the importance of the Bible to Christian faith and believes in the literal interpretation of the Bible.  He reviews various methods of interpreting Genesis that are consistent with methods of interpretation used in other passages of the Bible.  This part of the book is a good overview of the general concepts, but I think there are better books with respect to delving into issues of interpretation in depth. 

          Finally, Dr. Falk presents a case that the debate about the earth vs. sun being at the center of the universe was similar to the present day creation vs. evolution debate.  Specifically, the experience of Galileo is presented as a case where Christians can learn about important principles in the faith-science debate.  Since I agree with Dr. Falk on this, I think it is a very useful argument.  I’m not sure everyone would agree, but I do think it is worth Christians learning about the arguments presented by Galileo and the scripture passages used by the church at the time. 

          So, I recommend this book to those interested in the topic.  

Book Reviews and Recommendations - Entry #4

Five Days at Memorial: Life and Death in a Storm-Ravaged Hospital

by Sheri Fink

          This is the story of one of the hospitals in New Orleans that flooded during the Katrina disaster.  Ultimately a number of patients died in the hospital before everyone could be rescued and, in fact, one doctor and two nurses were charged in the deaths of some of the patients, but ultimately not convicted of any crime.  The first half of the story details what happened in the hospital during and after Katrina, and the second half of the story deals with the legal process afterward.  Personally, I found this story very fascinating and I could understand the difficult decisions that everyone faced.  I feel that the author was very even-handed in reporting the story and it makes you ask yourself “what would I have done in that situation?”  I highly recommend it.

          Though I am not a medical professional, I work in a hospital and interact with patients.  I can see how all of the problems that happened at the flooded hospital can develop.  So much of a hospital’s (or any organization’s) operational strategy is dependent on the existing infrastructure, and when that infrastructure fails, there really is chaos.  I remember working in my office at the hospital once when the power went out.  Since my office had no windows, it was suddenly pitch black.  But when I opened my office door into the hallway, I could easily see where I was going because there was emergency lighting all over.  If anything needed to remain powered up, it just needed to be plugged into the plentiful red outlets which are connected to backup power.  There was no panic – in fact there are regular tests of the process where the power is briefly switched off to verify that the backup power is working.  In the operating rooms and on the floors, business can really go on pretty much as usual.  That operational strategy works great.

          But what happens when the emergency power fails?  At Memorial hospital in New Orleans, the main power was, of course, knocked out by the storm.  No problem really – that was expected.  But when the floods came…well, it shouldn’t have been a problem.  The generator was above the flood level, so it should have been fine.  Unfortunately, the switching system was apparently below the flood level, so it failed.  There was no backup power.  That situation alone is hard to imagine.  Suddenly, everything that you totally rely on is gone.  How many things in a hospital do not require power?  The consequences are far-reaching.  Starting at that point, every patient on a ventilator had to be hand-ventilated 24 hours a day by someone.  That alone is just awful to consider.  Further, do you know of any big hospital buildings that have windows that open?  There is no air-conditioning, no ventilation at all.  The temperature soared inside.

          The problem was really complicated by the loss of communication.  First, of course, the hospital was flooded and no one could get in or out through the flooding.  Whatever staff was in the hospital at the time was suddenly on a 24 hour a day shift that was going to continue until they could be rescued.  How do you send an overhead code?  You can’t – you just have to take care of it yourself.  Communication was cut-off with the outside to a great extent (there was some communication – I can’t remember all of the details).  The hospital did have a helicopter pad, but it hadn’t been used in decades and no one knew if it could still be used.  And how do you get patients on beds up to the helicopter pad when the elevators don’t work.  There are no easy decisions and everything is difficult.  The more you think through the situation, the more you realize just how bad it is for the patients and staff.  Just awful.

          I believe the book is written clearly enough that anyone can put themselves in the situations that the staff, patients, and families faced and can think about what they would do in a similar situation.  Of course, the natural tendency is to say that this should never have happened – steps should have been taken long before to prevent the worst aspects of the disaster (like moving the generator controls above the flood level) – but that is not the situation people found themselves in.  This book is worth reading, whether you work in a hospital or are a medical professional or not.

Book Reviews and Recommendations - Entry #3

Miracles by CS Lewis

If I listed all of the books I would recommend that someone read, there would be more books by CS Lewis on that list than by any other author.  He is best-known for the Narnia tales, a series of seven books that I read as a kid and really enjoyed.  But he also wrote a number of non-fiction books that are really excellent.  His best-known non-fiction work is probably “Mere Christianity”, which grew out of a series of radio broadcasts he gave in the 1940s.  He also wrote “The Screwtape Letters”, “Surprised by Joy” and “The Great Divorce”, all of which I would recommend.  But, in my opinion, the most impressive of his books, from an intellectual standpoint, is called “Miracles.”  If you are interested in the kinds of things I write about in this blog, then I highly recommend that you find an old copy of CS Lewis’ “Miracles” and read it.

The book “Miracles” is an intellectual exploration regarding whether it is reasonable that miracles could happen.  It is not about whether miracles ever have happened or whether any miracle in particular has happened.  At first pass, you might think that it must be a very short book, since the answer to that first question is either yes or no, and then what else is there to say about it?  But I think you will find that the points that Lewis makes are very good, even if your foregone conclusion before reading the book is that miracles cannot happen.  The primary point that Lewis makes is that it doesn’t make any sense to evaluate whether a particular miracle has happened unless the question of whether miracles could happen has been addressed.  It seems like a simple point in retrospect, but I find that it is something constantly ignored in many discussions about the material and the non-material.  The thoughts in this book have greatly influenced my thinking, and I am certain that you will find many entries in this blog that have a direct or indirect link to some of the thoughts Lewis presents in that book.

I am not going to give a complete review of the book here, as many of the points in the book will come up in significant detail elsewhere.  I’d rather you read the book yourself.  It will require some brainpower to read – it is not a light read.  But I think a brief story at the beginning of the book serves to illustrate the point of the book.  Lewis mentioned that he only personally knows of one person who has seen a ghost.  Yet, he says, that person didn’t believe in ghosts before she saw the ghost, and still doesn’t believe in ghosts even after seeing one.  That might not make sense at first, but if you think about it, it makes perfect sense.  If you have decided that there are no such thing as ghosts, then no amount of ghostly apparitions and visions will, or even should, change that view.  My personal analogy would be with respect to aliens from outer space.  I don’t believe there are living beings from other planets visiting our planet.  That’s a decision I made long ago.  So, if I ever saw a UFO, I would believe that it must have some reasonable explanation that did not include being a spaceship from another planet, even if the object moved in ways that seemed to disobey the laws of physics.  If a little Martian came up to me, I would believe it was someone in a Martian costume, or a robot, or something else.  I would believe that someone was playing a trick on me.  The thing is, I’m not open to belief in aliens from outer space and I don’t even care to be open to such a belief.  Given that, it would be a waste of someone’s time to try to convince me that they really did have a close encounter with aliens.  I might listen politely, but their evidence will not change my view.  The point CS Lewis makes at the beginning of the book is that we have to acknowledge our a priori views.  The rest of the book is CS Lewis’ argument about why it is reasonable to take the view that miracles could happen, regardless of whether they ever have happened or ever will happen.  If you have already decided that miracles cannot happen, and you don’t want to have that view challenged, then you should not read the book, as it will be a waste of time.

I will bring up one more discussion from the book because it is sure to come up again in future entries and I want to give credit here where credit is due.  Lewis has an extended discussion about the difference between cause-effect (physics) vs. ground-consequent (reason) activity.  I bring this up because it is very relevant to my ideas on free will and neuroscience.  The general point he makes is that it is hard to figure out how physical reactions in the brain (I will say “between neurons”), which are (presumably) purely based on a cause and effect relationship, can result in the logical reasoning process that occurs when we are thinking through an argument (I will add “because all thought is the result of neurons firing in the brain”).  I will not restate things here, because Lewis does a much better job of it than I would.  It’s in one of the earlier chapters of the book.  Even if you don’t want to read the rest of the book, I’d really be interested in your thoughts on that particular chapter.  I don’t know why the concept isn’t discussed more frequently.  It might be because those who would argue against Lewis would have to claim that rational arguments are only made rational because that is the way our brains happened to fire, which would, of course, empty their arguments of any real substance.  Or…maybe it’s just that the whole topic requires more than 30 seconds to explain, so the average person tunes it out and goes onto something easier to understand.  If there is no sound bite, is there any sound?  Not today, I don’t think.

I hope I gave you enough of a taste to get you interested in reading the book “Miracles.”  It’s a fairly short book, but it will take a while to read.  Fortunately, Lewis is a very readable writer who always includes practical illustrations whenever he can.  Anyone can understand the book – it will just require some brain power!

My Favorite Quotes - Entry #3

 “If we submit everything to reason, our religion will have no mysterious and supernatural element. If we offend the principles of reason, our religion will be absurd and ridiculous.”

Blaise Pascal, Pensées, 1669

          I thought I would pick a quote from the book I just recommended – Pascal’s Pensées.  Blaise Pascal lived in the 17^th century (1623 – 1662) and was a French mathematician, physicist, inventor, writer and philosopher.  The quote above is one of many from his book that I could have picked, and I’m sure there will be more from this book in the future.

          I’ve had friends who would say “make sure you don’t check your brains at the door” when you enter a church.  They were making the point that you should use your brain when it comes to your beliefs.  They didn’t want to be swayed by some fast-talking or manipulative preacher.  I agree with them and I’ve always felt that it was important to keep your mind and reasoning abilities as a Christian.  I never wanted to be tricked or hood-winked into believing something that wasn’t true.  When someone sends me a story on the internet, I immediately check it on Snopes.  Then I try to check up on Snopes to see if they can be trusted.  Then, if it passes all of those tests, I put it in the bin marked “probably not true” – that’s the best I’ll give it.  So I agree:  to have faith doesn’t mean that you dump out your brains.  Believe only what is reasonable. 

          But the great thing about Pascal’s statement is the recognition that there are two sides to this issue.  I believe that Christianity is reasonable, but that does not mean that “reason” is the whole sum of my beliefs.  If your beliefs are against reason, then they are “absurd and ridiculous” as Pascal states.  But the balance to this is that there are some aspects of faith that go beyond reason.  They are supernatural.  If absolutely everything you believe is totally explained by reason, then what does God do?  Why do you even need God in that case?[1]

          You can’t prove Christianity through reason alone.  The best you can hope to do is show that it is reasonable.   I do believe you can show that it is reasonable.  However, having done that, it doesn’t get you to the true meaning of Christianity.  You have to go beyond where reason alone can take you.  Don’t give up on reason.  Follow it as far as you can.  But just don’t stop there.  [By the way, if you want to see where I go with that, check out the #1 Crazy Thing Christians Believe.]

Miracles fit perfectly into this kind of thinking.  A miracle is not “reasonable”, necessarily, but it is also not unreasonable.  I think Paul shows an excellent combination of reason and miracle when he says that Christ’s resurrection is the central point of Christian faith, and if Christ has not been raised from the dead, then faith in Christ is “in vain” (I Cor 15).  There is a logical aspect to this belief.  The historical aspects of Christ’s resurrection can be subjected to reason.  The centrality of Christ’s resurrection to Christianity can be subjected to reason.  But the resurrection itself is a miracle.  It is beyond reason.  You can’t sit in the corner of a room and reason your way to the resurrection.  It has to be revealed to you.

Don’t believe anything that offends reason.  That’s not smart.  But don’t confine your beliefs to reason alone.  That is dry and boring.  There’s more to life than that.  Not everything can be explained by science.  Music and art are not arrived at through reason alone.  There is a beauty to nature that is surely beyond reason.  Human emotions are surely real, and just as surely they are not always based on reason!  Allow yourself the opportunity to wonder and marvel.

I know that many will say “you don’t have to bring in the supernatural to experience wonder and awe at nature.”  That is true, and there are plenty of examples to support that.  All I am suggesting is that we not require of the supernatural something that we do not require of the natural:  that it must all bow to reason, and reason alone.  If the supernatural is there, do not miss the opportunity to experience it because you artificially confined it to a box that it can never fit in. 

---

[1] Some of course will say “exactly – why do you need God?”  But this particular quote from Pascal is written to those who already have a belief in God.  There will be more to come from Pascal for those who have already put belief aside.

Book Reviews and Recommendations - Entry #2

          You should read Pensées by Blaise Pascal.

          Yes, I am recommending a book written in the 1600s.  A book that isn’t even finished and wasn’t even completely assembled by its author.  A book that has never been on a bestseller list anywhere.  But if you have any interest in the discussion of science and belief, you should read this book.

          If you were like me, you might probably say that the name Pascal sounds vaguely familiar, but that is about all you could say about him.  Actually, for me, the name Pascal only meant one thing:  the Pascal programming language.  I spent a couple of years working primarily as a programmer during my PhD studies, and I programmed entirely in Pascal during that time.  It is still my favorite language by far – certainly better than BASIC or FORTRAN and, in my opinion, easier than C.  But my programming days are distant in my past and the only thing I remember from them is the name:  Pascal.

          Some would have heard of “Pascal’s Wager.”  The line of thinking described as Pascal’s Wager has to do with the probability trade-offs regarding belief and unbelief.  I won’t describe it here – it comes from Pensées – so if you read the book, you’ll read the passage about the wager in context, which makes much more sense.  Pascal’s Wager has made it into many popular works even today, but taken out of context it is easy to argue against.  When you read it in context, you find that Pascal already dealt with all the arguments that have been lifted against it.  You’ll also find that it is not the culmination of his thinking nor his most important contribution to the discussion of belief.  He has much more to offer.

          Pascal lived in the mid-1600s and died at the age of 39.  He was a French mathematician and philosopher.  Pascal might be more famous than Descartes, in my opinion, if only Pascal had lived longer (and if he would have been able to come up with some easily memorable phrase!).  Also, Pascal as a person and as a thinker can’t quite be categorized into a neat compartment.  Therefore, at some point in the book, just about everyone will come across something that they don’t agree with.  The scientists will say he is too religious.  The philosophers will say he is too much of a scientist and too practical.  The Catholics will say he is too Protestant.  The Protestants will say he is too Catholic.  Don’t get hung up on those things – just read it for its overall impact.

          Pascal was intending to write a book and had collected notes and ideas, but he had poor health and died before he could finish it.  No one really knows exactly how he intended to have it organized, and some of the sections are just bits of statements and unfinished thoughts.  But as such, it makes it kind of like a treasure hunt.  But you never have to read very far before you find another gem.

          One of the things you’ll find as you read this book is that “there is nothing new under the sun.”  The first time I read Pensées, I was amazed at how many contemporary topics were discussed by Pascal, writing almost 400 years ago.  Some of the sections of the book are so relevant that they could have been written yesterday, and, in my opinion, provide more insight on some topics than anything that is being written now!

          At the very least, reading Pensées should cure you of your “chronological snobbery.”  If you don’t know what that is, you’ll have to wait until you read one of my other upcoming book recommendations (hint:  from CS Lewis).  

Finally, Pensées is a book that is freely available – you can get it here:

http://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/18269

or here:

http://www.ccel.org/ccel/pascal/pensees.pdf

or you can even get an audio version and listen to it in your car:

https://librivox.org/pensees_by_blaise_pascal/

So you have no excuse not to read it! 

Book Reviews and Recommendations - Entry #1

I’ve always loved to read.  I remember really looking forward to first grade because I would be able to learn to read.  Even though I grew up in the 60s and 70s, my family didn’t have a television!  Instead of watching TV, I did other things, which included lots of reading.  I enjoyed the fact that when you read a story, you enter into that world for a time.  The story becomes part of your life for a while.  It’s like entering another dimension – it’s exciting.

When I was younger, I read mostly fiction.  Now I almost never read fiction – I can’t remember the last book I’ve read that wasn’t supposed to be real (I’ve been annoyingly tricked a few times, but that’s for a future entry).  Also, most of my reading is actually listening – I listen to lots of books in the car while I am driving to work or on long trips.  There’ve been a few really good books where I couldn’t wait to get back into my car to listen to the book again.  I figured I would occasionally review and recommend books here.  I’m also looking for good books to read myself, so I’d be interested in any of your recommendations.

I read pretty much any genre outside of fiction.  I am partial to science and philosophy, so I’ll frequently listen to whole courses on specific topics in that area (I’ve spent a lot of money at places like “The Great Courses”).  But I am also very interested in history and I really like to read biographies.  I do some broad reading in religion, but I generally stick to Christian apologetics if I’m going to read something in that genre.  I read at least a bit of the Bible every day, and occasionally I read some from other religious texts (yes, I know some of you would classify some or all of those in the “fictional” category – yet another topic for some future entry!).  I hardly ever read books more than once.  In fact, as far as I recall, there are only three books that I’ve read multiple times:  the Bible, the Lord of the Rings, and Pensees. 

Anyway, I thought I’d start this series of entries with a “recommendation”.  The book is “Finding Me” by Michelle Knight.  Actually, it’s hard to recommend this book – it’s more like suggesting that it is our duty to read it.  Michelle was one of the three girls who were held captive in a home in Cleveland for ten years.  I do not say that it is a story that you will enjoy.  It is sickening and shocking and impossible to imagine.  I still wonder – did it really happen? – but it did.  I actually used to drive within 500 ft of that house almost every day during the entire time those three girls were held there.  Michelle’s story makes you wonder how an individual can be so entirely evil.  But even more shocking and – to me – soul searching is the fact that her captor lived an average everyday life, interacting with society and neighbors and family as if there was nothing wrong.  He went to cookouts.  He was in a band.  He had family.  And no one ever seriously suspected him of anything except being a bit odd.  The capacity of human beings to put on a façade and hide our ugly inner selves is almost beyond belief.  That’s why I recommend this book – I feel it is our duty as human beings to understand how ugly we can be and how well we can hide it from everyone else.  So, the book is more like awful-tasting medicine – you will mostly learn dark things – but it reflects the reality of our situation.  The only positive from the story is Michelle’s resilience.

I haven’t read the recently published book written by the other two girls, but I will.  I’ll probably get it as an audio book.

So, there you go:  book recommendation #1.