Posts

Posted on

Weezer’s Albums Ranked Worst to Best

By Jim Spiegel

The first time I heard a Weezer song was in the Fall of 1994 at the university where I taught at the time. The song was “Undone” and while it was playing I asked a student, “Who is that band?” He sneered and said “Weezer” dismissively. The next day I went out and bought the album and was immediately amazed by what I heard. Over 30 years and hundreds of songs later, the band is still going strong and I love them more than ever. But many people still sneer at Weezer or at least don’t take them seriously. Why is this?

Several reasons, I believe. For starters, there is the band name, which is goofy. It originated with Rivers Cuomo’s father who would call his son “weezer” when Rivers was a little kid. Rivers liked the sound of it, so the rest is history. Another likely reason is that Weezer’s music is fun. Many of their songs are witty, satirical, or silly, and even on many serious songs there are funny turns of phrases that make us smile, all of which adds up to a band that has a generally campy aesthetic. This has been consistently reinforced by many of Weezer’s album covers, album titles, and their practice of repeatedly releasing self-titled albums, leaving it to journalists and fans to nickname them by their predominant colors. But perhaps the biggest reason why Weezer isn’t taken seriously is their unlikely front man. Shy, reclusive, self-deprecating, and well-educated, Rivers Cuomo is the archetypal anti-rockstar. Or, at least, his persona directly contradicts what we have learned to expect from a rock band’s central figure.

In light of all of this, those who are bound by rock culture categories will naturally be inclined to dismiss Weezer, perhaps seeing them as something of a jester in the court of modern rock. Add to this the fact that Rivers Cuomo doesn’t look cool. He looks more like an accountant or IT guy than anything we usually associate with rock stardom. Which is why it is so easy to miss the fact that he is a bona fide triple threat: A strong vocalist, a superb songwriter, and an excellent guitarist. Sadly, he is underrated in all three of those categories. But so it goes. Such must be the fate of anyone who so readily embraces the image of a dork.

Be all of that as it may, Weezer is a band to be taken seriously. Serious enough to be regarded as one of the great bands of all-time. This is despite the fact that their discography is wildly uneven in terms of quality, including several gems and some absolute stinkers. But, alas, every band whose career spans 30+ years has some bad albums to their discredit. What is fascinating about Weezer, however, is that, unlike most (all other?) bands, they have made their best music in their later years. Yet another way in which these guys don’t fit the mold.

Well, enough of this preamble. Let’s get down to business with my ranking of Weezer albums from “worst to first.” Unlike others who have done such rankings, I will lay out my assessment criteria so you’ll know the basis of my evaluations. I am using these four criteria: 1) musical quality, 2) lyrical quality (an often overlooked but critical aspect of song quality), 3) production quality, and 4) overall originality or innovation.

Weezer [The Teal Album] (2019) – Not rated due to incommensurability. In other words, as an album of covers it requires assessment by a somewhat different set of criteria than albums of original compositions. Among cover albums, I suppose I would arrive at a middling score of a C+ or B- (using a letter grade to help me resist any temptation to place it somewhere in the following ranking).

Now for the rest of the albums, I start from the worst and work upward. Brace yourself, Weezer fans; the first few may hurt. But hang in there. It gets better as you go!

Hurley (2010) – 1.6

In 2010 Weezer hit bottom with this misbegotten amalgam of bland melodies and trite lyrics. An album with literally no bright spots, it is as if they randomly selected a 10th grade kid from Podunk, USA and said “Here, write lyrics for 14 songs; you have one hour,” and this was the result. I can only think the band was somehow in need of money, or perhaps they did it on a dare and intentionally made a bad album. Whatever the explanation, Hurley goes down about as well as a diarrhea smoothie.

Death to False Metal (2010) – 2.7

To round out a year best forgotten in the history of Weezer, the band released this collection of re-recordings of leftover tracks from throughout their career. Biggest stinkers: “Everyone,” “Unbreak My Heart,” and the torturously wretched “Losing My Mind”—an excellent candidate not only for Weezer’s worst song but for the worst song of the decade by any artist. Even thinking about it puts me in a bad mood.

Make Believe (2005) – 3.5

Another poor effort overall, but with a few bright spots, including the opening track, “Beverly Hills,” which is Weezer’s satirical homage to Hollywood subculture. The next song, “Perfect Situation,” also works—a decent singalong. But from here it’s all downhill with non-stop lyrical drivel—clusters of cliches and lazy rhymes set forth in mostly somniferous packages with occasionally serviceable guitar lines. Make Believe is an album that makes you feel bad for the band—an aimless and uninspired recycling of mediocre ideas. The guys sound bored, though pretending otherwise. Make believe, indeed.

Weezer [The Red Album] (2008) – 5.5

A brief semi-recovery from the dreary aesthetic lowlands of Make Believe, the “Red album” has no cohesive identity but should be commended for its bold experimentation. It is Scott Shriner’s breakout album as a bassist and has some truly great moments. The album is replete with power chords, which is fine, but low on Rivers’ melodic lead work. The high points are clever power pop tunes like “Troublemaker” and “The Greatest Man that Ever Lived” (an epic tune, despite the talk-over, which is usually poison to a pop song but here adds to the comic effect). “Pork and Beans” is inane but it works somehow. The corny tribute “Heart Songs” kills the mood, and the three non-Cuomo songs in the middle of the album, though all earnest efforts, feel more like novelties and don’t strengthen the record.

Raditude (2009) – 6.1

Perhaps Weezer’s most critically panned album, I believe Ratitude is usually unfairly assessed. For all its quirks and strange turns, the album knows what it is: a party album. And an almost decent one at that. Weezer is goofing off here, and we love it. The production team, led by Jacknife Lee, temporarily rescues the band from its creative coma with crunchy textures, strong dynamics, and varied arrangements. Probably Weezer’s most danceable album. Definitely their best workout album. (Try it. I burn calories just listening while sitting still.) Most importantly, on this record Cuomo rediscovers some of his lyrical wit. The songwriting is generally helped by contributions from folks outside the band.

Weezer [The Green Album] (2001) – 6.4

Complicated by psychological wounds sustained from confused critical responses to Pinkerton, the “Green Album” was destined to be a safe, catchy retreat that takes no musical chances. It strives to be a high energy college rock album but is unwittingly marked by Cuomo’s melancholic disillusionment from unjust treatment of Pinkerton and, consequently, feels disingenuous. Despite good melodies and sweet harmonies throughout, there are too many vapid rhymes and lyrical cliches (including the most overused chorus lines on pop radio—e.g., “can’t you see,” “I’m lost without your love,” etc.) to be anything more than a mediocre album.

Van Weezer (2021) – 7.0

After a five year (and four album) hiatus from guitar-centric music, Weezer returned to their stylistic home base with this pure rocking collection. Sans the acoustic closer, the songs are uniformly metal-inspired, many of which showcase Cuomo’s superb lead guitar work. If the album title signals the fact that the album is a sort of tribute to the metal genre, the opening track, “Hero,” belies this: “. . . I tried to be a hero, but I was lying to myself. I walk alone.” It’s a powerful, and well-articulated confession in song. Something of which the young Rivers Cuomo seemed incapable. Besides “Hero,” however, there are just a few real highlights, including the Van Halen knock-off “The End of the Game” and the Ozzy-inspired “Blue Dream,” but, thanks to the guitar work and mostly decent lyrics, no real losers.

Pacific Daydream (2017) – 7.8

Though the opening song is named for an electric guitar, this album is decidedly not a guitar album. It’s more about dance grooves and synth pop. But it works. It has a consistent dreamy pop atmosphere. In that sense it is aptly titled. Lots of clever lines: “Everyone wants to be cooler than everyone else. It’s a hip-hop world, and we’re the furniture” (“Beach Boys”), “You’ve gotta choose between the Internet and me” (“QB Blitz”), and “You don’t have to die to go to heaven” (“Weekend Woman”). The album highlights are “Weekend Woman” and the closer, “Any Friend of Diane’s,” a danceable ditty featuring a classical guitar solo that, strangely, fits the song perfectly. An appropriate ending to an album that is surprising at many levels. Many critics complain that it’s a stylistic reach for the band. A reach, perhaps. But not out of their reach.

Pinkerton (1996) – 8.1

As a huge fan of the Blue Album, when Pinkerton was released, I was as surprised as anyone at the lo-fi turn the band took. But I was heartened by the clear indication the band refused to sell out. I also liked the raunchy keyboard sound that pervades the album and, of course, the lyrical vulnerability conveyed with raw vocals and minimal instrumental effects. It all showed these guys were for real and not just a pop rock outfit, daring to seriously address exasperation with the promiscuous rock star lifestyle (“Tired of Sex”) and sexual attraction to a minor (“Across the Sea”), among other difficult topics. So as negative reviews emerged, I was perplexed. But history has been kinder to the album, as its real quality has become evident to most music critics.

Maladroit (2002) – 8.3

Ironically titled given the depth and range of the album, Maladroit was a refreshing sign of musical growth, including the band’s first forays into heavy metal. It is also Pat Wilson’s breakout album on drums. His work on “Dope Nose,” “Keep Fishin’,” and “Burndt Jam” is especially strong. And the rhythmic turnarounds on “Fall Together” are super cool. Add to this some excellent lead guitar work and a lot of fun, nonsensical wordplay, and you have another distinct artistic advance for the band. The only significant low point is “December,” an unfortunately corny, if admittedly catchy, album closer. Cuomo sings, “Only trust can inspire soggy lungs to breathe fire.” Soggy lungs? Ohh-kay. An earnest but failed attempt at an inspiring rock anthem. In time, however, Weezer would succeed at this, and in big ways. Persistence pays!

Weezer [The Black Album] (2019) – 8.7

Horribly underestimated by most critics, in part no doubt due to a lack of interest or appreciation for lyrical quality, the “Black Album” was another step of maturation for Rivers Cuomo as a lyricist and the band as a whole for musical innovation. The album features more imaginative and creative humor, on a level with their “White Album” from three years earlier. Like that one, the “Black Album” is melodically and instrumentally rich and varied. There are lots of strong dance grooves to go with some excellent musical hooks. Also, some great lines, like: “the future’s so bright I gotta poke my eyes out” (“Can’t Knock the Hustle”), “life will make a beggar of rich men, bring the sovereign to his knees; and all the gold and all of the platinum melt like a chocolate sea” (The Prince Who Wanted Everything”), and “I don’t believe in mysticism, only in what science proves—like the sex appeal of your sick dance moves” (“Byzantine”).

Everything Will be Alright in the End (2014) – 9.3

Weezer’s “comeback album” after more than a decade of artistic doldrums. Was it Ocasek’s production? Cuomo’s brush with death? Creativity enhancing meditation? Who knows. Well-crafted songs, creative dynamics and arrangements, smart and sometimes introspective lyrics, inspired guitar solos, and ambitious vocals. The second half of the album might be the band’s strongest 6-song sequence, with two of the songs enhanced by female vocals. “The British are Coming” is one of Weezer’s very best—featuring a gorgeous melody, perfectly sung, and one of Cuomo’s most brilliant guitar solos, finished off with a killer outro. This is immediately followed by “Da Vinci”: Cuomo has written many songs about the unreachable, ineffably sublime girl, but this is his finest, complete with references to Stephen Hawking, the Rosetta Stone, the eponymous painter, and even the Gospel. All wrapped in an addictive cluster of melodies. Following this are the plaintive “Go Away,” featuring guest vocalist Bethany Cosentino, the genre-defying “Cleopatra,” and the touching “Foolish Father.” It all culminates in a soaring three-song suite to close the album. Wow.

Weezer [The Blue Album] (1994) – 9.5

What can be said that hasn’t already been said about this legendary Weezer premier? One of the all-time great album debuts, full of raw, youthful, catch-us-if-you-can energy. Uncommonly clever, if sometimes nonsensical, compositions packaged in walls of fuzzy power chords, pierced with hooky guitar solos, street-level vocals, all sprinkled with occasional dissonant guitar lines. Masterful production by the late, great Ric Ocasek, the ideal musical mentor for these determined grunge and 80s rock-inspired rookies who had no idea what lay ahead of them as a major rock band.

Weezer [The White Album] (2016) – 9.7

The ultimate “beach album” (as inspired by the band’s manager, Jonathan Daniel), complete with fully realized lyrical concepts, fresh melodic innovations, and, yes, some beachy themes.  Modern rock just doesn’t get any better than this. The album completes Cuomo’s decade-long trek from lyrical sloth to a genuinely smart, insightful, and even quotable songsmith. “We’ve  got the wind in our sail like Darwin on the Beagle and Mendel experimenting with the pea” (“Wind in Our Sail”), “We’re as happy as a couple Hare Krishnas” (“Good Thing”), “She swam away and flexed her mermaid tail” (“Summer Elaine and Drunk Dori”), “You’re the sun that I’m orbiting. I burn in your heat. Supernova and cosmic dust, you spawn galaxies” (“Jacked Up”). And then there’s Weezer’s single greatest song: “Thank God for Girls”—a lyrical journey that warrants an essay’s worth of analysis by itself. The White Album is not just a batch of hook-laden, super-singable, beach-inspired tunes. It is, at last, a lyrical effort worthy of the Harvard University English major graduate that is Rivers Cuomo.

OK Human – 9.8

Who would have thought Weezer was capable of something this smart and sophisticated? A baroque-style, fully orchestrated set of strikingly thoughtful compositions. And no electric guitars! The rich musicality throughout creates the ideal pallet for Cuomo’s substantive and moving lyrical ventures that include immersions in literature (“Grapes of Wrath”) and music (“Playing My Piano”) to insightful social commentaries on digital devices (“Screens”) and the psychological effects of statistics (“Numbers”) to a touching personal reflection about feeling past one’s prime (“Bird with a Broken Wing”). All of these songs are sandwiched between the plaintive opener “All My Favorite Songs” and the hopeful roundelay “Here Comes the Rain,” which, like several other tracks on the album, subtly packs a profound lyrical message. The string and horn orchestration and dynamics are exquisite, featuring seemingly endless layers of melodies and instrumental textures that perfectly serve the songs. Producer Jake Sinclair deserves as much credit as anyone here. The very idea of Weezer doing an album like this might have once seemed comical. (Yes, there are plenty of funny moments, but only because of Cuomo’s clever wit.) The truth is it all feels very natural and, well, authentically human.

SZNZ (2022) – 9.9

Technically, the SZNZ EPs are four separate releases. But because of their unifying theme and the fact that all of the songs came out of the same recording sessions, I regard SZNS as a single, albeit time-released, work. Indeed, Weezer’s greatest work. A consistently innovative blend of progressive rock, orchestral rock, baroque, and chamber music, with dashes of heavy metal, all with consistently strong lyrics. This is Rivers Cuomo at his most literate, smart, witty, personal, and compelling. SZNZ is loaded with seemingly endless pockets of melodies. Nearly every song has some interesting dynamic, whether a surprising arrangement, a challenging syncopation, an unexpected modulation, or creative musical sidebar, and usually a unique intro and/or outro. But nothing forced or pretentious. Just persistent, often stunning musical innovation. Lyrically, nearly every song is thought-provoking, many profoundly so, as in the case of “Lawn Chair” (on the origin of human suffering) “What’s the Good of Being Good,” (why be moral?), and “Should She Stay or Should She Go” (on Adam’s dilemma if Eve had succumbed to temptation in the Garden of Eden but Adam did not: “I could kick her ass out, move on with my life. Or I could follow her into the night”). Some more lyrical doozies: “I wish I could say it all to you in iambic pentameter. I’d improvise high notes like Thelonious when he’s jammin’ it” (“Iambic Pentameter”), “Why was I ever born and why did God make me? He must’ve been high when he dropped me down here” (“Dark Enough to See the Stars”), and “Lollygag in the lee of a highland ’til my ghost takes flight. In the sky I’m as high as a titan feeding on the fire, shattering those iron bars through the sky like shooting stars” (“Wild at Heart”). In addition to all of this, Cuomo’s voice is in top form. Underrated as he is as a guitarist, he’s probably just as underrated as a vocalist—like many great rock singers, not because of technical excellence but because of the personal connection he achieves and his ability to consistently match his vocal dynamics and emotion to each song’s meaning and mood. Simply put, SZNZ is an extraordinary achievement. If Weezer never records again, they will have gone out at their artistic peak. Brilliantly done, guys.

Posted on

What Might Be or Could Have Been: Thoughts on Anxiety, Faith, and Providence

By Jim Spiegel

Several weeks ago a young friend of our family—I’ll call her Lisa—choked on a grape and required assistance in order to clear her windpipe and regain the ability to breathe. Once the grape was dislodged she was fine, and no medical attention was needed. However, understandably, Lisa was very shaken up by the incident, as were her parents.

In the days that followed, their entire family was prompted to some deep reflection about Lisa’s brush with death and the tragedy that was averted. As good friends of the family, we too reflected on the horrible “would could have been.” Eventually, this thought occurred to me: It was never God’s intention for Lisa to die that day, as is obvious from the fact that she did not die. In fact, from the standpoint of divine providence, it wasn’t even close. From our finite human perspective, yes, it seemed like “a close call.” But with God there are no close calls. There are just two categories: what he ordains and figments of our own imaginations.

A question for us, then, is whether we will let our imaginations cause us anxiety and fear.

Regarding the past, we may experience anxiety as we either regret or cringe over “close calls.” “If only I had done X, then situation Y would not have occurred.” Here we let our failure or oversight haunt us indefinitely. Or we may think, “if I had not done X, then this horrible thing would have happened. Oh no—I might not be so lucky next time!” In that case, we displace a positive turn of events with anxiety over a bad thing that nearly happened but didn’t.

And regarding the future, we worry over what might happen. “What if X happens, then Y or Z follows, which would be terrible!” Here we are allowing another kind of figment of our imagination to torment us. If it never happens, then we burden ourselves with something completely fictional. We are victims of our own psychological self-torture.

But, we may rationalize, doesn’t worry at least serve the positive function of preparing us for circumstances that will eventually come to pass? Well, not usually. This recent study showed that over 91% of the things we worry about never come true. And in the cases of many people, 100% of the things they dreaded never came to pass. This seems to suggest that worrying really is a waste of time and mental energy.

In all such cases, we choose to live in the subjunctive mood rather than reality. And we pay a costly price: peace of mind.

Of course, worry is a universal human experience. We all struggle with anxiety about the past and the future. The only differences among us is how much we do this.

In his Sermon on the Mount, Jesus addressed the problem, saying, “Do not be worried about your life, as to what you will eat or what you will drink; nor for your body, as to what you will put on. Is not life more than food, and the body more than clothing?” (Mt. 6:25). And his disciple Peter would later say, “cast all your anxiety on the Lord, because he cares for you” (1 Pet. 5:7).

These and other biblical admonitions seem to suggest that worry is under our control. As Kant’s dictum goes, “ought implies can.” That is, if there is a duty to do X, then we must be capable of doing X. If Scripture tells us to cast our anxiety on the Lord, then it must be possible to do this. But how?

I wish I had a simple formula, but I don’t. Prayer is an obvious starting point. Perhaps it’s also the ending point. And all the points in between. Also, I believe consciously leaning on the fact of divine providence is critical. If God really is in ultimate control of all that happens and “all the days ordained for me were written in [His] book before one of them came to be” (Ps. 139:16), then there is no reality beyond what he stipulates. I have found that serious meditation on this fact can be a powerful mental salve.

What could be or what would be (logical possibilities and causal counterfactuals) may be worth our attention for the sake of contingency planning. But we are wise to fight against the temptation to obsess over them. And it is the fight of a lifetime, since the temptation to worry is among the most persistent of all temptations in human experience.

So, in the end, like all temptations, worry is a test of faith. How much do we really trust God’s power, love, and faithfulness?

Posted on

Death vs. Ascension

By Jim Spiegel

One of the most fascinating scenes in the New Testament—to my mind, at least—is the ascension of Jesus Christ. As Luke records the event in the book of Acts, he notes that after his resurrection, Jesus appeared to his disciples over a period of forty days and on one occasion:

They gathered around him and asked him, “Lord, are you at this time going to restore the kingdom to Israel?”

He said to them: “It is not for you to know the times or dates the Father has set by his own authority. But you will receive power when the Holy Spirit comes on you; and you will be my witnesses in Jerusalem, and in all Judea and Samaria, and to the ends of the earth.”

After he said this, he was taken up before their very eyes, and a cloud hid him from their sight.

They were looking intently up into the sky as he was going, when suddenly two men dressed in white stood beside them. “Men of Galilee,” they said, “why do you stand here looking into the sky? This same Jesus, who has been taken from you into heaven, will come back in the same way you have seen him go into heaven.” (Acts 1:6-11).

And that was the last they saw of Jesus. It was their final, unceremonious goodbye. And yet, apparently, there was no weeping or wailing. No one cried. No one mourned. In fact, the disciples simply got to work building the church and joyfully proclaiming the Good News.

What a contrast between this and when Jesus died six weeks earlier. And yet, from the standpoint of saying goodbye, at least as far as anyone could tell at the time, the situation was no different. A beloved friend was leaving for good. Why such a different response?

Was it the manner of death? This can’t be the explanation, since it is the loss of our loved ones that we mourn, not their manner of death. This is reflected in the (very reasonable) common expression, “I’m sorry for your loss.” We never say, “I’m sorry your loved one died the way they did.” Yes, an especially painful or violent death may exacerbate the pain of loss. But the essence of sorrow regards the loss of the person, not how they died. And yet, when Jesus ascended, the disciples lost their friend. So why no mourning?

Was it the presence of Jesus’ dead body that made his death so much more painful than his ascension? No, this can’t be it. If your loved one were to die in such a way that their body is out of sight or irretrievable (e.g., sunken in the ocean depths, lost in space, etc.) you would mourn every bit as much as if their lifeless body was present. The presence of a corpse may make some psychological difference (for better or worse), but that’s not the source of our sorrow. Again, it is the loss of the person we mourn.

Or maybe the difference lies in the fact that by the time Jesus ascended, he had proven he was the Messiah, that the disciples’ personal investment in him was not in vain, and that their trust in him was vindicated. Perhaps this is why
the disciples didn’t mourn his ascension. Again, this doesn’t account for the fact that, just as in the case of a physical death, by ascending Jesus was leaving them for good.

Or was he? It seems to me that the key to understanding the different responses is that Jesus’ ascension proved his departure was only temporary. That by his resurrection he proved that he had conquered death and that he could be trusted in his promise that he was going to return and bring about his everlasting kingdom. This meant, again, that the goodbye was not permanent but only temporary.

So the difference has to do with Gospel hope, something that the disciples definitely did not have immediately after Jesus was crucified and buried. In fact, they had lost all hope. But with the fact that the ascension occurred after his resurrection made all the difference. Moreover, his resurrection proved that all death is conquered and that, as Christians, all of our goodbyes are only temporary. And this is why the Apostle Paul would later dare to mock death, saying, “Where, O death, where is your victory? Where, O death, where is your sting?” (1 Cor. 15:55).

Of course, I am not saying that our mourning the death of friends and loved ones is not rational or that we lack faith in doing so. Rather, we mourn with hope. And, as Christians, we understand that our goodbyes really are temporary—that we, too, ascend after death and, like our Lord, we go to await our final reunion with the people of God. That is Gospel hope, and it makes all the difference in the world.

Posted on

Staying on the Cross

By Jim Spiegel

In Martin Scorsese’s film The Last Temptation of Christ, Jesus’s last temptation is represented as the domestic life—to come down from the cross, take a wife, have kids, and live a normal family life. The film is a bit of fanciful celluloid imagination, but it gets this much right: Christ’s final temptation on earth was created by the mockers who challenged him to take himself down from the cross:

“It was nine in the morning when they crucified him. The written notice of the charge against him read: ‘The King of the Jews.’ They crucified two rebels with him, one on his right and one on his left. Those who passed by hurled insults at him, shaking their heads and saying, ‘So! You who are going to destroy the temple and build it in three days, come down from the cross and save yourself!’ In the same way the chief priests and the teachers of the law mocked him among themselves. ‘He saved others,’ they said, ‘but he can’t save himself! Let this Messiah, this king of Israel, come down now from the cross, that we may see and believe.'” (Mark 15:25-32)

Jesus resisted this temptation—something he could very easily have done, to relieve himself of such extreme torment and humiliation. But doing so would have undermined God’s perfect plan for the salvation of humanity. Jesus had to suffer in full in order to provide complete atonement for the human race. So Jesus had to submit completely, and, thankfully, he did.

Sometime before his crucifixion, Jesus told his disciples, “If anyone would come after me, let him deny himself and take up his cross and follow me. For whoever would save his life will lose it, but whoever loses his life for my sake will find it” (Mt. 16:24-26). This remark—like so many cryptic statements by Jesus—must have utterly confused them, not the least because they had no idea what fate shortly awaited Jesus. As we now know, it is not just a quaint, poetic expression but a metaphor we should seriously ponder for how it applies to us as Christ followers.

One application context is personal offense, specifically when a person refuses to apologize for a serious wrong committed against you, especially when this leads to public humiliation. If ever there was a time to urge someone to apologize, the sin of slander would probably be as compelling a reason as any. If you have already taken the steps of personal rebuke prescribed in Matthew 18 but to no avail, it can be tempting to “take matters into your own hands,” such as through spiteful treatment, public shaming, or worse. In the days of social media when discretion is an increasingly rare virtue, this can be especially tempting.

However, if their wronging you put you on this cross, so to speak, then any such responses may essentially be efforts to take yourself down from the cross rather than to “carry” it to the full extent God has ordained for you. When the Matthew 18 steps have been exhausted, I’ve resolved to eschew additional efforts and submit to whatever remaining suffering and slander may be meant for me. If Jesus tells me to deny myself, take up my cross, and follow him, then presumably this means I should be willing to remain on that cross as long as he stipulates.

Of course, there is a time and place to “escape” the torment of others, whatever form that might take, whether physical or psychological abuse, etc. And there is a time to confront people who owe you an apology for injustices and other wrongs that have caused you to suffer (as, again, we know from Matthew 18). But there is also a time to recognize when, humanly speaking, none of this is possible and only God can redeem the situation. Such is the time to remain on the cross and trust God for a moral resurrection within a human heart that only he can effect. That is my resolution, anyway, and it has been a blessed approach.

Posted on

The Best and Worst of 2024

By Jim Spiegel

It has been another exciting year for the Spiegel family—more transitions and making new friends. In August Jim commenced his work as Executive Director at the Kalos Center in Columbus, Ohio. Amy continued her work in the office of Gifts and Estate Planning at Hillsdale College. Jim has been commuting to Columbus weekly, which we plan to do until Andrew graduates from Hillsdale Academy in the Spring. Maggie has been taking classes at Jackson Community College and plans to transfer to Wayne State University next Fall where she hopes to complete her degree. Sam will graduate from Taylor next month and is strongly considering a career as a commercial pilot. And Bailey has been working two jobs while working on his art portfolio. He just applied to several MFA programs around the country. So we are excited about all of these developments, as our kids continue to develop into interesting and ambitious young adults. Our family conversations about art, culture, philosophy, theology, and politics are more stimulating and enriching than ever. As usual, we are closing out the year with summary remarks about good and bad stuff related to film, music, books, sports, food, and family.

Film Experiences

Jim: Three films stood out for me this year, though only one of them was released in 2024. I loved Peanut Butter Falcon (2019), a unique drama about a young man with Down’s syndrome who, after escaping from an assisted-living facility, befriends a troubled fisherman. This film is both fun and profound with excellent performances all-around, including Shia LaBeouf. I also really liked Leave No Trace, a 2018 film that follows the relationship between a military vet with PTSD and his daughter as they live in a remote forest area and ultimately in a mobile home community. This one really sneaks up on you. And I thought one of the best of 2024 was Cabrini, a powerful historical drama about a 19th century Catholic missionary’s ministry to the poor of New York City. Inspiring and extremely well-directed.

Amy: I’m afraid I have no great works of art to recommend this year. I have spent the year revisiting old friends (rewatching all of Matlock, Columbo, and any period piece I can find). I’m always up for a good true crime series of documentary (The Man With a Thousand Kids, Ashley Madison: Sex, Lies and Scandal, Sweet Bobby: My Catfish Nightmare, to name a few). During the holidays, I enjoyed a couple Hallmark-esque movies (The Merry Gentlemen and Our Little Secret) and, before you sneer, I argue that balancing light-heartedness with good writing that doesn’t fall off the cliffs of absurdity is a rare jewel that should not be underrated. I did enjoy The Fall Guy with Ryan Gosling and Emily Blunt, Something to Stand For with Mike Rowe, and After Death, a documentary about near-death experiences. The “film” experience I have spoken of most often with people is Hillsdale College’s online course on Paradise Lost which was beautifully produced and my first experience of the poem.

Food and Music

Amy’s Best Food Experiences of the Year: Food these days is more about the company than the menu for me. Every meal we’ve eaten with all four kids feels like a cause for celebration these days, knowing that meals will become fewer and farther between as the years go by. Jim and I had a wonderful night at Cascarelli’s in nearby Homer, eating pizza and drinking excellent cocktails, along with a few meals sampling some of the ethnic food Columbus has to offer. We also had a memorable “game night” eating wild game harvested by the Hillsdale Shooting Club.

Jim’s Best Musical Experiences of the Year: My favorite musical experience of 2024 was going to see Weezer with my daughter in Columbus. This was part of their 30-year anniversary (!!) tour for their legendary debut “Blue” album. Maggie and I are both big fans and had a great time. Two of my new musical discoveries this year were LP and Declan McKenna. In addition to being a strong songwriter, LP’s unique vocal style is mesmerizing, as is her uncanny ability to whistle. Check out her most well-known song, “Lost on You.” Declan McKenna, on the other hand, is a self-produced alt-rock Brit singer-songwriter that I’ve found to be quite addictive. Another band I was introduced to this year was the Lemon Twigs, who master a retro 60s-style that may thrill you or annoy you. I’m still trying to decide which category they fall into for me. As for my pick for album of the year, it is hands-down Beyonce’s Cowboy Carter. I had never listened closely to Beyonce’s music before, but this one got my attention both because of the media buzz and the very concept of the album. Some slam it for reverse cultural appropriation. Whatever. As far as I’m concerned, genres are made to be broken, blended, invented, and reinvented. Beyonce achieves all of that on this fresh and somehow timeless concept album. A profound achievement. Finally, I have to mention T-Bone Burnett’s latest album, The Other Side, which is stunning in both its musical simplicity and lyrical wisdom. If ever there was an album to live by, this is it. At least check out the opening track, “He Came Down.” As I slowly build my “best songs of the 2020s” list, I’ve already reserved a spot for this one.

Sports

Jim’s Favorite Sports Moments of the Year: Watching Andrew continue his prowess as a star soccer and basketball player on the Hillsdale Academy teams has been a lot of fun, as was watching Sam finish his college career as captain of the Taylor University soccer team. Sam had more spectacular moments in goal this year, culminating in his being selected for the All-Crossroads League team. It was also a fun year as a Detroit Lions sports fan. (Note: I’m not a bandwagon Lions fan but have rooted for them since I was 7-years-old kid, growing up in the Detroit area.) I feel like my half-century of loyal Lions fandom is finally being rewarded. Now, if they can just make it to the Super Bowl . . .. It was also a blast to watch the Tigers make a spectacular late-season run to make it to the playoffs and even win a playoff series. Looking forward to next season under the leadership of Hinch & Co. But the best moment of all was seeing my Michigan Wolverines win the NCAA football national championship. Go Blue!

Amy’s Favorite Sports Moments of the Year: I have a terrible memory for specific games and details. I love sitting on the couch any given Sunday watching football with Jim and marveling at my predictive abilities. (Did I mention I am currently leading our family Pigskin Pick Em’s league?). I’ve tried to soak in Andrew’s and Sam’s last seasons of high school and college soccer respectively and am grateful for the way sports has shaped their character and mindset.

Jim’s Most Disappointing Sports Moments of the Year: My Detroit Lions getting knocked out of the NFL playoffs by the 49ers last January, after squandering a 24-7 halftime lead. Ouch. But it doesn’t take away the joy of watching the Lions win playoff games for the first time in over 30 years. It also hurt to see the Tigers bounced by the Cleveland Guardians in the second round of the MLB playoffs after leading the series. After such an improbable run to make the playoffs, we Tigers fans had dreams of running the table. But it was not to be. Maybe next Fall! Of course, these sports sorrows don’t compare to the more poignant endings of our sons’ high school and college soccer careers. See Amy’s thoughts below.

Amy’s Most Painful Sports Moment of the Year: Seeing Sam’s college soccer career end after a tough season was bittersweet. So proud of his dedication and talent but sad to see that chapter come to an end. Andrew’s high school soccer career ended with a brutal loss but it was wonderful to hear his coach reflect on Andrew’s leadership on and off the field.

Good Reads

Jim: This year I actually had time to read a few works of fiction. After a conversation with a former colleague who wrote her dissertation on Thomas Hardy, I decided to read The Mayor of Casterbridge, which is a powerful, if a bit dark, moral tale. It made me more happy than ever that I’ve never sold my wife and child in a spontaneous public auction. (Yep, that’s the book’s premise.) On the negative side (a definite “bad” read) was Cormac’ McCarthy’s The Road. Despite whatever undeserved awards the book may have won, it is a dreadful piece of fiction. See Amy’s blurb about it in a previous post. Blecch. As for non-fiction, I enjoyed Edward Klein’s The Kennedy Curse: Why Tragedy Has Haunted America’s First Family for 150 Years. If you think you know the whole story when it comes to Kennedy family tragedies, check out this book. It runs far deeper than even most students of the topic realize. Other works I’ve enjoyed in the past year include Rizwan Virk’s The Simulation Hypothesis, The Works of Joseph Butler, and The Essential Writings of Christian Mysticism, a wide-ranging compendium of classic writings falling under the (somewhat loose) heading of mysticism.

Amy: I’ve had a lot of great reads this year. Most recently Shepherds for Sale by Megan Basham, Overruled by Neil Gorsuch, and Troubled by Rob Henderson were all interesting and eye-opening reads. I can’t remember how I stumbled into listening to I’m Glad My Mom Died by Jennette McCurdy, and I can’t say I “enjoyed” it but it was well-written, and McCurdy gives the reader a disturbing window into the world of child actors while displaying  an impressive amount of understanding for her parents (despite the title’s shocking title) and avoiding playing the victim. Hannah Coulter left me asking where Wendell Berry has been all my life, while The Road by Cormac McCarthy left me wishing I had taken a detour. My Cousin Rachel by Daphne du Marier and Never Let Me Go by Kazuo Ishiguro were both page turners worth the time.

Best 2023 Family Memories

Jim: Our annual Bell (Amy’s side of the family) summer reunion was great as usual, though this time we had a new addition—our great niece, Margot, who is a total joy. Another highlight was painting the exterior of our Jonesville house, which I did with some help from our boys and a hydraulic lift I rented for a week in July. This was made all the more rewarding by the daily compliments I would receive by passersby.  The house had been painted a hideous yellow with red trim before we transformed it into a stately overcast grey with white trim, far more befitting the classy exterior features with which it was endowed back in 1846.

Amy: Welcoming my great-niece Margot into the family, experiencing the solar eclipse with Andrew and Maggie, and welcoming Bailey home from Bolivia were definite highlights. I got the chance to spend time with my mom and sister in Ohio which is a rarity I greatly enjoyed. Our beloved (Jane) Austen made it through a tough bout of pancreatitis for which we are extremely grateful. We have had more than our fair share of car woes this year which ironically have been an opportunity to be blessed by the generosity of our friends and community.

New Year’s Resolutions

Amy: Continuing to see God’s grace and mercy in all circumstances will be a goal this year and every year after. I am still hoping to concentrate on being a better steward of my time and body, especially after turning the big 5-0 this year.

Jim:  Having nearly fulfilled my 2023 New Year’s resolution of completing our Jonesville house renovations (we still have two rooms to renovate), my 2024 resolution is to finish those two remaining rooms!

 Happy 2025 everyone!

Posted on

They Aren’t Just Eating the Dogs and Cats

By Amy Spiegel

My mind is often a colliding mix of thoughts and ideas, swirling around in a chaotic soup inside my head. This morning while sitting on a balcony looking out at the Gulf Coast of Florida, Jung’s “devouring mother,” the words of the apostle Paul, and Springfield, Ohio all coalesced into what follows.

Sitting in God’s beautiful creation, I was reading 2 Timothy 3 which outlines “the last days” and what will characterize them. Some of the things listed, frankly, have characterized human civilization since Adam and Eve decided to have a snack from the wrong tree in Eden: lovers of self, lovers of money, proud, arrogant, abusive, disobedient to their parents, ungrateful, unholy, etc. What struck me, however, was the following: “…lovers of pleasure rather than lovers of God, having the appearance of godliness but denying its power. Avoid such people. For among them are those who creep into households and capture weak women, burdened with sins and led astray by various passions, always learning and never able to arrive at a knowledge of the truth” (vs. 4-7).

Could there be a more apt description of the current state of our nation and many in the evangelical church in America? Women, burdened by their guilt with no one calling them to repentance are not only being led astray but leading the charge to assault the most vulnerable among us, our children. Through the ungodly teachings of the woke, which has infiltrated our thoughts on parenting and motherhood, whichever side you land on politically, these women have been persuaded to follow harmful paths, carrying their children along with them into a desolate and dangerous land.

As a frequent consumer of Jordan Peterson’s lectures and podcast, I have become familiar with the concept of the devouring mother. The basic idea, as I understand it and will use it here, is of a mother who has come to depend so heavily on her children for her sense of self-worth that she consumes them with toxic “care” rather than nurturing them into healthy and self-sufficient individuals. Think the “bad” mom in the story of Solomon willing to divide the baby in 1 Kings 3 or Gothel of “Mother Knows Best” fame from Disney’s Tangled.

So, you ask, how does this relate to 2 Timothy’s weak women and the hellscape of morality in modern America? Here are a few current issues where I believe we can see the devouring mother doing battle against, rather than for, her children:

Abortion: I’m not sure I need to say more. Literally a mother killing her child in its most dependent and vulnerable state. What is different now is that women are no longer being told this is a final escape hatch only to be used in case of emergency. We are being encouraged to celebrate doing that which should be devastating even to contemplate. The aim of “rare and necessary” has become “common and discretionary.” Women are being told to rejoice and defend our ability to destroy life; we should instead be marveling and protecting our sacred and unique ability to procreate and carry life.

Trans rights: The response of many women to the onslaught of trans activism is a head-scratcher for me. Allowing their compassion for those they see as marginalized to blind them, these women have aligned themselves with one of the most misogynistic movements in history. I could take a whole post to outline this argument but standing against the mockery and erasure of womanhood, the predatory nature of “gender affirming care” providers who with little thought subject vulnerable young girls to life altering medical procedures, and the physical, emotional and psychological endangering of women in sports and public spaces should be a stance with whom any clear thinking woman agrees. There also seems to be a vampiristic segment of mothers who are encouraging their children to disavow their biological sex. Don’t believe me? Just look at the disproportionate number of celebrities with trans children. These real-life stage moms are exploiting their children’s confusion for social standing rather than helping them navigate their way, as beings created by God in His image, through the confusing waters of childhood and adolescence.

Social media: A non-partisan issue we should all be able to get behind is the harmful effects of social media on the mental health of women, especially young girls. This is an area where I feel most ashamed as a mother and child of God. I have allowed social media to eat away at my soul with envy and greed. I have used my kids as props for online clout building and failed to shelter them from the destructive repercussions of social media consumption. Ironically, it was my daughter who helped to lift the scales from my eyes when she asked me, years ago, to not post pictures of her online. It started me questioning why it was that I wanted to in the first place. I should have been the one protecting her rather than “selling” her image to prove I was worthy of others’ approval. This is to say nothing of the use of social media by predators or the devastating effect of social media on the mental health of children.

After the second presidential debate, I became obsessed with Donald Trump’s delivery of the line “They’re eating the dogs. They’re eating the cats. They’re eating the pets.” Whatever your opinion of the man, you have to admit, he knows how to coin a phrase and create a slew of chuckle-worthy memes. Though the truth of that claim might be in dispute, there is no disputing the perilous danger our children find themselves in, partially due to the cowardice of weak Christian women, myself included. The world is eating our children and our failure to stand up and protect our children, whatever the cost, is a stain on the sacred reputation of motherhood and we must do all we can to remove it. We must refrain from devouring them ourselves and protect them. We must teach them and one another how to live as God’s children. When reminded by Jim that our kids will one day cut the apron strings and fly the coop, I would often say, “Yes, but on the battlefield they always call for their mothers.” Ladies, our children are crying out to us from the battlefield and we must heed their call or they will perish alone.

The devouring mother will not be defeated through politics. This is not a power structure issue; it’s an issue of the heart. And in some ways that’s good news. When it comes to influencing the hearts and minds of our fellow believers, we the Church are in charge, not the political powers that be. Let us stand against the devouring mother and see her transformed into the nurturing, protector she was meant to be. Let us guard her heart with truth and wisdom, as we guard our own, and in doing so we guard her children from destruction.

Posted on

Another Metaphysical Mystery for Theists

By Jim Spiegel

As a follow up to my recent post on the “ultimate mystery,” I want to touch on another mystery pertaining to God and the cosmos.

One of the distinctive aspects of an orthodox Christian doctrine of creation is that of divine creation ex nihilo—the notion that God created the cosmos “out of nothing.” That is, God did not use any pre-existing materials to make the world. This sharply contrasts with many Eastern cosmologies as well as that of the ancient Greeks. Plato, for example, though a theist, regarded matter as co-eternal with God. Similarly with Aristotle. According to him, God was necessary to explain change in the world but not the existence of the world itself.

The biblical picture of divine creation is that God spoke every aspect of the cosmos into existence. The first century A.D. Jewish scholar Philo of Alexandria might have been the first to formalized this into the concept of creation ex nihilo. The first Christian thinker to articulate the doctrine was Theophilus of Antioch a century later. By the time Augustine affirmed the doctrine a few centuries after that, the concept of creation ex nihilo was becoming a firmly established pillar of church doctrine.

It is easy to see why early Christian scholars so readily embraced this idea, as the alternative view, creation ex materia (the notion that matter is eternal and divine creation is simply a reforming of this primordial material) does seem to conflict with the Genesis creation account and the general biblical portrait of God as alone eternal.

But here is an interesting question as regards divine creation—and I suppose it is as much of a quandary for the ex materia as it is for the ex nihilo view: where did God derive his ideas for creating the things he made—planets, stars, plants, animals, insects, etc.? The easy—and not very useful—answer is that God simply thought of these things out of his own infinite imagination. But how? Without any pre-existing things to prompt or inspire creative possibilities, what could have been the basis of the content of God’s creative choices?

Whenever human beings create we always do so with existing resources, things we have seen, heard, read, or otherwise experienced. So none of what we make is creative in the ultimate sense. Even our most “original” works are somehow derivative. So how does a mind come up with ideas purely and simply? We have no category for such a thing.

This is actually the hardest thing to comprehend about divine creation ex nihilo. It is not the act of creation ex nihilo—which I take to be essentially the sharing of ideas with other minds—so much as the devising of the ideas to share. It is this conceptual first step that boggles my mind. How did God conceive of the idea of a dog or a tree or even biological systems in the first place? This invites the question, out of what divine stuff did God conceive of these original ideas? Here we see the temptation to entertain some kind of Platonism which posits the eternal existence of certain ideas or forms. But, alas, such a view encounters the same problems that plague creation ex materia, as it affirms things that are co-eternal with God.

Another option would be to say that there are eternal ideas but they are not external to God but in God. This alternative essentially places the Platonic field of forms within the divine mind. But this option faces other difficulties, such as making sense of why just certain ideas are fundamental to the divine mind and not others (when, after all, there is presumably no reason to think that the idea of, say, a dog or tree is a necessary aspect of the divine mind). Here one might be tempted to avoid this problem by supposing that all possible ideas are eternally in the divine mind. But this faces the problematic implication that the mind of God is eternally loaded not only with rich and wonderful ideas but also with frivolous and random ideas from feces and pimples to hideously ugly potential plants and animals.

In any case, these are vexing questions, and I welcome any suggestions for potentially promising theories. Oh, and for more ruminations on the metaphysics of the divine mind, check out the book Four Views on Christian Metaphysics, a volume to which I contributed the chapter on idealism.

Posted on

Book Notes

By Amy Spiegel

Hannah Coulter by Wendell Berry: My first reading of Wendell Berry came to me via a book recommendation shared in line at our campus coffee shop and was reinforced by a friend a few days later at a wedding. Somehow this seems a fitting way to discover the world of Port William. I now know this is one of the last in the series and plan to work my way from the beginning. Beautifully written, lush with description and life without being overly fussy. Enjoyable but with depth, Berry celebrates the simplicity of rural life in America without reducing his characters to caricatures. Only now I am sad I didn’t pick up any of his works before now. I fully intend to make up for lost time.

The Road by Cormac McCarthy: Would you be satisfied if I just said “Ugh”? When he decides to dive into the world of fiction, Jim has a nasty habit of taking the plunge with very difficult but quality works. In this instance, he decided to make me share in his suffering and unfortunately for us, the work was difficult without the quality. Reading this book was an act of futile drudgery, devoid of joy or meaning. A bit like the task of “the man,” the main character, walking endlessly with his beloved son; destination and purpose unknown. My issues with McCarthy’s Pulitzer Prize winning work weren’t just the nihilism that seeped from every adverbless, comma avoidant sentence. It lacked imagination, character development, and realism. One can only assume it was meant to be a Hemingwayesque, bare bones narrative whose style reflected the bleakness of the landscape through which the man and boy are traveling after some unnamed event has left Earth in ecological ruin. But Hemingway’s genius was bringing character into sharp relief despite his restrained prose. McCarthy starves the reader’s imagination to death with regards to his characters while forcing them to feast on absurdities like roving bands of cannibals and just-in-the-nick-of-time root cellars. In this case, I’ll choose the road less taken, thank you very much.

Troubled by Rob Henderson: I read this after hearing Henderson interviewed by Jordan Peterson. This memoir is unflinchingly raw and honest about the failings of the foster care system and the adults who raised him but also his about his own behavior. He recounts how the selfishness and unthinking actions of many people impacted his life and worldview with a sympathetic clarity which is to be applauded. Avoiding creating villains and heroes, Henderson allows the reader to draw their own conclusions about the complex motivations of both himself and others. A tragic and triumphant story well worth reading.

Beyond the River: The Untold Story of the Heroes of the Underground Railroad by Ann Hagedorn: This is my favorite style of historical non-fiction. Hagedorn brilliantly draws the reader into the world of 19th century Ripley, Ohio with her immensely well-researched work, often drawing heavily from primary sources which allows the historical figures to tell their own story instead of being spoken for by the author. This book has special meaning to my family because we have vacationed near Ripley the last two summers and had the opportunity to visit both the John Parker House and the John Rankin House for two of the most memorable historical museum visits we’ve ever had. History comes to life as you look across the Ohio River listening to the stories of slaves, aided by hundreds of brave men and women in their desperate bid for freedom. These stories were passed on to Harriet Beecher Stowe, a friend of the Rankin family, and many appear in Uncle Tom’s Cabin. Inspiring stories of courage in the face of unthinkable cruelty, particularly in the dark and clarifying times in which we live.

Honorable Mentions: Close to Death by Anthony Horowitz: Nothing to write home about but the perfect light read; a nice ice cream cone on a summer day. Wrong Place Wrong Time by Gillian McAllister: This one actually annoyed me, a lot but kept me turning pages to get to the end. Not exactly an ice cream cone, more like a slightly squished peanut butter and jelly sandwich halfway through a long hike: you won’t be leaving a five star review but better than nothing at all.

Posted on

The Ultimate Mystery

By Jim Spiegel

A recent episode of the Joe Rogan Experience, featuring a conversation with Rizwan Virk, deals with the possibility (or likelihood) that we are living in something like a computer generated reality. Of course, what this really points to is the age-old notion that the world is the product of some ultimate consciousness, that is, God. Rogan, like all of us, understands the significance of this, which explains why he is uncharacteristically silent through much of the conversation. We are talking about the ultimate question here.

There are really just two fundamental worldviews: Either all comes from Mind or all comes from matter. There are many versions of each, but these are ultimately the two options. It’s really that simple. Those who take the latter view are materialists (or naturalists or physicalists, depending on one’s preferred nomenclature). They are also empiricists and typically regard science as the most reliable or perhaps only way to secure knowledge. Materialists believe in minds and consciousness, of course. They just believe that it is reducible to, or an epiphenomon of, physical reality

Those who take the Mind-most-real view reject strong empiricism, affirming that reason or mystical-religious experiences provide evidence for the reality of a supernatural realm. They do not deny the reality of the physical world but simply deny that it is the ultimate reality. They maintain that this material realm is in some way the product of the workings of an ultimate consciousness. Those among them who maintain that this Mind at the bottom of things is personal are generally called theists. For many such theists, such as Socrates, Plato, and Aristotle, among others, theirs is a purely philosophical conviction. Most others subscribe to a theological tradition, such as Judaism, Christianity, or Islam.

Whichever view one takes, the conviction tends to be held very firmly, often dogmatically. This is despite the fact that whichever view one holds there are serious metaphysical problems and ultimate mysteries that defy ready explanation. This, I suppose, is symptomatic of human arrogance or insecurity or both. Plaguing both views is the ultimate metaphysical question: How did all of this get here? And even more basic is Heidegger’s famous question, Why is there something rather than nothing? (Ways of addressing this question are boundless. For a recent sampling, check out these, most of which miss the point or involve a confusion of some kind.)

Then there are the problems unique to each perspective. For the materialist, the most fundamental problem pertains to how consciousness could emerge from inert matter. The options here are numerous, including philosophical behaviorism, strict identity theory, functionalism, and property dualism. But they all face serious problems, such as that of 1) explaining the particulars of consciousness, including phenomenal qualia, subjectivity, and enduring selfhood, 2) accounting for human freedom, 3) accounting for moral truth, and 4) accounting for rationality—non-natural things like reasons, logic, and evidence influencing the world. Then there are the perennial problems of cosmology (explaining the origin of the universe and cosmic fine-tuning) as well as all sorts of empirical data pointing to the supernatural (e.g., mystical experiences, NDEs, OBEs, etc.).

Materialists may balk and minimize these problems all they want. It’s simple denial. Any self-respecting materialist will at least admit that these are genuinely significant problems with their perspective. It is no wonder that, after a half century of concerted atheism Antony Flew flipped from a materialist view to a Mind-most-real view (see his There is a God) and that the inveterate materialist Thomas Nagel has admitted that materialism is bankrupt and in serious need of overhaul, if not outright rejection (see his Mind and Cosmos).

But Mind-most-real proponents have no grounds to be cocky. They also face serious metaphysical problems. In addition to the ultimate metaphysical question—why is there something rather than nothing?—there are many other thorny questions: How could the ultimate Mind create something so radically different as physical matter? What is the substance of this Mind? How does this being causally act on the world? How much of the cosmos does the Mind control? Does this Mind have a moral nature? If so, then why evil—and why so much evil? Has the Mind communicated to humans? If so, which, if any, of the purported supernatural revelations is genuine? If one of them is, how do we resolve the countless interpretive problems?

As a Mind-most-real advocate, I am happy to be relieved of the problems plaguing the materialist view. But I naturally am interested in many of these other problems. However, as a Berkeleyan immaterialist, I think many of these admit of ready solutions. For on the Berkeleyan idealist view (which the great American theologian Jonathan Edwards essentially affirmed as well), the physical world just is ideas. And since minds naturally traffic in ideas, God’s production and causal influence on the world is not mysterious at all. (For in-depth scholarly discussions of a wide range of issues pertaining to idealism and Christianity, look here and here. And here is a London Lyceum interview with me on topic.)

But there is one particular problem unique to the Mind-Most-Real view that is especially deep and intractable: How does a Mind make another mind? In the theistic traditions, we learn that the primordial Mind (God) created all things. In the Christian tradition, at least since Augustine, we affirm that God created ex nihilo. So how did this ultimate center of consciousness—God—bring into existence minds like yours and mine ex nihilo? How does a subjective consciousness endow another thing/substance with subjectivity? And what exactly is the substance of each of our minds? How are our minds like and unlike the ultimate Mind?

One plausible philosophical answer is theologically problematic, at least from the perspective of Christian orthodoxy: The Mind did not create other minds ex nihilo but rather finite minds are aspects of the primordial Mind. This solution isn’t necessarily pantheistic, but it is panentheistic. (For an interesting discussion of this possibility, see Jordan Wessling’s chapter in this aforementioned book.)

As a convinced theist who believes that Christianity is the most reasonable version of theism, the question of ultimate reality is settled: Mind is most real. The likes of Antony Flew, Thomas Nagel, and Joe Rogan have recently been waking up to this fact, even if they aren’t ready to call themselves theists (or even, in the case of Nagel, a non-materialist). For me, then, the remaining ultimate mystery is just this: How does the Mind make other minds? This will be one of the first questions I ask that Mind when I get to the other side.

Posted on

Women’s Work

By Amy Spiegel

For years, when our children were small, Jim and I would share a hurried kiss and a “Have a good day” as he left for campus and I began a day at home with the kids. We used to joke that as we went our separate ways, each of us would look at the other with wistful pity and mutter under our breath “Sucker!”

Sure, there were days when, with a heart full of envy, I imagined him gathered around the water cooler (this was truly imagining because they didn’t have a water cooler) with his colleagues, discussing current events, quoting Plato and basking in the luxury of adult time. I am less sure that there were days where he sighed with regret as he pulled out of the driveway, watching the kids and I head out for a walk to the library or a playdate with friends. But for the most part, we were quite comfortable in our roles. He was the main breadwinner, supporting our family financially, not to mention influencing the minds of countless students and readers through his lectures, books, and articles. I was a stay-at-home mom, supporting our family through the various little tasks of home life, planning meals and doing laundry, not to mention educating our kids through elementary and middle school. We were, and still are, a great team, sharing the responsibilities and burdens, as well as the joys and rewards, of raising a family and pursuing a life of purpose and accomplishment.

I have no doubt that Jim, were he left on his own, would not have accomplished as much professionally without my support. Were he to have been a single dad, most of his time and energy would have gone into raising his kids, with little surplus for research and writing. I consider his accomplishments, all the publications, awards, etc., to be shared accomplishments in which I played a vital, though not equal, role. Obviously, he could have been a non-dad and had many more hours for his intellectual pursuits, but without the depth of experience, not to mention the love and encouragement, a family brings which I think has shaped him into a greater man than he would be otherwise.

Similarly, had I been a single mom I’m not sure the kids and I would have made it out of their formative years alive. Putting aside the obvious financial support Jim provided, allowing me the privilege of focusing on raising our family, his emotional and spiritual support was instrumental in my development as a wife, mother, and more generally as a human being. He is quick to credit me with influencing our kids to a greater degree than he has and that is perhaps somewhat true given the sheer quantity of time I was able to spend with them. But that time was made possible through the hours he spent lecturing, grading, doing research, and so on, not to mention the profound impact he has had on me as the spiritual head of our family. Our roles have shifted over the years, with the kids off to school, though I am still more focused on the daily routines of our family while he is focused on providing for our family through a myriad of ways.

This division of labor has worked, with varying degrees of success, for thousands of years. Men and women working together to nurture the next generation. Of course there have been abuses and imbalances of power, but the modern tendency to sneer at “women’s work” in the home as oppressive or demeaning is yet another symptom of the overall mass misogyny of our times. Nowhere is this more apparent in the current petition calling for the dismissal of Kansas City Chief’s player Harrison Butker over comments he made as the commencement speaker for Benedictine College which you may read in full here.

Those supporting this effort have called his comments “sexist, homophobic, anti-trans, anti-abortion and racist.” Well, they at least they got the anti-abortion part right. I won’t go into all their claims but would like to address their accusation that Butker’s remarks were sexist. Many

National Catholic Register

have pointed to the hypocrisy of those leading the charge for Butker’s firing given the numerous instances of domestic abuse and unlawful and violent behavior on the part of countless NFL players which has garnered little attention from the press or fans. What’s most interesting to me about the outcry on the part of some regarding Butker’s comments, however, is hypocrisy in another form.

They believe that a man celebrating the sacrifices and achievements of his wife is sexist. They believe that a woman’s value is to be found in her paycheck and not in her eternal investments in the lives of those entrusted to her care. In other words, they believe that women should be judged by the historically male dominated standards of career and, for lack of a better word, “worldly” accomplishments. Do they think that Butker holds his wife hostage at home? Do they think so little of women’s intellect that we are incapable of deciding for ourselves how we will divide our time and energy? Do they see so little value in the great joys of motherhood and homemaking? This seems the epitome of sexism!

In a world where men have decided that they can simply declare themselves women, invade our private spaces, steal our opportunities in sports and demand our acceptance of them as our equal, can we not at least acknowledge that being a modern woman can take many forms? Can we not celebrate those who work inside the home alongside those who choose to do so outside the home? In a world which demands acceptance of all manner of lifestyle choices, can we not allow for the rights of the traditional alongside the pantheon of “alternatives”?

The petition demanding his firing calls for unity rather than divisiveness. I couldn’t agree more; as our founding fathers put it, “Out of the many, one.” One body with many parts, all working together to function as a whole. This to me is the unity of purpose Harrison Butker wished to celebrate by praising his wife and all she has done from the sidelines to support and enable him and their family. In my eyes, she is playing the better game and winning. There are of course other roles that women can play, roles which hold great value and purpose. But I say Isabelle Butker is the star quarterback for her team. Perhaps you disagree but as for me, I’m a big fan!