The effects of naïve optimism could be seen in the 19th century, called the Age of Ideology. During this period, ideologies and theories were developed and propagated under the garb of science. Even though it was poorly supported with scientific evidences14, the evolution theory15 was used to invade the realm of faith by the prophets of philosophical naturalism.16 Evolution was not only used to explain the biological origins of man; it had influenced man’s understanding in the development of religion, culture, politics and economy as progressing on a similar dynamic, evolutionary path.
Herbert Spencer (1820-1903), the British social philosopher applied Darwin's theory of natural selection to human societies. He argued that human progress resulted from the triumph of more advanced and wealthy cultures over their inferior competitors. Poverty was perceived as evidence of inferiority. In the early 20th century, social Darwinism was used to justify cutthroat, beast-like economic competition, racist and imperialist policies. Poverty-stricken nations were seen as “unfit”, unworthy of any aid.
Evolutionary thought even influenced liberal theology, arguing that Christianity is merely the highest stage of religious development. It is different in degree, not unique in kind compared to animism or polytheism. Actually, evolutionary philosophy is nothing new. It has existed since the earliest Greek philosophers first pondered on ultimate reality. They were divided into two camps, namely the philosophy of being and the philosophy of becoming. Parmenides believed that "Being is real. Change is illusory"; hence, his dictum, "Whatever is, is!" The opposing view was advocated by Heraclitus, who believed that "Becoming is real"; his dictum being, "All things are flowing. You never step into the same river twice!" The evolution theory embraced the philosophy of becoming. Therefore, we need to be sensitive to discern much of its metaphysical baggage hidden under the guise of objective science.
The Age of Analysis
We have noted that much of the script played out in the 20th century was written in the 19th century. Other products of the 19th century were logical positivism (Auguste Comte), Communism (Karl Marx) and existentialism (Karl Jaspers, Martin Buber and Soren Kierkegaard).
Existentialism was particularly popular among the young people. What is it? Atheistic existentialism (Friedrich Nietzsche and Jean-Paul Sartre) taught that there is no God and therefore, no transcendent purpose for human essence. Logically, there is only the “nothingness of human existence!” In the face of nihilism, man is forced to confront his dialectic dilemma: his finitude and quest for meaning. In that nothingness, existentialists tried to argue for some value for existence. Man is asked to create his own value and discover the meaning of existence by sheer resolve. We become authentic by making right decisions with a powerful act of will. But, why be authentic or courageously seek meaning when even all this is also ultimately meaningless?
In Holland, I met a young Dutch lady at a Billy Graham evangelistic crusade. As an Indonesian evangelist was preaching, she took great offence that he was bringing back the religion that her ancestors had brought to Asia. She made a lot of commotion and I decided to strike up a conversation with her. She asked me if I have heard of logical positivism and I replied in the affirmative. I said to her, “I know only a little. Are you referring to the thinking of Auguste Comte, Ludwig Wittgenstein, Professor Ayer and the Vienna Circle?” She smiled and nodded.
Just to digress a little, Comte believed that science was the key to reconstructing a new socio-political order. He argued that human development can be analysed in three stages.17 Each branch of knowledge passes through "three different theoretical states: the theological or fictitious state; the metaphysical or abstract state; and, lastly, the scientific or positive state." At the theological stage, events are immaturely explained by appealing to gods or God. At the metaphysical stage phenomena are explained by appealing to abstract philosophical categories. The final evolutionary stage, the scientific, involves abandoning any quest for absolute explanations of causes. The empirical sciences are the only adequate source of knowledge. Therefore all we need is to observe how phenomena are related and arrive at verifiable generalizations.
Coming back to my conversation with the Dutch lady, having established rapport with her, I continued, “If I am not mistaken, your most important axiom is “Anything that cannot be verified in a laboratory is not real.” Again, she replied in the affirmative. Then I asked her again, “Have you thought about this question before? Logical positivism itself could never be verified by science in an experimental laboratory”. She was surprised and answered, “I have never thought of this before. It is meaningful. It means something like...” I gave her some advice not to dismiss Christianity as unscientific and irrational without thinking deeply and humbly about the facts. I told her that what science informs us today might not be absolute because a new theory, which could explain the phenomena more adequately, could emerge later and replace the previous model. With that, she said, “Okay, I am going to think it over and over.” As we parted, I said, “Think wisely for the way of life cannot be guided by science alone.” Indeed, if empirical sciences are the only adequate source of knowledge, logical positivism itself could never be verified as adequate knowledge.
Nationalism [18] was also a modern movement, which greatly impacted the world. Before the 20th century, the prophets of culture were music composers. A nationalistic musical style inspired by folk rhythms began to emerge in Russia, Bohemia and Czechoslovakia. In the 1830s, Mikhail Glinka paved the musical way for the Russian Five19 to break away from merely imitating the Italians or Germans. “Why don’t we establish our own unique symphony?” they reasoned. The Russian Five used the folk material extensively in their music. Tchaikovsky, the first great Russian symphonist also made use of folk material primarily through his songs and piano music. In fact, on my flight to Kuala Lumpur, I had a chat with a music conductor who was due to perform Dvorak’s Seventh Symphony. His curiosity was evoked when he discovered that I knew the symphony. Much to his surprise, I told him, “I am also a music conductor!”
In France, her new form of nationalistic music was influenced by music elements from Java. Like Chinese music, gamelan was also pentatonic. But a sixth tone was later discovered and incorporated into the emerging French nationalistic movement. The birth of nationalism blended folk songs and rejected Greater Germany’s imperialism from overwhelming Europe. It anticipated the modern nationalism movement.
After the Second World War, nations rushed towards independence and formed distinct political entities. The world became increasingly fragmented. Is the history of the United Nations (UN) more united? How many nations were founding members of the UN? And how many members do we have now? I would not be surprised if we have 600 members in the future. Unity is difficult whereas separation is easy. Nationalism seen in Kazakhstan and Pakistan, for instance, called for unity but unity under their respective banners. After 1989, even the mighty Soviet Union disintegrated into many separate states. Will nationalism continue relentlessly?
At the beginning of the 20th century, nationalism was the ideological nemesis of Communism. Communism was universal in the sense that it sought a utopian order of classless society. As we saw earlier, nationalism called for the creation of separate political entities. After the global war, many nations including China, which was, ironically, a very nationalistic country became Communist!
There is also something else worth noting. Last year, in Yugoslavia, the slogan of nationalism failed to unite. The Balkan conflict flared up along sharply ethnic lines. A race ideology superseded nationalism. This is a dangerous development as genocide based on racial origin violated basic human rights. It was the contribution of former U.S. President, Jimmy Carter that human rights issues should be treated as an international affair, not a domestic affair. For the Christian, human beings possess inalienable rights derived from God as the bearer of his image. These rights are not a concession or gift bestowed by the State. It remains to be seen how the world will respect inalienable human rights in the near future.
How do we describe the 20th century? Despite its unparalleled scientific advances, the 20th century can be justly called, “The Age of Folly.” Yes, it is true that more people have been educated; information is at our fingertips through the Internet; and more convenient modes of transport are made available. An agricultural economy can be transformed into an information-based economy, bypassing the industrialization phase. Yet along with it, there is a deeper spiritual emptiness and inner loneliness. Unrestrained competition exploits the weak and the poor. Affluence comes at the expense of social justice and responsibility. Corruption is rampant. Where are the lofty ideals of our Asian ancestors? Pollution threatens our environment and depletes the ozone layer to the detriment of our future generation.
Despite many scientific exploits, there is little original philosophical break through. The 20th century has been called the Age of Analysis. Relativism is touted as the only absolute. Despite its self-defeating logic, men continue to wax eloquence about the only absolute – there being no absolutes.
On the world stage, we have been merely acting out the scripts of the 19th century – evolution, materialistic naturalism, logical positivism, Communism, atheism and existentialism, each one having wielded influence over millions of people. There is science but no spirit. There is knowledge but no wisdom. There is understanding but no faith. We have superstructures without foundation, mobility without direction, phenomena without essence and purposes without Purpose. With our fragmented and specialized knowledge, we are unable to see how the particulars relate to universals. As a result, our quest for unity in the diverse disciplines had to be abandoned. For we have strayed from God, from whom, in whom and to whom are all things.
Herbert Spencer (1820-1903), the British social philosopher applied Darwin's theory of natural selection to human societies. He argued that human progress resulted from the triumph of more advanced and wealthy cultures over their inferior competitors. Poverty was perceived as evidence of inferiority. In the early 20th century, social Darwinism was used to justify cutthroat, beast-like economic competition, racist and imperialist policies. Poverty-stricken nations were seen as “unfit”, unworthy of any aid.Evolutionary thought even influenced liberal theology, arguing that Christianity is merely the highest stage of religious development. It is different in degree, not unique in kind compared to animism or polytheism. Actually, evolutionary philosophy is nothing new. It has existed since the earliest Greek philosophers first pondered on ultimate reality. They were divided into two camps, namely the philosophy of being and the philosophy of becoming. Parmenides believed that "Being is real. Change is illusory"; hence, his dictum, "Whatever is, is!" The opposing view was advocated by Heraclitus, who believed that "Becoming is real"; his dictum being, "All things are flowing. You never step into the same river twice!" The evolution theory embraced the philosophy of becoming. Therefore, we need to be sensitive to discern much of its metaphysical baggage hidden under the guise of objective science.
The Age of Analysis
We have noted that much of the script played out in the 20th century was written in the 19th century. Other products of the 19th century were logical positivism (Auguste Comte), Communism (Karl Marx) and existentialism (Karl Jaspers, Martin Buber and Soren Kierkegaard).
Existentialism was particularly popular among the young people. What is it? Atheistic existentialism (Friedrich Nietzsche and Jean-Paul Sartre) taught that there is no God and therefore, no transcendent purpose for human essence. Logically, there is only the “nothingness of human existence!” In the face of nihilism, man is forced to confront his dialectic dilemma: his finitude and quest for meaning. In that nothingness, existentialists tried to argue for some value for existence. Man is asked to create his own value and discover the meaning of existence by sheer resolve. We become authentic by making right decisions with a powerful act of will. But, why be authentic or courageously seek meaning when even all this is also ultimately meaningless?
In Holland, I met a young Dutch lady at a Billy Graham evangelistic crusade. As an Indonesian evangelist was preaching, she took great offence that he was bringing back the religion that her ancestors had brought to Asia. She made a lot of commotion and I decided to strike up a conversation with her. She asked me if I have heard of logical positivism and I replied in the affirmative. I said to her, “I know only a little. Are you referring to the thinking of Auguste Comte, Ludwig Wittgenstein, Professor Ayer and the Vienna Circle?” She smiled and nodded.Just to digress a little, Comte believed that science was the key to reconstructing a new socio-political order. He argued that human development can be analysed in three stages.17 Each branch of knowledge passes through "three different theoretical states: the theological or fictitious state; the metaphysical or abstract state; and, lastly, the scientific or positive state." At the theological stage, events are immaturely explained by appealing to gods or God. At the metaphysical stage phenomena are explained by appealing to abstract philosophical categories. The final evolutionary stage, the scientific, involves abandoning any quest for absolute explanations of causes. The empirical sciences are the only adequate source of knowledge. Therefore all we need is to observe how phenomena are related and arrive at verifiable generalizations.
Coming back to my conversation with the Dutch lady, having established rapport with her, I continued, “If I am not mistaken, your most important axiom is “Anything that cannot be verified in a laboratory is not real.” Again, she replied in the affirmative. Then I asked her again, “Have you thought about this question before? Logical positivism itself could never be verified by science in an experimental laboratory”. She was surprised and answered, “I have never thought of this before. It is meaningful. It means something like...” I gave her some advice not to dismiss Christianity as unscientific and irrational without thinking deeply and humbly about the facts. I told her that what science informs us today might not be absolute because a new theory, which could explain the phenomena more adequately, could emerge later and replace the previous model. With that, she said, “Okay, I am going to think it over and over.” As we parted, I said, “Think wisely for the way of life cannot be guided by science alone.” Indeed, if empirical sciences are the only adequate source of knowledge, logical positivism itself could never be verified as adequate knowledge.
Nationalism [18] was also a modern movement, which greatly impacted the world. Before the 20th century, the prophets of culture were music composers. A nationalistic musical style inspired by folk rhythms began to emerge in Russia, Bohemia and Czechoslovakia. In the 1830s, Mikhail Glinka paved the musical way for the Russian Five19 to break away from merely imitating the Italians or Germans. “Why don’t we establish our own unique symphony?” they reasoned. The Russian Five used the folk material extensively in their music. Tchaikovsky, the first great Russian symphonist also made use of folk material primarily through his songs and piano music. In fact, on my flight to Kuala Lumpur, I had a chat with a music conductor who was due to perform Dvorak’s Seventh Symphony. His curiosity was evoked when he discovered that I knew the symphony. Much to his surprise, I told him, “I am also a music conductor!”In France, her new form of nationalistic music was influenced by music elements from Java. Like Chinese music, gamelan was also pentatonic. But a sixth tone was later discovered and incorporated into the emerging French nationalistic movement. The birth of nationalism blended folk songs and rejected Greater Germany’s imperialism from overwhelming Europe. It anticipated the modern nationalism movement.
After the Second World War, nations rushed towards independence and formed distinct political entities. The world became increasingly fragmented. Is the history of the United Nations (UN) more united? How many nations were founding members of the UN? And how many members do we have now? I would not be surprised if we have 600 members in the future. Unity is difficult whereas separation is easy. Nationalism seen in Kazakhstan and Pakistan, for instance, called for unity but unity under their respective banners. After 1989, even the mighty Soviet Union disintegrated into many separate states. Will nationalism continue relentlessly?
At the beginning of the 20th century, nationalism was the ideological nemesis of Communism. Communism was universal in the sense that it sought a utopian order of classless society. As we saw earlier, nationalism called for the creation of separate political entities. After the global war, many nations including China, which was, ironically, a very nationalistic country became Communist!
There is also something else worth noting. Last year, in Yugoslavia, the slogan of nationalism failed to unite. The Balkan conflict flared up along sharply ethnic lines. A race ideology superseded nationalism. This is a dangerous development as genocide based on racial origin violated basic human rights. It was the contribution of former U.S. President, Jimmy Carter that human rights issues should be treated as an international affair, not a domestic affair. For the Christian, human beings possess inalienable rights derived from God as the bearer of his image. These rights are not a concession or gift bestowed by the State. It remains to be seen how the world will respect inalienable human rights in the near future.
How do we describe the 20th century? Despite its unparalleled scientific advances, the 20th century can be justly called, “The Age of Folly.” Yes, it is true that more people have been educated; information is at our fingertips through the Internet; and more convenient modes of transport are made available. An agricultural economy can be transformed into an information-based economy, bypassing the industrialization phase. Yet along with it, there is a deeper spiritual emptiness and inner loneliness. Unrestrained competition exploits the weak and the poor. Affluence comes at the expense of social justice and responsibility. Corruption is rampant. Where are the lofty ideals of our Asian ancestors? Pollution threatens our environment and depletes the ozone layer to the detriment of our future generation.
Despite many scientific exploits, there is little original philosophical break through. The 20th century has been called the Age of Analysis. Relativism is touted as the only absolute. Despite its self-defeating logic, men continue to wax eloquence about the only absolute – there being no absolutes.
On the world stage, we have been merely acting out the scripts of the 19th century – evolution, materialistic naturalism, logical positivism, Communism, atheism and existentialism, each one having wielded influence over millions of people. There is science but no spirit. There is knowledge but no wisdom. There is understanding but no faith. We have superstructures without foundation, mobility without direction, phenomena without essence and purposes without Purpose. With our fragmented and specialized knowledge, we are unable to see how the particulars relate to universals. As a result, our quest for unity in the diverse disciplines had to be abandoned. For we have strayed from God, from whom, in whom and to whom are all things.
Comments