Moments in the Mist

I have been describing myself this week as a skeptical theist. When I am talking to my peers or other Christians, I use the term agnostic Christian, because I don't think that those in my contact would understand the label "skeptical theist" (unless I happen to run into philosophers Perrine and Wykstra who helpfully define the term in the Cambridge Companion to the Problem of Evil). The "core" of skeptical theism is the view that if there is a God, the metaphysical gap between humans and the divine could reasonably prevent us from understanding her actions and attributes. Put simply, as a skeptical theist, I don't expect to be certain about what God is like or the way she works. One common misconception is that the word "skeptical" in this instance refers to a skepticism regarding God's existence. Rather, it refers to human epistemic limitations. Under the mentality explained in my first paragraph, I am skeptical that I have the ability to gr...

Like countless women, I dated the wrong guy in high school. This wasn't simply a case of falling head over heels too quickly, going through a tough breakup, and then learning from my mistakes and growing as a person. Although these are all aspects of my story, I still struggle to process my experience several years later. My high school boyfriend was emotionally and sexually abusive, and our relationship took an extreme toll on my mental health. I doubted myself and my experience constantly, and I even began to have anxiety attacks and nightmares that lasted for months after the breakup. Needless to say, I was no longer thriving. About a year after our relationship ended, I was diagnosed with post-traumatic stress disorder. It isn't easy to categorize this part of my life. I will never be "grateful" for the suffering I endured during that relationship, and I wouldn't say that the ways I have grown since then make the experience "worth it." I still stru...

Those of us who have experienced profound suffering often struggle with the question, "How can there be a God," or, "How can a God who allows this to happen to me be a good God?" Whether we know it or not, by asking those questions we are participating in a vibrant philosophical debate. The Problem of Evil is the biggest logical threat to the existence of an omniscient, omnipotent, and omnibenevolent god. If a god knows there is evil in the word, is powerful enough to stop it, and is good, how can she allow evil to exist? Theists can choose between two major responses. One is the free will defense: humans cause suffering and evil through their free will, but God knew when he created the world that a world with free will and evil is better than a world without free will. This option does not easily address evils not caused by humans, such as natural disasters. I will call the other response the "redemption defense" (I am sure there are better names for ...

Mr. Kline turned to me and Turtle Boy and said, "You both need to produce more writing and share it with others, maybe join a writing group of some kind."  Turtle Boy looked at me and smiled. "We could form our own creative writing group over the summer," he suggested. I shook my head. "No." Two years later, I regret not being a bit kinder to Turtle Boy. However, I do not regret turning down the invitation to join a creative writing group with him. It's not that I think writing groups are a bad idea. But I do prefer to wait to get feedback until I produce enough decent work to make it a worthwhile endeavor, and I did not have enough produced at that point. If I write creative short stories for the sake of bringing them before a small group for feedback, I am likely to fall into the trap of writing to impress. It is necessary for me to finish the stories for the sake of themselves. After I have done that, the feedback of other writers and reader...

On February 6 Michael Pakaluk, professor of ethics and social philosophy at the Catholic University of America gave a lecture called “Is Aristotle a Friend of Liberty?” He is a self-proclaimed "disciple" of Aristotle. Pakaluk argued that Aristotle is a friend of liberty based on what various founders said about him. Pakaluk cited Jefferson and Adams, who looked to Aristotle for the principles and institutions of the new government. He argued that because those principles and institutions safeguard liberty, anyone who stands by them is a friend to liberty. These safeguards include governance for the good of the people, checks and balances, separation of powers, mixed regime, and rule of law. As a lover of philosophy, I thoroughly appreciate Aristotle. However, I am not sure that his principles promote liberty for everyone. For example, Aristotle preferred aristocracy to democracy. He thought it best that a few people known for their virtue and merit make most political decisi...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SXEXX8bkLDI Today I was tasked with comparing my writing process with that of a famous author. I chose Margaret Atwood because I want to write my political passions into creative stories like she does. Atwood advises writers to keep a pen (or pencil) and paper with them at all times. She explains that this is necessary to avoid forgetting good ideas that may be useful in the future. I agree with her sentiment, but writing myself an email with the word, phrase, moment, or idea works well enough for me. Atwood and I both rewrite as we go along. For Atwood, this looks like switching off between handwriting and typing. Atwood handwrites her drafts because it helps her flow with her stream of thought. In contrast, when I try to handwrite my drafts, I tend to tire quickly and am unable to keep up with my thoughts. Typing my drafts helps me to keep up and write for longer periods of time. If I am writing creative short stories, I will spend each section o...

There is more than one way to become a wife, and I became a wife only two months ago. To argue that my method of becoming a wife has been the best and most logical approach would be too strong of a claim. Instead, I will argue that my method has proven to be a good and logical approach. I would recommend my method to those in significantly similar circumstances to mine. My circumstances were as follows: When I first began using my method, I was a straightforward and ambitious 18 year old woman. At this point, I felt ready for marriage. I felt secure in my own identity and goals, yet hoped to grow in both of those areas by becoming a wife. My definitions of "marriage" and "wife" were specific. Marriage meant the prospect of experiencing life alongside a partner, in my case, a man. I wanted someone who I could faithfully support through life's challenges and joys without contradicting my identity. This man would ideally do the same for me. The prospect of becomi...

Last night my professor took me to dinner for the third time this week. We met with other students and speakers who graduated from Harvard, experts in philosophy and economics. I did what I always do. I sat in the corner and ate lots of fries. I listened to the speakers talk over each other, and absorbed bits of wisdom that trickled slowly through my filter. The other students asked questions about Thomas Aquinas, matter, and socialism.  After dinner, I went to a lecture by one of the speakers. I took notes for an article I will write for The Crescent . Unlike my classmates, I didn't ask questions during the Q&A.  Although I feel connected on a cosmic level to philosophical and political issues, I do not know how to engage with the philosophers and politicians I have come across. So many of them have fallen into the ready trap of self-fulfillment. They are used to being told they are brilliant, or highly skilled, or even good. Yet, I cannot separate them from my peers...