Some Personal Thoughts on J.R.R. Tolkien’s Short Story: LEAF BY NIGGLE

Introduction

In a previous post [ https://peterkazmaier.wordpress.com/2023/02/20/some-personal-thoughts-on-tim-kellers-exposition-of-matthew-chapter-11/ ], I talked about the significant beneficial influence Tim Keller’s podcast had on me in 2022 and now in 2023. In another recent podcast, Keller introduced me to a short story of Tolkien’s that I had not read before: LEAF BY NIGGLE.

This story was especially poignant for someone who is a writer and sometimes wonders “if all this work that goes into writing a story is worth it.”

A word of caution. My thoughts on this story contains spoilers, so perhaps you’d like to stop here and read the story before you continue.

 

Study Guide for COVENTRY 2091. Part 5. Chapters 16-18

The First Plot Twist

To Keep My Stories Moving I Generally Introduce Two Plot Twists

A plot twist is a sea change for the characters and the trajectory of the plot. Almost everything is not the same after the twist occurs. In this story, the assault on Coventry lets Jacob, Hanna, and Zeke discover the real, hidden Coventry which has until now remained secret while the surface Coventry was kept up as a front.

Chapters 16-18

Correcting a Potential Misunderstanding

As I thought about some of our group discussions, I thought, perhaps in writing, I had given readers the wrong impression about the Peace, Order, and Good Government (POGG) Tribunals. As I imagined Canada in 2091, I did not envisage that the POGG tribunals would replace all legal functions, but rather this unique innovation from 2051 conceived to solve the problem of sentencing huge numbers of people quickly, would be kept alongside the regular court system. In other words, it was so useful to the government (and to well-connected, powerful officials like Connaught) that the tribunals were quietly kept active for subversives that the government wanted to send to Coventry with a minimum of fuss and publicity. That’s why Jacob was surprised when he found himself at the tribunal rather than at the regular court he was expecting.

Was this a misunderstanding you encountered in the early chapters of your reading?

Chapter 16

In Chapter 16, Jacob and his two friends have to decide whether or not to stay in Coventry. I faced many writing questions as I imagined how Coventry would function, given that the population consisted of many disparate groups that likely had different customs, articles of faith, and couldn’t even agree on holidays. How would I keep them from fighting among themselves? I settled on the idea of the Swiss Canton, where each cavern would be its own canton and make many of its day-to-day rules. So if Seventh Day Adventists wanted Saturday to be the day off, in their canton their bylaws would set that day aside.

What do you think of this solution? Could it work?

As Christians we try to find a balance: grace and works, freedom and law. When forced to decide on a governing formula, what would we select? One way to think about this is to think about governance and law in three domains:

1. Laws that must be on the books to prevent serious crime and protect citizens. These would be laws against murder, theft, and physical violence.
2. There should be no laws against how you dress, cut your hair, or what Christmas decorations you put up etc. These are questions of taste and personal preference and have a minimal impact on others and so should not be legislated.
3. In between these two extremes there is a very broad area where there may not be any laws, but society regulates them by social censure. For example, in the 1800s, if a man ran off and left his wife and children destitute, he pretty well couldn’t show his face in his home town again because his reputation was destroyed. As I imagined Coventry, I imagined a society that had the middle domain as large as possible i.e. few laws on the books, yet social censure could inhibit behavior that was thought by many to be deleterious.

Do you think this could work? Why or why not? What kinds of social censure ought to be permitted?

Chapter 17

In Chapter 17 we get a glimpse of the technology and society that Coventry has developed. In solving the problems of living underground when one has abundant, clean energy, one encounters many of the problems encountered in the Biosphere2 project, in space flight, and in space colonization.

https://www.britannica.com/topic/Biosphere-2

What technology would they require to live underground? Have you ever heard of Biosphere 2? What do you know about it? Does anyone know what led to Biosphere 2’s failure? Do you think this plan of underground safety is a permanent solution or a temporary one?

Chapter 18

In Chapter 18 we find out that Coventry has long realized that their underground solution was, at best, temporary one. Eventually they would be overrun. We find out they have established a giant floating city in the upper atmosphere of Venus and also, along with two other “coventries” sent three starships to Alpha Centauri. Only one ship completed the journey. A big problem with interstellar travel is the relativistic time distortion. Alpha Centauri is “close” by interstellar distances, but even a phone call to Alpha Centauri is impractical. It would mean you would have to patiently wait for over four years to receive a message. In most of SF, one overcomes this with a faster-than-light (FTL) drive and FTL communication. I chose to use something I imagined for my first series (The Halcyon Cycle), a plant called a Travel Oak, which makes use of a contradiction (or inconsistency) between relativity and quantum mechanics. This speculation fascinates me, but if I were to discuss it, likely your eyes would begin to glaze over, so I won’t delve into it too deeply.

How does a Travel Oak work? What other technology(ies) does Coventry require to make this scenario plausible? What surprised you about the Venus colony and the planet Canaan? Why Venus and not Mars?

Study Guide for COVENTRY 2091. Part 4. Chapters 8-15

Rousseau’s Plot

Genre Plot Stereotypes

I had earlier said that I write books that I wish someone else had written, but never did. For SF, one reason for this are plot stereotypes that are very common. Two common Science Fiction background assumptions are:

1. Since all religions in general and Christianity in particular are superstitions, they will be destroyed by scientific enlightenment. Curiously, the final demise of Christianity is slated to occur a few years after the SciFi book is written.
2. Since all religions in general and Christianity in particular are superstitions, serious religious people and Christians are anti-science and as Luddites oppose science whenever possible.

I don’t agree with the view that Christians are anti-science. Consider the following questions. Why did the age of science develop in Europe? Why not China, Egypt, India? Do you think Christians are anti-science? Why or why not?

What social developments in our Post-Modern culture might be anti-science? If you have trouble thinking of any, think about what science as an activity needs to be productive and successful.

Chapters 8-15

Being sent to Coventry was a hardship and a persecution. Can you think of any ways God turned it into a blessing?

In the Old Testament there have been instances of judgment by enslavement or captivity.

Terrible as the enslavement of the Hebrews was in Egypt, do you see any hidden blessings there?

Were there any hidden blessings in the Babylonian Captivity?

Have you ever experienced God taking a terrible or stressful time in your life and turning it into a blessing? If you’re willing, why not share with the group.

Rousseau’s Plot

What do you think is going on with Rousseau and his cronies?

Why is he recruiting newer inmates into his circle?

Any guess to what’s coming next?

Supplemental Reading for Further Thought

“It’s a lot like Nature’s [Nature is perhaps the world’s most prestigious science journal] change to the meaning of “ethics” — once meant to protect individuals from overreaching scientists, the concept has been broadened to prevent research that may hurt someone’s feelings.

Canada already lags behind many other industrialized countries when it come [sic] to health research and the creation of new drugs. The problem will only deepen if researchers have to factor social justice into their pursuit of the truth.”

Jamie Sarkonak. National Post, Sept 22, 2022.

https://nationalpost.com/opinion/jamie-sarkonak-when-science-goes-woke-people-will-suffer

Study Guide for COVENTRY 2091. Part 3. Chapters 4-7

The Founding of Coventry

Special thanks to a friend for her help with the counseling content of the next chapter(s)

When I first wrote about the sessions between Giesbrecht and Jacob, I was primarily driven by a desire to fill in Kraiser’s backstory, reveal some of Jacob’s character, and, in an unobtrusive way, present some of the details of the founding of Coventry.

I have no expertise in counseling. A friend of mine was very helpful in removing some of the obvious counseling missteps in the dialogue. However, I could not implement all of her advice, so I expect many aspects of the dialogue are likely “sub-best-practice.” These deficiencies are mine.

Chapters 4-7 The Founding of Coventry

As a writer of fiction, I’m supposed to “show not tell,” but sometimes my showing can either be too obvious or too subtle. So some of my questions have to do with my show-not-tell success.

Why do you think Jacob’s nightmares began to surface now, years after the traumatic deaths of parents and siblings?

It’s been a long while since I read Aldous Huxley’s Brave New World. I think the dystopia I’m imagining is much more along Huxley’s line than Orwell’s in 1984.

Do you agree or disagree?

One theme here: when God is working to repair us, things often get worse before they get better.

Is this generally true? Have you experienced this in your own life?

Books, especially fiction, have played a significant role in my life. Here I’m relating to George MacDonald’s Curdie children books.

Has anyone read them?

Plausibility of the events leading to the 2051 peaceful protest

It’s important to the success of the story that this peaceful protest and subsequent government reaction is plausible.

Part of the political background to this peaceful protest was the assumption that politically, governments in Canada are chosen and maintained by the votes of the urban population, while the protest was fueled by the sentiments of the essentially disenfranchised (they can vote, but their vote never makes a difference) rural population.

Is this plausible?

Even today, do you think the views of urban voters and rural voters in Canada are sufficiently different to set this kind of dichotomy? Why or why not?

What was the imaginary drug Cerebretocin-21 in the story? Why do you think some were strongly in favor of its use and others strongly opposed?

Was the government’s response reasonable to the unpopular Cerebretocin-21 protests?

Without digressing too far into the arguments in favor or against the justification of the recent Trucker’s Convoy to Ottawa, when it happened, were you surprised by the determination of the convoy participants to stay the course? Were you surprised by the government’s response? Why or why not?

Any other thoughts on the backstory plausibility leading to the founding of Coventry?

Another question relating to the story line in Coventry 2091: we have had many hours of testimony and thousands of pages of documentation released by the ongoing Public Order Emergency Commission (POEC) which has shed the light on government thoughts and motivations leading up to the imposition of the Emergencies Act last February.

If you have been following some POEC revelations, have these revelations made the Coventry 2091 plot more or less plausible? Why or why not?

I think, it’s fair to say that most Christians, particularly in a democratic society that expects her citizens to participate in governance, feel a tension between obedience to the government, support of freedom, support of justice, and yet not letting political action become our substitute for building Christ’s Kingdom.

How do you resolve this tension in your life?

How do you relate to Christians who have radically different views on resolving this tension?

Study Guide for COVENTRY 2091. Part 2. Chapters 1-3

Facilitators Notes for Part 2

In our discussion, we covered Parts 1 and 2 in a single session. There was more than enough discussion to fill two hours (our planned discussion time).

One of the questions that came up during the discussion: “Was the protest that led to the founding of the Coventry Penal Colony motivated or inspired by the Freedom Convoy that took place in Canada in January and February 2022?”.

The simple answer:  The chronology of the writing of Coventry 2091 makes that connection impossible.

• Coventry 2091 was published in June 2021, a full 6-7 months before anyone, including me, even heard of the Freedom Convoy.
• The events in Coventry 2091, thought to occur in 2049-2051 were imagined before my previous book, The Dragons of Sheol was published in June 2019.
• This connection is simply one of those coincidental things that happen as one does one’s best to imagine the future.

The Opening Chapters of Coventry 2091

My hope about our discussion

When paddling your kayak in a channel in a strong wind, it’s not enough to point the boat’s bow toward your destination, since the wind will blow you off course. You have to take the wind into account by paddling against it just enough to reach your goal. The assumptions made about the future in this book and others in this genre are like the wind blowing us off course (unless the wind comes directly from astern—unlikely). Let’s focus on how we change our paddling rather than thinking about changing the direction of the wind.

What is the Coventry 2091 “What if?” Question?

Most Science Fiction, particularly if it’s extrapolated from the present, begins with a “What If …” question. So does Coventry 2091.

What if, in 2051 in Canada, a politically unpalatable, peaceful protest occurred that was so extensive and enduring that the government had to take extraordinary measures?

The Coventry 2091 story is set some forty years later.

Are there any other “What if” questions embedded in the extrapolation from your reading of Speculative Fiction as well as Coventry 2091?

Chapters 1-3

When writing fiction, it’s important to make the fictional invention plausible enough that the reader isn’t constantly saying “no way!” or “I can’t believe that would happen!”

How plausible do you find the back story leading up to the founding of Coventry Penal Colony and its operation? Do you think it could happen in Canada? Why or Why not?

What do you find least plausible in the back story resulting in the non-violent protests in 2050 and the founding of the Coventry Penal Colony? Why?

At the end of Chapter 3 (pages 18 and 19), Jacob, Hanna, and Zeke talk about the difference in teaching between their brief experience at Coventry and their public education.

How do you see our public education (at all levels) changing and if you were to look into your crystal ball? How will these changes affect future generations of students? How will these educational changes affect Christian students in particular?

How do we change our paddling, as it were, if we:

• Saw changes in our educational system that we found very disturbing and deleterious?
• Concluded that our children or grandchildren were no longer adequately prepared for life through their education?
• That the educational system increasingly becomes more antagonistic to Christianity?

Study Guide for COVENTRY 2091. Part 1. Introduction to Speculative Fiction

Introduction to the Coventry 2091 Discussion Question Series

I was privileged to be invited to facilitate a discussion group on my most recent novel, Coventry 2091. I thought there might be readers who could benefit from the time I invested in crafting questions for the discussion. I hope this proves to be of value.

The group I facilitated was interested in discussing the implications of the world view that under-girds much of the world-building and character development. Many of the questions were designed to encourage that particular type of discussion by the group members. I was not always sure how active and far reaching the discussion would be. In practice, I covered two parts in each session. If the discussion in Part 1 by your group requires more time, it’s easy to end after one part and reserve the second part for the following session.

Introduction to Speculative Fiction

Speculative fiction is a general term encompassing both Science Fiction (itself a broad term) and Fantasy. The easiest way to understand them is to look at some concrete examples:

• DUNE by Frank Herbert is Science Fiction
  • Has anyone read it or seen the movie?
  • Any characteristics of SF you can identify?
• THE LORD OF THE RINGS by J.R.R. Tolkien is Fantasy
  • Has anyone read it or seen the movie?
  • Any characteristics of Fantasy you can identify?
• HARRY POTTER by J. K. Rowling is a subcategory of Fantasy that some call Urban Fantasy.
• OUTLANDER by Diana Gabaldon is a Time Travel novel, but also a Romance and Historical novel.
• Dystopian novels such as 1984, BRAVE NEW WORLD, and A HANDMAID’S TALE are Speculative Fiction because they are set in the future (future at the time of writing).
• Are there any other books you have enjoyed, that, on reflection, might be Speculative Fiction?
• Given the examples we discussed, any thoughts on a comprehensive definition of Speculative Fiction?

So, you might be reading Speculative Fiction without knowing it.

Why Do I Write Science Fiction/Fantasy?

There are a number of reasons:

• There are books I would have liked to read, but no one has bothered to write them yet. So, I had to write them.
• Most SF books are based are based on a Materialist world view. When I read them I don’t truly feel “at home” in them, and often wish there were books more in line with what I believe.
• I read a lot of SF in high school and university and these books helped kindle my love of science. I would like to connect with that age group of readers, who normally don’t care what an old guy thinks, but might read a story by an old guy if it were well-written enough.
• Did anyone else read Science Fiction and/or Fantasy in high school and university? What made you stop (if you did)?

If you were to write a novel, what would you write about?

The Dystopian Political System in THE HALCYON DISLOCATION

When I was planning the plot for The Halcyon Dislocation, an essential element was the development of a dystopian political system for the isolated, dislocated University of Halcyon. In particular, the political system, to the outside observer, would look like a functioning democracy with regular, honest elections, opposition parties, and even new grassroots parties that objected to the status quo.

However, the system is rigged so that these fledgling opposition parties almost never rise to power since it takes a very long time to gain a following, and even if they do, they will find the new party membership and the incessant government propaganda has turned them into another version of the older parties that they were supposed to supplant. Hence nothing has changed except possibly the ruling party’s name.

The reader might ask, “Why do we need such a new, elaborate political system. Man’s history is replete with tyrannical regimes which used propaganda and force to beat down opposition, often for long periods of time?”

I would answer that those systems all have several fatal flaws which this modified dystopian quasi-democracy circumvents.

First of all, using power overtly to suppress dissent means the dissent goes underground and the government receives outward compliance until the opposition gains sufficient momentum that people begin to believe a regime change is possible. Then allegiances change very quickly.

Secondly, suppressed citizens are smart enough to see what is going on and they will not be fooled even if the penalties force them to comply outwardly. They are essentially slaves in their own country and will serve and work halfheartedly at best. It will lead to a general malaise.

The Aberhardt Principle

A key element of the Halcyon quasi-democracy is the Aberhardt Principle, named after the professor on staff who wrote about it. In this approach for making societal change, one sets up a system where everyone is encouraged to speak their mind so the sociologists can measure how effective the advertising, propaganda, education, and entertainment activities have been in changing people’s minds about key issues. The focus is on changing people’s minds against their will by repetition, multiple lines of influence, and long exposure to the multi-media message. The rate of time-dependent change of people’s minds determine how quickly the agenda-setters in the Halcyon quasi-democracy can implement their social changes.

So, even though grassroots opposition parties form, by the time they get to power (if they ever do), they will find not only has their new party changed their outlook, but sufficient time has elapsed that the electorate now fully endorses the new sociological innovations that the old grassroots membership opposed.

Concluding Comments

This is not a political blog and I draw no inferences to past, present, or future systems which might resemble this Halcyon University dystopia. I merely point out, through this imaginative exercise in plot development, that it is possible to develop a political system that has honest, regular elections, allows citizens to share their political views with some freedom, and yet is totally tyrannical and constrained even though the programmed social innovation happens on a multi-year timescale to allow for Aberhardt-style attitude adjustment.

If you have a CALGARY PUBLIC LIBRARY card, you can check out Peter’s books for free …

Becoming a Truth-Seeker in an Age of Propaganda

My well-used copy of THAT HIDEOUS STRENGTH

In C. S. Lewis’ novel THAT HIDEOUS STRENGTH, published in 1945, he foresaw the age of propaganda. An unobtrusive organization, the National Institute of Coordinated Experiments (N.I.C.E.), was engaged in implementing its program of  eliminating undesirables. Although not well-known to the public, the N.I.C.E. controlled parliament. It didn’t really matter whom you, as a voter. elected. Once elected, the MP would be beholden to the N.I.C.E. for their success. Similarly, the media organizations were also under the thumb of the N.I.C.E.

At one point the protagonist, the malleable Mark Studdock, in his quest to always be part of the progressive element at his college, is roped into writing propaganda pieces for the N.I.C.E. for its many initiatives destined to remove people’s freedoms and liberties. Studdock’s template propaganda pieces appear in customized form in all of the nation’s papers. Lewis presents a brilliant picture of how a well-educated, articulate, academic can write convincingly and compellingly on almost any subject. As a reader, who knew the true events behind the story, I could nevertheless only marvel how a clever writer could twist the context to make the facts fit the wholly deceptive perspective desired by the N.I.C.E. The malevolent Progressive Element in the N.I.C.E. goes on to stage fake protests, use the media to mislead the public to rage against the innocent, all for the purpose of eliminating those people who oppose their pragmatic agenda of efficiency and control. Lewis has a real knack for making the propaganda so persuasive that the reader would be taken in if he didn’t see the actions behind the rhetoric. To me this prophecy is happening before my eyes seventy-five years after this book was written.

How does one, then, become a truth-seeker in an age of propaganda?

Before beginning a discussion of a difficult subject about truth and propaganda, it is important to define the terms.

Truth is a very important word in the New Testament. In the Greek the noun, transliterated, is ALETHEIA.

ALETHEIA: “The reality lying at the basis of appearance; the manifested veritable essence of a matter”

W.E. Vine; Cremer

PROPAGANDA: “An organized programme of publicity, selected information etc. used to propagate a doctrine, practice, etc.; the information, doctrines, etc. propagated in this way, esp. regarded as misleading or dishonest”

Oxford English Reference Dictionary

As I work to be a truth-seeker, two important points stand out to me:

1. Truth (Aletheia) is connected to reality. It is quite dangerous to ignore truth because reality, by its nature, will win out.
2. Truth is not always easy to identify, since appearances may be misleading. Often appearances can be created by what people say.

With regards to propaganda, it is not the opposite of truth, but often is a caricature of it. As the definition indicates, propaganda uses publicity and selected information with an end in mind. They may want you to buy a product, vote for a particular party, censure some group, or believe a particular message. The publicity and selected information is chosen in order: to get the audience to accept the teaching or take the steps desired.

So how do I become a truth-seeker in an age of propaganda? I think there are four steps that are important for me to take:

1. If I am given information driving me to a particular belief or action, argue against it. If the information is part of a propaganda initiative, the propagandists are likely telling me half-truths and omitting all counter arguments. If the information is true, I won’t find any compelling counter arguments and the information will become even more convincing.
2. Look for data and make the discussion about data. Often the most convincing propaganda is based on emotion, perhaps appeals to sympathy. That is to say, the propagandist avoids asking whether the statement under question is true or false. Instead they focus on how someone has been hurt or denigrated by the assertion.
3. Look at the presuppositions. In propaganda, often the assumptions behind the information is never discussed, much less critically evaluated. Yet the whole argument rests on the validity of these assumptions.
4. Become a two-column person. By that I mean, assume there is data for and against any position. If none is presented, as is often the case with propaganda, seek it out. Don’t be satisfied to leave one column empty.

What I learned from Tim Keller’s Message on Guidance

In these days when, by government edict here in Canada, churches are deemed “non-essential services,” I find myself searching the internet for inspiring and thought-provoking messages. A few weeks ago, I listened to a 2004 message by Timothy Keller on guidance. See the link below:

For a transcription of the talk, check out the link below:

https://reformedevangelist.blogspot.com/2015/12/a-transcription-of-tim-kellers-your.html

Keller talks about three forms of guidance:

“We’ll find out by answering, by looking at these proverbs and understanding first of the guidance God does, secondly the guidance God gives and thirdly the guidance God purchases for us.”

• Guidance God does
• Guidance God gives
• Guidance God purchases for us

He further subdivides “Guidance God does” into:

• Paradoxical guidance God does 
• Non-obvious guidance God does

There is so much in this message that I can only talk today about what spoke to me about “Paradoxical guidance God does.” When I think of guidance I think of help in decision making. Keller points out there are two contradictory views about decisions. One view is a deterministic view that decision making is really an illusion. Our brain chemistry, our hormones, are appetites so completely determine our decisions (if you’re a Materialist) that our decisions don’t matter. There is also a theological version of this: God makes our decisions for us, so again they don’t matter.

The second, free-will view, is that our decisions completely determine everything. Keller astutely points out that both points of view, if thought through to their logical implications, can’t help but lead to despair. Absolute determinism logically leads to complete passivity. My decisions don’t matter, ever. But free will leads to paralysis since I know so many of my decisions will not only be wrong, but devastatingly wrong that second guessing and doubt will paralyze me.

Keller correctly points out that, not only Proverbs, but he New Testament itself asserts both individual Free Will and God’s Sovereignty (Determinism) simultaneously and the two together are essential for hope and confidence in the future.

Since Free Will exists and is operative, my decisions matter a lot, so I cannot be passive. Yet since the God who loves me still is sovereign, he can smooth over my many poor choices, so in the end I will be okay. Keller uses the Genesis historical account of Joseph where many people made terrible decisions with some good ones thrown in, but God, made everything work together to good purpose and save Jacob and his family from a killer famine.

How to Come to Terms with this Paradox

As a scientist, I am no stranger to paradoxes. The one that springs immediately to mind is the wave-particle duality that is particularly pronounced in small particles. One knows this paradox is intrinsic to particles. One also understands the quantum nature of very small particles is so different from what I encounter in the macroscopic world, that I should not be surprised the properties characteristic of the quantum realm appear as paradoxes to me.

The way a physicist handles these paradoxes is instructive. One knows when to treat an electron as a particle and when to treat it as a wave to solve a particular problem. For diffraction one treats an electron as a wave; for collisions as a particle.

Some years ago I read Roger Penrose’s book The Road to Reality. Much I did not understand but his explanation of the arrow of time always stayed with me. Of the four dimensions (x, y, z, t) only time is unidirectional, that is to say time always moves from the present to the future. Indeed, our world is what it is, because of time. The Second Law of Thermodynamics states that for any process, the entropy of the universe must increase. To go back in time is to return to a lower entropic state of the universe and so contradicts this law. As a human being, I am remorselessly and relentlessly bound in time. At one point in time I am deciding cereal or eggs for breakfast. Twenty minutes later that decision is irrevocably set in the past. Within time I made a decision.

Yet if I believe that God created everything including time, then I have to believe he exists outside of time as well as within it. This to me is the whole explanation why Free Will and Determinism can co-exist. Within time (the only realm I comprehend), real decisions are being made and have consequences. Outside of time, in some way there is some multidimensional present where all of infinity is seen (I want tot say simultaneously, but that would be a symptom of my incurable compulsion to always drag time back into God’s timeless realm).

This brings me to my final point. I can’t understand God’s Sovereignty without dragging time into his timeless realm and so making him responsible for all actions and destroying Free Will. I can’t understand his sovereignty, but at least I know why I can’t understand it.

As Keller points out, having free, meaningful choices and a sovereign God superintending all is the only way of avoiding paralysis on the one hand and passivity on the other. Like the scientist, I apply my imperfect models to the problem at hand. When I am making a decision, I decide knowing that this is my responsibility. When I have second thoughts and wonder if I my decision has been a huge mistake, I am confident that God in his sovereignty will make it work out, despite my flawed choices.

Whither Our Universities? Part 1

Is the sun setting on our universities?

Since high school, one way or another, I have been associated with universities. First as a student (undergraduate and graduate), then as a Postdoctoral Fellow, as a research collaborator, and also as an Adjunct Professor. I have also participated in academic pursuits such as writing and refereeing papers. Organic Chemistry was my focus and through that discipline I met many fine people.

A writer of futuristic fiction is concerned about where things are headed

As a writer of futuristic fiction, I am driven by “What if …” questions. Since universities have played such an instrumental role in our culture in molding the sequential generations, naturally enough, some of the “What if” questions deal with trends or potential trends I have observed in higher education.

In my novel, The Halcyon Dislocation, the movement and isolation of a hypothetical University of Halcyon to a parallel world sets up an experimental literary sandbox. One can ask the question, what would the university elites do if they had the opportunity to channel the thinking of their students in any direction they chose? What would they choose? How would they get there?

What would university elites choose if they could mold student thinking in any direction they wanted?

One of the problems that plagues science, indeed culture and politics as well is the question:

If I can do something, how do I determine if I should do that very thing?

The “can” is usually determined by data, experimentation, and collective scholarship, but the “shoulds” remain elusive since they depend on the question of objective right and wrong which is inaccessible to data and experimentation. In the absence of an objective right or wrong, the answer often becomes: “Because I have the power and I want to, I will do it and no one can stop me.”

The danger then, for universities, is the tendency to becoming factories of conditioned students rather than nurturing educated students who have learned to thoughtfully consider opposing points of view in humility and respect.

Becoming factories producing conditioned students, rather than educational institutions that enable students to thoughtfully consider different viewpoints with respect, is one of the dangers universities face

The antidote to this tendency to become ever more efficient conditioners of students as our manipulative skills and technology increase, is to make sure opposing voices (including religious voices) are not only allowed to speak, but are heard and considered. Free speech is the best safeguard against conditioned speech.

A Recent Example That Hits Close to Home

I know of Organic Chemistry Professor Tomas Hudlicky by his fine reputation. He wrote, and had accepted a paper in Angewandte Chemie (along with the Journal of the American Chemical Society, Angewandte Chemie is arguably one of the two best journals in chemistry). However, after the Twitterati ignited a Twitter storm (Twitter Gewitter?) everything changed for Professor Hudlicky, According to an article in the National Post by Peter Shawn Taylor, the accepted paper was withdrawn by Angewandte Chemie, the two referees were taken off the referees list (I’m sure as volunteers they have better things to do with their time) and the editor was suspended.

I respectfully suggest you read the whole paper, as I did, or at least read up to page 4, along with Note 2 which seemed to cause all the offense and then think about discussing the points Professor Hudlicky is making.

The text of the paper if it’s still available … Hudlicky Paper

Retraction Watch with resignations

Another Retraction Watch discussion

A blog by Jordan Peterson on this specific topic

In my view, the proper way to proceed is to have everyone, first read the paper, then present their best arguments in respectful discussion. A view or position that is not permitted to be questioned, is likely indefensible. If the case for the other side were compelling, why not make it? Is that not the mission of universities to encourage students to properly discuss opposing points of view with respect and leave the final convictions that come out of the discussion to the students? Apparently not.