Representing Belief

In Marilynne Robinson’s article entitled “Reclaiming a sense of the Sacred,” I found it interesting how she was able to quote virtually every prominent Protestant Pastor of the 1800’s and combine their ideologies with those of Virgil and Homer. Granted, the effect was a flowing thread of one conclusion to another, however I found it interesting that she attempted to make that many connections in so long of an article – I somehow feel that it was the basis for a thesis paper that she had written some time ago (or, perhaps she is simply just that passionate about the subject matter at hand).

There are many ways that we can approach something foreign: we may revile or repulse at it, love it almost by instinct as did the female rats with the infant rats in her article, or simply take a more scholarly approach and instead learn to apply our own lives to what is being taught.

Whether for naught, ill or good, we are ultimately forced to either embrace or reject a topic when it comes to our recognition. As we realize our own weaknesses, for example, we have the options to either improve, stay the same by ignoring it, or simply get worse off. While we may struggle to achieve a perfect open-minded philosophy in this life, I propose a few things to help us along the way, which by no means should be canonical; first, we should strive to accept both the good with the bad. Much of life already gives us the sweet with the sour, so if we ignore the sour now in favor of the sweet, there will still come a due time in which we must taste of the opposite. Why not do so when we are best prepared and expectant of what is before us? I say, don’t be afraid of opposition to our own thoughts or belief systems, but to simply be cautious and be willing to truly spend the time in genuine research of the mind and the heart for both sides. Only by then doing these two things can we achieve a better sense of how we, too, might achieve a better balance in finding the good in more things around us. As a wise parent has probably at least once told us all: how can you know unless you try it? To which I would add, or experienced it vicariously?

Representing Belief

Marilynne Robinson’s article was long however, it had some insightful thoughts about representing belief. I like when she discussed how everything she took from her studies whether it be subjects taken from anthropology to economics did not comply with how she made sense of the world around her. There are a lot of times in lectures and such, especially in high school, where lessons taught did not hit home or send mixed messages. For example, in health class in high school, we had a guest speaker. We had a local police officer come in and talk to the class about drinking. He asked the students why it was so bad to drink. Students responded with: because you do stupid things, because someone can get hurt, because it’s against the law, and the classic, I don’t know, I don’t really care… it’s fun! For me however, it was much more than that. I knew that alcohol was not made for the bellies of man but rather for cleaning and healing of wounds. I knew that alcohol was an addicting substance and when one is addicting, one’s free agency is virtually gone because one can make their choices. I knew that alcohol was not part of a healthy lifestyle and against the Word of Wisdom. All these things I would have loved to say that day however, I knew that my classmates would not have understood what I was saying.
What I am trying to say is that much of what I learn through secular lenses often are not absorbed and misunderstood by me, and if that’s the case for me, I’m sure the same for others and as such beliefs should be represented, whether secularly for those who don’t associate with religious means or spiritually for those that do. By keeping that in mind that everyone has different beliefs we can engage belief in a respectful way. We can introduce ideas and thus people can think about those ideas and construct, carve, and complete their beliefs (this is starting to sound more and more like inception, but I assure that that’s not where I am going).
So it is that introducing ideas/beliefs should be encouraged. However, forcing ideas/beliefs should be avoided. In the “Meet Your Farmer” films, we were able to look at what it’s like to have the lifestyle of a farmer, family life, struggles, etc. By exposing us to that we were able to form a simple belief about farmers, such as the belief that farmers work. Marilynne said that we can know about characters and know characters. I think the farmer videos allowed for the getting to know of the characters and thus creating a personal connection to them and therefore, creating beliefs about them. Belief is all around us and we have to attentive to how we share those beliefs, how we represent them, and how not to force them down people’s throats.

YOU HAD BETTER BELIEVE IT! UNLESS YOU DON'T, WHICH IS ALSO OK

Ms. Robinson said a bunch of things! That is ok to do. One set of words (often referred to as a "paragraph"; are you taking notes?) that I liked AND is applicable to our assignment addressed attitudes  in modern controversy, which she then applied to the relationship between the scientific and the spiritual. To me, the most important point Marilynne made--we are on a first name basis, you see--was when she noted that, in many of today's arguments, an individual's tantrum-like defense of their own position often takes priority over examining the difference in opinions, considering the perspective of another, and coming to a mutual understanding. I think that observation alone is pretty applicable to our discussion on representing and engaging in belief respectfully. Entering into a conversation, assignment, or piece of work with our eyes closed and ears covered (metaphorically or literally) is a flat-out refusal to acknowledge or contemplate the truths that someone else has invested in. Why would you want to spend time with a person who turns up their nose at that which you believe in? Let us not dismiss unless we ourselves desire dismissal. Preparing ourselves to face, recognize, and accept the beliefs of others, especially our documentary subjects, will help us be better artistes, as well as people.

I just read Kipling's Captains Courageous, but haven't seen the movie. Let me tell you though, it illustrates this point very well. So. Do you remember the episode of the fine television series Spongebob Squarepants entitled "Camping"? If you don't, let me catch you up. Spongebob and Patrick go camping. Squidward ends up coming along. Hijinks ensue. Sponge and Pat give Squid various warnings about sea-bears, and detail the precautions one should take to prevent such an attack. Squidward scoffs at these "simpletons" and rejects these ideas that they believe are true and vital. What does he get as his reward? A sound mauling from a sea-bear. Are you getting the moral here? Do I need to spell it out? I won't, because I respect you. And yr beliefs.


(themoralisyoushouldn'tshrugoffthegentlesuggestionsandadviceofothersbecauseitismeananddumb)

Representing Belief

In the article, Marilynne Robinson says something about Christianity and judging others that really stood out to me. She said, “The Bible, Christianity, should have inoculated us against this kind of disrespect for ourselves and one another. Clearly it has not.” This reminded me of a thought I’ve been pondering lately. Sometimes, members of the Church (and any church, I suppose) are the worst culprits when it comes to judging others, even though it is something we are directly taught not to do. It can be hard to find the right balance between keeping yourself out of harm’s way and judging another. This is one of the challenges we face when trying to represent belief in a respectful way. I think what Marilynne Robinson might have been saying is that we must somehow find the middle ground between standing up for our beliefs and respecting others.

Sometimes it is best to avoid direct confrontation when it comes to personal beliefs. Unless somebody is challenging your beliefs in a way that makes it harder for you to live by those beliefs, than perhaps people should just quietly live by what they believe. There’s no use is creating unnecessary conflict. This doesn’t mean, however, that everyone should be embarrassed and shy with their beliefs. You can share what you believe without being forward and rude. The idea is to have somebody consider for themselves what you say, not to force something on them. It is for this reason that I think subtly should be encouraged when sharing beliefs. Your message will come across stronger by being a good example. I know that’s a super Mormon phrase, but generally people are more willing to accept real-life example as opposed to words on a page. The “Meet Your Farmer” film we watched in class is a good example of both of the things (which are really the same thing, if you think about it) I talked about above. The farmer in this film didn’t talk about what he believed specifically, as far as religion and philosophy goes, but his actions made it clear what some of his beliefs are. He explained that he did some of the things he did because of his family, and then we see him working on the farm with his kids. These words and images had a stronger impact on me than if someone were to just tell me that they think family is important.

Ba-dump, ba-du-dump

Well now. This article was a handful of words. And sort of a chore to read. If not for its length, I would have read it again to really understand the author’s intent. Despite this, there are a couple paragraphs that really stood out to me, even if the whole is a little intense.

First of all, I enjoyed when she was discussing how our religious beliefs need to help us understand other people, those who may be worse off than ourselves. The fact that we have the true church in our lives doesn’t mean that we’re inherently better than those who don’t. In fact, this paragraph seems like a sort of call to missionary work. She mentions William Tyndale, the man who was burned at the stake for translating the bible, and how he tried to make it applicable to everyone, even the poor plowboys. As members of the LDS faith, we need to be mindful of not only the poor but anyone who doesn’t have the gospel.

The author spends a lot of time comparing science and religion, a comparison that has been going on for centuries. She mentions the ancient Greeks and Romans who created Gods and elaborate stories to explain the meanings of the universe. She relates this to modern day religious types who are scared that science will, in some way, replace God. I’ve noticed this urge many people have to separate the two, but have never agreed. If anything, the complexity of our world, our bodies, everything reaffirms that there needs to be a God out there planning it out. Some things just can’t come together accidentally.

While I was trying to extract some sort of visceral meaning from the article, something that stood out to me was the accompanying picture at the beginning of the article. When thinking why that particular one was chosen, I related it to the author’s faith being sort of interrogated. As a result, she decided to write this meaty article convincing and explaining to herself, as much as her readers, why she believes what she does.

Lots of words does not necessarily = convincing...

It seems like a lot of us struggled a bit with Robinson’s article. I found it to be fairly well-written, but half the time her prose made it too difficult to divine what she was trying to say. Some of the comments by readers at the end of the article helped sum up her points much more succinctly. I agree with the others who have posted that it seemed her article revolved around the interaction of science and religion; I’ll forego citing from her article, but I have my disputes with a number of her passages and we’ll leave it at that.

That being said, she does try to approach the topic of religion—and its interaction with science—in a respectful, though sometimes sort of snobbish, kind of way. I felt like she was trying to convince me, from her position of well-cultured moral superiority, that my belief in certain religious tenets was a little backward…or at least suppressed my ability to revel in the sacredness all around me. She did raise several points that were insightful, but how would her conversation relate to those who do believe that science and religion do not and should not intersect? Didn’t she spend approximately 27 pages talking about the need for both disciplines to intersect and share in the process of enlightening us to the wonder of the human experience? I guess there were some bits about fiction writing and college reading in there too…

In any case, enough about that. Respectfully engaging with belief involves giving said belief the chance to speak for itself--something Robinson didn't really set up, instead working with broad sweeping characterizations of either religion or science. In my experience, I don’t think this applies to missions, since that’s not really the purpose of that endeavor. Again, just my experience/opinion, but there’s SO MUCH work to do, we don’t usually have time as missionaries to have hour long give-and-take discussions where we both leave understanding one another’s religions much better. Hopefully the other party understands our religion much better, but missionaries shouldn’t be interested in full sharing. It just impedes the work. As regular members, now, we have the opportunity to fill in where missionaries cannot, and come to better understand where our brothers and sisters are coming from in their personal experiences. These discussions might not lead to conversion as often as missionary conversations do, but they help us bond with others who share belief—they just believe in something different.

My favorite “Meet Your Farmer” film talked about the love the farmers had for their professions and how it was the best thing they could be doing at that time. The pair of farmers discussed what it’s like trying to encourage local growing and purchasing, and they were clearly passionate about the matter. This is a case where their beliefs—which don’t always have to be religious—were alien to me, and I found it enlightening to listen to their portrayal of their belief. By the end I believed in how important is was for them, and even though I don’t know enough about the issue to really believe one way or the other about what they purported, I do believe that they personally believe it. And that communicates something sacred about their human experience.

Agreeing doesn't always mean believing.

I think that most of us can agree that this article wasn't as clear or straightforward as we would have liked it to be. At times I wasn't sure what exactly she was trying to say. Maybe I'm just really tired. But i tried my best to understand it as much as I could. It seemed like she was trying to make some sort of connection between science and religion. I think she was trying to say people are turning to science for answers when they can be so simply answered by religion. People are letting science cloud their mind when pure religion should be where they turn. And then when peoples beliefs clash, there is always that awkward thing of "should i stand up for what I believe in- even when it is different than what others may think?"

I experienced this a lot growing up. People in my town weren;t too familiar with Mormons and at times I got a lot of heat for some of our doctrine. There were times when I thought it would be so much easier if I just let them think what they want and not rely stand up for what I have been taught my whole life. I think it is important to learn how to do this, while respecting others beliefs. It is important to stand up for yourself without draggin goes down. Everyone is entitled to their own opinion and though at times we might want to shake the and ask them why they cant just believe in this gospel, we can't do that. By being civil and respecting others beliefs, we might be paving the road for more later on.

I think this an kind of be related to the "Meet Your Farmer" videos because this is something I am not familiar with at all. Honestly, living on a farm and having to do those chores all day long sounds like death. I can't think of many things that sound worse. it would be easy for me to continue living with this notion and not really respect or care about people that actually do it. But watching these videos made me see them in a new light. Just because I dont agree with their "belief" doesn't mean I have to take an extremist view on it. After watching a few, I have a newfound respect for those they do that. They put so much work and effort in. So much work and effort that often goes unnoticed.

I think that it what I got out of this assignment. That you can agree with something without fully having to invest and believe in it. We are all entitled to believe what ever we want to believe. We just have to learn to coincide with those who may believe things contrary to us.

Compassionate Communication

In "Reclaiming a Sense of the Sacred" Marilynne Robinson defines the way interpretations of religion and science impact each other in relation to literature. We've all heard this argument many times before, but I like her perspective as a creative writing perspective because her support was based on the importance of being well read and understanding the implications and reasons for religious texts. She uses what is familiar and dear to her in order to represent her belief and reconciliation with God in a world that wants to ignore Him. I thought this was an effective article and it caused me to reflect on the fact that just as there are countless religious perspectives and denominations, there are likewise disagreements in the scientific world. Science, just like religion, is the search for truth. Humanity has a difficult time agreeing on the exact definitions of truth, so just because something is "science" does not automatically mean it is fact.

In engaging about beliefs, I think that it may be important to establish your own beliefs. For example, I could quickly tell that Robinson is Christian, but I am not sure which denomination, which would have been helpful for me to more fully understand her perspective. In a conversation, it is equally important to listen to and understand the other's position and beliefs so that you're not shooting in the dark either. Anger and righteous indignation should be avoided. No matter how "right" you may be, no one will want to even consider accepting your beliefs if you beat your audience over the head without stopping to listen to their concerns. I've experienced this several times with my oldest well-meaning but over-protective sister who didn't want me to make certain decisions, but because she so forcefully told me my only option, I resisted even though part of me knew she was right. And then she rubs in the "I told you so"s when things go wrong and that makes me resist even more (just to make things clear, I love my sister with all my heart and I know that she only does this because she loves me so much. Like all family relationships, it's just complicated). This is why humility, compassion, and an even-keeled demeanor are crucial to exploring differences and representing personal beliefs.

A film that I believe explores personal religious beliefs with sophisticated compassion would be Terence Malick's The Tree of Life. He basically presents his Catholic view of the Plan of Salvation but without arrogance or heavy-handedness. None of his characters are vilified but simply presented as human, with all the complexities, virtues, and imperfections this condition creates. This compassionate treatment of his characters allows for a more compassionate and humble analysis of the meaning of the film. In my opinion, this film is a pretty darn good representation of personal belief.

Fearless

As Mormon’s we engage belief in a way that says “I respect your opinion respectfully, but with all due respect, would expect the same respect as I present what I believe.” That’s not a direct quote (though likely a tongue twister); it’s just me trying to talk like Dean Duncan. But I do think it sums up what we (as Mormons) are taught and so it is theoretically what we do. I think the tendency in reality is more like “that’s great and all, and I’m going to make sure to let you know that I “respect” your belief, but now let me sit you down and tell you how it really is, since you don’t seem to know.”

This is erroneous and asinine, of course. This is not respect. I think true respect is being able to understand why I person thinks a certain way, and not trying to convince them of your view. If someone shares a view or belief of theirs, and you really respect it, then you will not only listen, but try to sympathize and understand why they see and feel this way. You will try to read deeper than just what words they use, but understand the reasons behind them that they are not talking about. You won’t be eager to talk about what you believe, but be eager to ask them more questions and understand. Respect is more than just not cutting someone off midsentence.

I think a movie that demonstrates this is “Fearless”. This movie talks about different forms of wushu, a form of martial arts, and how no branch of wushu is better than the others. It talks about how wushu isn’t really about winning or losing, and that petty quarrels between competing practitioners are indeed petty and self-defeating, because wushu isn’t about being right and defeating others, it’s about mutual understanding and inner peace. This whole movie can be seen as a metaphor for belief and the idea that we need to unite in understanding and accept that we all have different views so that we can overcome other obstacles of greater significance together.

Spencer Tasso, Blog 8

In all honesty, this essay, although somewhat fruitful, seemed tedious, long, and was hard to understand. Nonetheless, I did get something out of it.

Firstly, to challenge belief. Socially I see people judge all the time, especially in this BYU perfectionist/molded environment. Most everyone is trying to be the “perfect” Mormon, which is awesome and enlightening, but can be very narrow, even judgmental. I being very guilty of this myself can be prone to judge people by my set of standards, when in reality, this only leaves greater room for error as you judge by your experience, knowledge, belief, etc. instead of the persons. Just today I went to an audition for BYU’s got talent. I myself subjected a few of the performances than a less than extraordinary opinion, when my own bias probably shone through on others. Likewise, some of the judgments around me seemed harsh and unfitting. Relevant to belief, I’ve learned to not judge. Others see constraints differently than what you see. What’s good to you is mediocre to another, and vice versa. Instead of putting down, we need to do as Christ taught, putting ourselves in the shoes of our neighbor, refusing to judge, only uplifting and looking for the good.

Secondly, there is a background to our beliefs. We all entertain different thoughts. We all have different experiences. We believe the things we do, or judge the way we do, largely because of our upbringing. Can we really reject or deny another’s beliefs or ideas, rejecting their opinion because we grew up differently? We need to be able to recognize the differences surrounding us, and choose to not judge, lest we sin and bring condemnation upon ourselves. Who’s to say we are right, other than ourselves? If we don’t respect those around us, we can never expect those around us to respect us. I find my happiness derides mainly by being involved with, talking to, listening to, interacting with those around me. Accepting their differences and loving them for it. I am very much imperfect in this sense, but am looking to improve.    Most of these thoughts have stemmed from my experience at BYU’s got talent. I apologize if they seem monotonous. I learned something though.

Representing Belief

“It is the mark of an educated mind to be able to entertain a thought without accepting it.” -Aristotle, Metaphysics

It is natural to reject ideas and beliefs that are unfamiliar to us. We are comfortable with what we know and subscribe to, and are inherently resistant to things that may "shatter" our beliefs.  This does not make us bad people, it makes us human. But what does it mean to be human?  This is what Marilynne Robinson explores in her essay. A large part of religious belief deals with who and what we are as human beings. "If my beliefs are wrong, then I am nothing!" This is frightening. This is why we defend our beliefs with such vehemence. It's not that we hate groups with different belief systems or view them as heathens, it's that we cling so desperately to our own that there is no room for any others. It's about protection--protecting our understanding of what and who we are. Identity is the premier human need. And once we have a sense of identity, we cling to it militantly. 

So the first key, then, is to analyze and break down our own beliefs. We must be able to discuss beliefs as our own and not as they are prescribed to us. Dogma will always be rejected by someone who does not share your beliefs. But nobody can deny human experience: “I believe these things because I have had such-and-such experiences.” And once we get there, we must recognize that other humans believe differently because they have experienced differently. Any Muslim can testify just as passionately that Islam is the truth as you can that Mormonism is the truth. So who is right? You both are. Yes. It is possible for two paradoxical things to both be true at the same time. So now that you’re both right, you can have an intellectual discussion about the ins and outs of the human condition. And both are mutually edified together.

I’ve had this experience many times. Several of my former coworkers are virulent atheists, as is my current roommate. They all licked their chops at the opportunity to crush my beliefs and convert me to atheism. None of them succeeded. Nor did I succeed in convincing them of the existence of deity. After several discussions, we accepted each other as intellectuals with foundations for our beliefs and have high respect for each other’s faith system. And since reaching this point of mutual intellectual respect, we have had some fascinating and enlightening discussions about humanity, about the cosmos, about science, miracles, creation, procreation, and about ethics. But we had to get to a point of mutual intellectual respect before anything worthwhile came from our discussions. The instant you discount another person’s beliefs, you kill any chance of sharing your own with any efficacy. Seek to learn and understand the basis of other beliefs, you’ll gain the respect of it’s believers who will more readily listen to your own.

Belief

I was reading Marilynne Robinson’s article and I have to say that I really did not understand any of it.   I think what she was trying to say was that religion needs to be focused back to it’s purest form of being religion and not being about anything else.  Robinson says, “Science can give us knowledge, but it cannot give us wisdom. Nor can religion, until it puts aside nonsense and distraction and becomes itself again.”  I really like and dislike this quote for two reasons; one, it think that it’s true that religion can get muddled in nonsense and distraction.  It can be deformed from what it really means and gets stuck in ideas that have nothing to do with belief, or in just belief based on nonsense.  What I dislike about that quote is that it says science cannot bring us wisdom. Now I don’t understand the context that the quote was in so I could be taking it out of context but it seems like she is saying that only religion can bring us true understanding, which is the definition of wisdom.  I believe that science can be a way to understand the world better and bring you closer to knowing there is a God.   Though I do believe it can be difficult to get a true understanding of the world, or yourself, or of other people through science I don’t believe it to be impossible.  That’s just nonsense.

Back to the topic of belief, I think that when we want to express our beliefs we should in a way that shows we are passionate about it but we aren’t looking for people to force our beliefs on.  I think that many times we are taught about belief or religion, or doctrine in a way that we are shown what to think and why we should think it.  It’s not always yelled at you that you should believe this and believe now, but there have been times when I’ve felt taught at rather than told about.  Everyone should be allowed to share their beliefs but you shouldn’t do it in a way that makes people feel like you know better and they are stupid.  Because often times when I’m being taught at I don’t want to learn or believe what I’m being told even when it’s in Sunday school.  I want to be shown a belief in a way that I want to go out and decide whether I believe too.