"'I am not sure anybody will grasp why mortals make war,' van Rijn answered somberly. 'Maybe someday we will find a sophont species what is not fallen from grace, and they can tell us.'" (p. 258)
What? All rational species in a densely populated galaxy were created in a state of grace and all without exception, exercising their free will, fell from grace? Absurd. That has got to be an outmoded belief. The behavior of species can be explained entirely in terms of their natural biological evolution and social development - and might well encompass a wider range than Poul Anderson allows for. Also, van Rijn mystifies the causes of war. Such causes are comprehensible and we have an obligation to do something about them.
For a fictional universe in which only Earth and the near side of the Moon are fallen, see CS Lewis's The Cosmic Trilogy.
34 comments:
Kaor, Paul!
And I disagree with your comments here. At the very least, it is indisputable that the human race is indeed Fallen. Or, if you like, all too prone to folly, error, wickedness, etc. Anderson seems to have accepted what Old Nick said; because in Chapter 1 of THE GAME OF EMPIRE, we see Fr. Axor saying that all KNOWN oxygen breathing sophont races were prone to sin, error, death, etc. Lastly, we DON'T know what the situation is on other worlds, if intelligent races exists on them. They might be fallen, in the theological sense, or they might not be.
Happy New Year! Sean
Sean,
but being prone to folly etc does not necessarily mean that we have fallen into folly etc from an initially perfect state. Indeed, that seems unlikely. The evidence indicates that we have risen from animality.
Paul.
Kaor, Paul!
And this is where I have to disagree. I believe there is more to the human race than simple animality. Briefly, I believe the SUPERNATURAL exists.
Happy New Year!
Sean,
Of course there is more to us than animality. We have risen above it.
Paul.
Kaor, Paul!
Sometimes!
Happy New Year! Sean
I'm an atheist, but as G.K. Chesterton said, Original Sin is the only religious dogma that doesn't need to be taken on faith.
For that one, there's abundant empirical evidence.
Chesterton had a knack of thinking that he had settled a complicated argument with a single smart remark.
Kaor, Paul!
And Stirling is correct. The doctrine of Original Sin is AMPLY proven every day simply by watching a news show or reading a newspaper. The corruptible, flawed, and imperfect nature of all human beings, without exception, is why I don't believe in any of the Utopian fantasies so often peddled by political agitators and ideologues.
And I disagree with that apparent dismissal of Chesterton. Many of his "smart comments" are so powerful because of the shrewdness they contain. I recall how Poul Anderson, in one of his letters to me, wrote of how he loved Chesterton, despite his occasional disagreements.
Happy New Year! Sean
Sean,
But human imperfection does not prove that our first ancestors were created sinless but somehow sinned and that we have inherited their sinfulness.
Paul.
Kaor, Paul!
But I don't think Stirling was saying that, your first point, I mean. Otherwise he would not be an atheist. But he does believe Christians are right when we say we are all flawed, corruptible, imperfect, etc.
What all humans have inherited from the Fall is being prone to sin, error, folly, etc.
Ad astra! Sean
Sean,
But I am responding to Chesterton who believed, as you do here, that we have inherited sin and error from a primeval Fall. That is not proved by our experience of imperfection.
Paul.
Kaor, Paul!
I understand that, and that is one of our points of disagreement. But I was thinking more of how I thought Stirling understood Original Sin.
Ad astra! Sean
Sean,
But my point is not just that I don't believe in the Fall but that it is not proved by experience.
Paul.
Kaor, Paul!
Again, I have to disagree. Hard experience PROVES every day how Fallen mankind is.
Ad astra! Sean
Sean,
Experience shows that we are imperfect, not that:
our earliest ancestors were created sinless;
they nevertheless somehow sinned;
we have inherited sinfulness from them.
Paul.
Kaor, Paul!
I still disagree. MY argument is that here you are touching on matters of faith which cannot be dis-proven. Because you cannot know what might or might not have happened hundreds of thousands or even millions of years ago.
Ad astra! Sean
Sean,
But to say that something is not proved is not to say that it is disproved.
If something is a matter of faith, then it is not proved.
Paul.
Kaor, Paul!
And my point was you have not dis-proven the doctrine. And, unlike you, I allow for the supernatural, God, actively intervening in the world/universe. With the cures recorded at Lourdes being one example of that.
Ad astra! Sean
Sean,
But I am not trying to disprove a doctrine. I am responding to your claim that it was proven.
To claim that a proposition has been proved, then to fall back on the defense that it cannot be disproved is an elementary logical error.
Paul.
Kaor, Paul!
Then we seem to be misunderstanding each other. All I was trying to say, in the first place, was that the FALLENNESS of the human race, its imperfection, corruptibility, proneness to folly and wickedness, etc., can be demonstrated by simply watching or reading the daily news.
And that too seems to be Stirling's own view, btw.
Ad astra! Sean
Sean,
We are imperfect but where is the evidence that our first ancestors FELL from perfection?
Paul.
Chesterton was very insightful in some respects. In others he was blinded by wishful thinking.
Eg., he thought England could become predominantly rural again if there was land reform in the countryside -- which was just arithmetically impossible by his day.
And on a visit to the US, he praised Henry Ford for making a small, cheap car that ordinary people could buy.
But then he said the next step should be for the car to be built in small, autonomous workshops run by craftsmen, because he found the gigantic assembly-line factories repugnant.
He apparently didn't realize that while you -could- build a Model T workshop-style, it would cost so much only a rich man could afford it.
Kaor, Paul and Mr. Stirling!
Paul: Problem is, I accept the Biblical accounts of the creation and fall of man as evidence, which you do not. And the Catholic Church does NOT interpret those accounts in the crude and naive way of so many evangelical Protestants. Rather, the Church believes and teaches those stories were inspired by God to teach mankind theological doctrines about mankind's1 origins. And that these mysterious events happened many thousands of years ago. And in such a way that evolution also played a role in humanity's origins.
Mr. Stirling: Exactly! Chesterton failed to understand that the reasons why Henry Ford was able to bring down so drastically the cost of buying a car was thru skillful application of division of labor and economies of scale. That was why cars were no longer rich people's toys.
Ad astra! Sean
Sean,
But the question here was whether human imperfection proves the Fall.
Paul.
Kaor, Paul!
I believe our corruptibility and imperfection proves we are Fallen. And that means there was a Fall.
Ad astra! Sean
Sean,
But to have FALLEN into corruptibility and imperfection, our first ancestors would have had to have begun their existence incorruptible and perfect and where is the evidence for that?
Paul.
Kaor, Paul!
None, in forms you would accept. It is a matter of defined fain in the Catholic Church that the first man, whenever he lived long ago, was infused with a soul perfect and free of sin and error. But failed the test, whatever form it took, of patience, loyalty, and obedience to God.
Ad astra! Sean
Sean,
So our present imperfection ALONE is not sufficient to prove the Fall.
Paul.
Kaor, Paul!
Only for those who disbelieve in the existence of the supernatural. Since I do believe in that, I find the all too obvious folly, imperfection, and bungling of mankind to be evidence of that Fall.
Ad astra! Sean
Sean,
But there are other supernaturalist views. In Buddhism, not a Fall but beginningless greed, hate and delusion.
Paul.
Kaor, Paul!
And I don't agree the Buddhists are right.
Ad astra! Sean
Sean,
Neither do I but my only point here is that both beliefs are equally compatible with the fact of human imperfection which therefore does not prove the Fall.
Paul.
Kaor, Paul!
And I still disagree, because, to me, it's so patently OBVIOUS mankind is a Fallen race.
Ad astra! Sean
Sean,
It is obvious that we are imperfect but not that our ancestors FELL from perfection.
Paul.
Post a Comment