In brief, "Just
because most of the authorities in a field are shouting in unison that they
know the truth, it ain't necessarily so.”
In the 1950s,
the John C. Winston Company, later to become part of Holt, Rinehart and
Winston, published “Adventures in Science Fiction,” a series of juvenile
hardcover novels that made up a collection of thirty-six books.
Some of the
world’s greatest science fiction writers got their start with the series: Arthur
C. Clarke, best known for 2001: A Space Odyssey, Ben Bova, Lester
Del Rey, Donald Wollheim, and Poul Anderson. The books carried an original
price of $2.00. Today, depending on condition, scarcity, and the author, a
first edition/first printing with a dust jacket can bring a high price. For
example, Ben Bova’s The Star Conquerors is considered to
be the rarest of all the Winston Juvenile books published. A first
edition/first printing copy is offered for sale on several sites for more than
$1,000. An autographed copy is for sale on the internet for $2000.
In addition
to the wonderful stories, the books are worth collecting for the cover art.
While the books are dated in terms of technology (the use of computers is
minimal and email was non-existent), the stories reflect the moral worldview of
post-World War II America trying to find its footing. Civil religion was in
vogue. In 1954, in response to the Communist threat of the times, President
Eisenhower encouraged Congress to add the words “under God” to the original
Pledge Allegiance that was written by socialist Francis Bellamy and published
in The Youth's Companion on September 8, 1892. Bellamy’s
daughter objected to the addition.
A young person reading these
books would find a great deal of borrowed capital worldview wisdom sprinkled
throughout the 200+ pages of these fascinating science fiction novels like I
did. One particular scene caught my attention in the 1956 novel The
Lost Planet by Paul Dallas, a story about how two teenagers try to
stop a war between their home planets. The scene takes place just before the
teenager from Earth boards a spaceship and travels to the distant planet of
Poseida which is partially underwater.
The Lost Planet (1956) by Paul V. Dallas
In a
discussion after a Christmas dinner, the topic turns to defend earth “against
an aggression from space” brought up by General Watkins. He then describes the
proper tactic:
As he spoke,
the general seemed to become preoccupied with thoughts of the military
situation, and he absently deployed salt and pepper shakers with knives and
forks on the table, setting up in front of him an imaginary military problem in
the field. “It is a basic truism,” he continued, “that wherever possible the
best defense is a good offense. Now if we are attacked,” and he brought a piece
of silverware in toward the plate that was obviously representing Planet Earth,
“not only do we defend the point under immediate attack but,” and here several
pieces were quickly moved from the plate Earth to the butter dish from which
the attack had originated, “we immediately counterattack at the source of the
aggression. After all, if you cut off the head, you have no need to fear the
arms.” [1]
Against All Opposition
This book is a game-changer. It is THE apologetics manual from
THE master apologist. "We must not be satisfied to present Christianity as
the most reliable position to hold among the competing options available.
Rather, the Christian faith is the only reasonable outlook available to
men." — Dr. Greg L. Bahnsen
Dallas has
the General making a crucial point about fighting and winning against an enemy
combatant that applies to ideological conflicts. Defending the Christian
worldview against unbelieving thought takes an understanding that every
worldview has a centralized guiding principle that serves as its foundational
operational assumption about the nature of reality.
This means
that we must begin where the Bible begins, where the Bible starts: “In the
beginning God…” (Gen. 1:1). God is not a
probability argument that we reason to, making us the foundational principle
and ultimate authority. God is the operating presupposition that we reason
from.
We should never forget that opposing worldviews also
have a fixed starting point on which they reason from. Such a standing place—a
pou sto—is inescapable. The goal is to rock the foundation of opposing
worldviews. Instead of blasting away from a battleship by way of particulars,
our efforts to undermine unbelieving autonomous thinking is better done by a
submarine. Damage the hull and the ship with all its particulars sink.
Numerous
starting-points are put forward as the foundational basis for unbelieving
thought. Here's a sample:
- Rationalism:
reason rules
- Mysticism:
unknown forces rule
- Hedonism:
pleasure rules
- Relativism:
we get to make up our own rules
- Post-modernism:
there are no rules
- Pragmatism:
it's a rule only if it works
- Materialism:
only matter matters
- Monism:
all is one so there is nothing to argue about
And if
specific philosophical systems like the above are not enough to establish an
authoritative starting point, then there is the appeal to any number of
self-proclaimed or institutionally sanctioned experts: a brilliant college
professor, the writings of a Zen Master, the directives of a cult leader, the
latest scientific studies, the writings or revelations of self-appointed
religious leaders, statistical analysis, opinion polls, the Constitution of the
United States, psychics, fortune tellers, frequently quoted philosophers,
newspaper and magazine editors, judges, television news anchors, Oprah, the
high-minded opinions of Hollywood actors, or even alien life forms.
Thinking Straight in a
Crooked World
A worldview and apologetics rolled into one. You will learn how
to torpedo the opposition with foundational principles and show the
consequences of unbelivieving thought.
Even some atheists hope against hope that someone
(other than a personal God) is "out there" to give meaning to the
cosmos. Abandoning pure materialism, some are proposing that "an invisible
force is at work" in the ever-evolving universe. [2] The
materialists have become mystics. Maybe it's from watching too much Star
Wars. Of course, when the ever-changing worldviews of a splintered
secularism fail to live up to their claims of ultimacy, the university is quick
to shut out competitive debate. Speech codes abound. Contrary opinions are
suppressed. Outside speakers are shouted off the stage if they ever make it on
campus in the first place. The entrenched university worldview—no matter how
discredited—must be protected at all cost, even though it's a philosophical
house of cards.
So-called
experts, no matter what their field of study or how much information they
gather, are finite in knowledge and fallible in practice. Put simply, they
don't know everything, and they make mistakes. For every group of experts who
claim to know something authoritatively, there are always other groups of
experts who claim they can dispute the findings of the first group of experts. The Bible describes it this way:
"The first to plead his case seems just, until another comes and examines
him" (Pr. 18:17).
Christopher Cerf and Victor Navasky, after
compiling thousands of expert opinions and declarations about innumerable
subjects over thousands of years, summarize their findings:
Our research has yielded (and we have
systematically catalogued and footnoted for the first time) thousands of
examples of expert misinformation, disinformation, misunderstanding,
miscalculation, egregious prognostication, boo-boos, and occasional just plain
lies. And based on our preliminary findings we can say with some confidence
that the experts are wrong without regard to race, creed, color, sex
discipline, specialty, country, culture, or century. They are wrong about
facts, and they are wrong about theories, they are wrong about dates, they are
wrong about geography, they are wrong about the future, they are wrong about
the past, and at best they are misleading about the present, not to mention
next week. [3]
In brief, "Just because most of the
authorities in a field are shouting in unison that they know the truth, it
ain't necessarily so.” [4]
- Paul
Dallas, The Lost Planet (Philadelphia, PA: The John C.
Winston Company, 1956), 2–3.[↩]
- Charles
W. Petit, “From big bang to big bounce,” U.S. News & World
Report (May 6, 2002), 59.[↩]
- Christopher
Cerf and Victor Navasky, "Introduction to the Original (1984)
Version," The Experts Speak: The Definitive Compendium of
Authoritative Misinformation, rev. ed. (New York: Villard, [1984]
1998), xxvii.[↩]
- William
R. Fix, The Bone Peddlers: Selling Evolution (New York:
Macmillan, 1984), xix.[↩]
https://americanvision.org/24091/rocking-the-foundation-of-opposing-worldviews/