© 2014 The Wired Word
www.thewiredword.com
Leonard Nimoy, the actor who brought to life the Vulcan-human Mr. Spock on
TV's Star Trek science-fiction series and in subsequent
movies and spin-offs, died last week in Los Angeles at age 83 of end-stage
chronic obstructive pulmonary disease.While Nimoy made his mark in poetry, photography, music, movie directing and in other acting roles, it was as Mr. Spock, the pointy-eared, brainy, determinedly logical first officer of the starship Enterprise, that Nimoy became one of the most iconic fictional characters of the last several decades.
Although Nimoy published an autobiography in 1975 titled I Am Not Spock, he says he was not rejecting the role, as some people assumed. He maintained he was only clarifying the difference between himself and Spock, whom he always enjoyed playing. But he admits that he didn't count on the fact that some people would only read the title and not the book itself. Thus, in 1995, when he published a second volume of his autobiography, he called it I Am Spock. In that book, Nimoy explains that Spock has always been a part of him.
The original Star Trek premiered in 1966 and was canceled after three seasons because of low ratings, but it birthed a cult-like following, with fans calling themselves Trekkies or Trekkers (Nimoy preferred the latter).
Spock -- the character, not the actor -- always sought to keep his emotions, inherited from his human mother, under the domination of his logic, inherited from his Vulcan father, though occasionally his emotions temporarily broke through. In Nimoy's obituary in The New York Times, Virginia Heffernan wrote, "... Spock, the most complex member of the Enterprise crew, who was both one of the gang and a creature apart, engaged at times in a lonely struggle with his warring racial halves." An unidentified author, writing on Wikipedia, said, "Star Trek depicts a trio of Spock, [Captain] Kirk, and Doctor Leonard McCoy; while McCoy often acts as Kirk's conscience, Spock offers the captain an emotionally detached, logical perspective. The character also offers an 'outsider's' perspective on 'the human condition.'"
Whether or not Nimoy is Spock, he made this comment some years after the TV series ended: "To this day, I sense Vulcan speech patterns, Vulcan social attitudes and even Vulcan patterns of logic and emotional suppression in my behavior." Apparently he was okay with that, for he added, "Given the choice, if I had to be someone else, I would be Spock."
Perhaps it is useful to define "logical," because the word gets used in so many ways. Google.com offers the following definitions:
•of or according to the rules of logic or formal argument. "a logical impossibility"
•characterized by or capable of clear, sound reasoning. "the information is displayed in a simple and logical fashion"
•(of an action, development, decision, etc.) natural or sensible given the circumstances.
In effect, something is logical if it derives by means of clear and sound reason. The opposite is not "emotional" but "irrational." Something logical can be accompanied by an emotion of disgust, of pleasure, of fear, of desire -- or by none at all. Philosophers call these sorts of things (logic and emotion) "orthogonal": they refer to different, not opposite, things.
However, in the case of the Spock character in the Star Trek series, logic is often presented as being in opposition to emotion. The logical Spock is contrasted with his friend, the emotional Dr. McCoy. Captain Kirk symbolizes the middle road, synthesizing the logical and the emotional into the whole person. Kirk's actions are motivated as much by logic as by emotion -- with the added twist that the logic is often subconscious and not fully apparent until after a decision has been made and proven to be effective.
Finally, logical conclusions are always based upon premises that are accepted as true. If a premise turns out to be false (or unknowable), then a logical conclusion may also be false -- at the least, it can have no more validity than any conclusion based solely upon emotions.
More on this story can be found at these links:
Leonard Nimoy, Spock of 'Star Trek,' Dies at 83. New York Times
Why Leonard Nimoy Came to Embrace His Long, Prosperous Life as Spock. New Republic
Spock. Wikipedia
The Big Questions
1. Is belief in God and trust in Christ as Savior logical? Is it illogical? Why or why not? Do such things need to be logical? Do these things need to be solely logical? List some of the premises involved in belief in God and trust in Jesus.
2. What role might logic play in the search for something to believe in? Have you ever led someone to Christ through logic? or to what you considered a more reasonable position on an issue through logic? How have you responded to attempts by others to sway you to their side by logic?
3. Are there other pathways to truth besides logic? If so, what are they and on what basis do you judge their conclusion to be true?
4. Do you think God is a logical being? Explain your answer.
5. In human dealings, can logic ever be forced upon troubled situations and turn things around? Explain your answer.
Confronting the News With Scripture and Hope
Here are some Bible verses to guide your discussion:
Isaiah 1:18
Come now, let us argue it out, says the LORD: though your sins are like scarlet, they shall be like snow; though they are red like crimson, they shall become like wool. (For context, read 1:7-20.)
This statement from God through the prophet Isaiah comes in the course of a divine indictment of Judah in which that nation's disobedience is compared to that of Sodom and Gomorrah (v. 9). But instead of simply issuing instant retributive judgment on them, God invites them to think reasonably about the possibility of redemption and salvation -- to "argue it out" or, as some other Bible versions translate it, to "reason together." We might also say to have "logical discourse."
Questions: What role did logic play in your decision to follow Jesus? Did logic come more into play after, before or during the process of conversion?
Luke 2:49
[Jesus] said to [his parents], "Why were you searching for me? Did you not know that I must be in my Father's house?" (For context, read 2:41-52.)
This is from the only account we have from Jesus' childhood, the time when he was inadvertently left behind after his family visited Jerusalem. When he was discovered missing, his parents searched desperately for him. They eventually found him in the temple, engaged in reasoning and learning. Luke, the gospel writer, notes that Jesus' level of discernment "amazed" the teachers present in the temple.
When Mary and Joseph asked Jesus why he had stayed there, causing them so much anxiety, he replied with Spock-like logic, using the words above.
The action of the 12-year-old Jesus was consistent with modern adolescents who make an assumption (as no doubt their elders did in their day) that they are competent to make decisions independent of those who are responsible for them. Mary's question to Jesus is based upon an appeal to emotion: "Child, why have you treated us like this? Look, your father and I have been searching for you in great anxiety" (v. 48). She does not browbeat Jesus, but describes how his actions made her and Joseph feel.
Questions: Do you think Jesus' logical response to his parents was any comfort to them? Since they had been anxious about his whereabouts, should Jesus have given some additional response to them as well, such as an apology for not telling them where he was? Under what circumstances is a logical answer insufficient?
Even though Jesus probably felt his explanation trumped his parents' concern, how should we interpret Luke's statement that Jesus "went down with them and came to Nazareth, and was obedient to them" (v. 51)? Looking back to when you were on the divide between adult and adolescent, when did you rely on logic, and when on emotion? How successful was either stance?
John 9:30-33
The man [born blind] answered, "Here is an astonishing thing! You do not know where [Jesus] comes from, and yet he opened my eyes. We know that God does not listen to sinners, but he does listen to one who worships him and obeys his will. Never since the world began has it been heard that anyone opened the eyes of a person born blind. If this man were not from God, he could do nothing." (For context, read 9:1-41.)
You gotta love this guy. He was born blind, so he had never seen. But after Jesus gave him his sight, instead of dancing in the streets, he calmly gives logical answers about what had happened to him.
First, when the crowd asks how it is possible that he suddenly can see, he straightforwardly says, "The man called Jesus made mud, spread it on my eyes, and said to me, 'Go to Siloam and wash.' Then I went and washed and received my sight" (v. 11).
The crowd then brings the man to the Pharisees, a powerful Jewish subgroup who were especially committed to keeping every detail of the Mosaic Law. Rather than congratulate this man on his healing or thank God for it, they get all hung up on the fact that Jesus performed this healing on the Sabbath day. Therefore, in their logic, Jesus is a sinner, and if he is a sinner, then there's no way that he could be from God.
So the Pharisees ask the man what he thinks about Jesus. He responds, "He is a prophet" (v. 17). There is a quiet logic in his answer, and the force of what he is saying is that whatever else Jesus may be, he is at least a prophet.
At this point, the Jewish authorities get involved. They have already set themselves against Jesus, and they don't want a miracle story floating around about him, so they try to debunk it. Thus, the leaders tell the man to give glory to God by admitting that Jesus is a sinner. This man doesn't think himself in a position to make a religious pronouncement about Jesus' status before God. So, with perfect logic, the man answers the leaders: "I do not know whether he is a sinner. One thing I do know, that though I was blind, now I see" (v. 25).
There it is -- this man's clear logic: "I don't know the answer to all you're worried about. But I know this: I was blind until Jesus touched me, and now I can see."
With that, the leaders become verbally abusive, telling the man that he is a disciple of this hated Jesus while they are disciples of Moses. But the man is not intimidated, and he speaks to them again, with perfect logic, using the words quoted above, and concluding with "If this man were not from God, he could do nothing."
In terms of rational thought, the formerly blind man has won the argument, but the leaders won't admit it. Instead they dismiss him with an insult, saying he was born in sin (implying that his blindness was some kind of divine punishment) and thus he has no business trying to instruct them.
Later, Jesus seeks out this man and asks him if he believes in the Son of Man (a title for the Messiah). The man answers, "And who is he, sir? Tell me, so that I may believe in him." Jesus replies, "You have seen him, and the one speaking with you is he." The man then says, "Lord, I believe" (vv. 35-39). And so he becomes a follower of Jesus.
This man's logic led him step by step to the point where he could make a leap of faith.
TWW team member Liz Antonson comments, "Logic is not in conflict with faith/belief. The blind man illustrates this. It was not the emotion of his healing that caused him to believe that Jesus was the Son of Man; it was the process of evaluating all the factors, arriving at a conclusion and placing his trust in the conclusion (belief/faith)."
Questions: Is a leap of faith usually in a direction away from logic or beyond logic? What's the difference and why does it matter?
1 Corinthians 1:18-21
For the message about the cross is foolishness to those who are perishing, but to us who are being saved it is the power of God. For it is written, "I will destroy the wisdom of the wise, and the discernment of the discerning I will thwart" [Isaiah 29:14]. Where is the one who is wise? Where is the scribe? Where is the debater of this age? Has not God made foolish the wisdom of the world? For since, in the wisdom of God, the world did not know God through wisdom, God decided, through the foolishness of our proclamation, to save those who believe. (For context, read 1:17-31.)
The apostle Paul devoted tons of words to logically explaining the work of Christ (if you want to get a brain cramp, try reading Paul's letter to the Romans in one sitting). But here, in this letter to the Corinthians, he admits the shortcomings of logic (he calls it "wisdom"). He divides humanity into those who are perishing and those who are being saved. To the former, the message of the cross, no matter how logically -- or emotionally -- it's explained, is "foolishness." To the latter, that message is "the source of your life in Christ Jesus" (v. 30).
Paul is not rejecting logical explanations of the cross, but he's admitting that logic alone does not save us. At some point, there must be an "I believe."
Questions: How can faith in Christ be logical and, at the same time, surpass logic? How is it that logic leads some people to the place from which they can make a leap of faith and leads other people to the place where they conclude there is nowhere and no One beyond to which to leap?
Proverbs 3:5 (NIV)
Trust in the LORD with all your heart and lean not on your own understanding. (For context, read 3:1-35.)
We suspect modern people have more trouble with this verse than did those in the days Proverbs was written, for we have great regard for our rationality today. (At the least, we tend to believe we are behaving in a rational manner.) TWW team member Malia Miller puts it this way: "A thought I have when it comes to logic is how it can be a barrier to my faith when I can't make sense of things. There is a fine balance here. I feel I need to employ all the reasoning abilities God has given me to understand, but ultimately, I have to defer to his will. That is where my 'leap of faith' occurs. I have to remind myself of the scripture about how God's ways are higher than man's and get past my ego-driven belief that everything can be logically explained."
Question: When have you allowed trust to carry you when your understanding failed?
For Further Discussion
1. Plato coined the word "misology" to describe a hatred of reasoning and logic. Do you ever encounter misology in the church? If so, where? Does misology have any kind of useful role?
2. While Gene Roddenberry, the creator of Star Trek, was an atheist, several observers have noted religious themes in some of the series episodes and movies, including, in one movie, the resurrection of Mr. Spock from the dead. This website gives several examples of religion/spirituality in {ITALIC}Star Trek. You might cite a few examples from that website and discuss them in class.
3. Respond to this, from a sermon by TWW team member Stan Purdum: "Faith goes beyond reason, but it doesn't go in a different direction from reason. Your logic may say, 'I'm not sure who Jesus is, but I know that being in church gives me peace and a sense of hope.' Or 'Well, I'm not an authority on religious matters, but I know that when I pray through Jesus, something real and life-giving occurs.' Or 'I was stuck in guilt and shame until I asked Christ to forgive me, and now I can face life full on.' Or something similar. In fact, if there's any good thing in your life that you attribute to an action of God or Christ, it provides a place to stand from which to make a leap of faith. And there are plenty of us to testify that when you make that leap, the place you land is solid ground.
"For a few of us, logic may have been enough to move us to become Jesus' disciples. For others of us, there may have been an emotional component or the testimony of friends or other motivating forces as well. Most of the time, logic needs the guidance of love and inspiration, which, of course is the bailiwick of religion.
"But it's good to know that following Jesus is not an illogical choice. Many of us can say some version of 'I don't know all there is know about the Bible or theology, but this much I'm sure of: Once I was blind; now I can see.' That's often enough to point us in the direction of Christ."
4. This website discusses Spock's encounter with human illogic, saying, "In The Wrath of Khan (1982), Spock says, 'Logic clearly dictates that the needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few.' Captain Kirk answers, 'Or the one.' This sets up a pivotal scene near the end of the film. With the [starship] Enterprise in imminent danger of destruction, Spock enters a highly radioactive chamber in order to fix the ship's drive so the crew can escape danger. Spock quickly perishes, and, with his final breaths, says to Kirk, 'Don't grieve, Admiral. It is logical. The needs of the many outweigh ...' Kirk finishes for him: 'The needs of the few.' [Note: This is really not a logical statement, but a statement of a philosophical basis -- something outside of logic.] Spock replies, 'Or the one.'
"In the next film, The Search for Spock (1984), the crew of the Enterprise discovers that Spock is not actually dead, that his body and soul survive separately, and that it may be possible to rejoin them -- which the crew proceeds to do. Once restored, Spock asks Kirk why the crew saved him. Kirk answers, 'Because the needs of the one outweigh the needs of the many.'"
Spock learns that humans are not always logical. Is that a good thing? Is illogic part of the human condition? How does faith address that?
5. Comment on this: In character as Spock in Star Trek VI: The Undiscovered Country, Nimoy said, "Logic is the beginning of wisdom, not the end."
6. Spock's struggle to acknowledge his human, emotional side can be a way to discuss the commandment to love God with all one's heart, soul, mind and strength. Give some examples of how we can love God with each of those aspects of our being.
7. Comment on this, from TWW team member Frank Ramirez: "I like the way Nimoy struggled to get away from the character Spock, then later in life embraced it. He wrote a book titled I Am Not Spock, and later in life a book titled I Am Spock. Who in their life of faith hasn't tried to walk away, or at least think about doing so, before realizing this is our best destiny?"
Responding to the News
This is a good time to remind ourselves that logic and reason are not the only paths to truth, and that faith can lead us to the God of truth -- as well as to remember that God does not expect us to "check our brains at the door" of church and faith, but rather that our mental faculties are an aspect of the human body created by God and given to us for the sake of connecting with God and serving the world.
Closing Prayer
No comments:
Post a Comment