Quick overview of current thoughts.
-Why is there not a strong Christian Left in the United States?
-What would a anthopology of Christianity look like? (See Gil Anidjar's article, On an Anthopology of Christianity)
- I would like to see a study on Christian subjectivities in the Age of Secularism. Someone write this, please.
- Could the Religious Right (read neoconservative) be pursuing, paradoxically, the same ends as the secular state, depite the fact that they advocate a stronger religious presence in the public sphere? What does this actually mean?
- How can Christian subjectivites be re-established after the surrender of Christian traditions and Christian reasoning to the modern secular state? How do these discourses lead us to the same ends? Can they be reclaimed?
Current readings:
Why I am not a Secularist by William E. Connolly
Secularism, Hermeneutics, and Empire - The Politics of Islamic Reformation by Saba Mahmood
Foucault on Freedom and Truth by Charles Taylor
Secularism by Gil Anidjar
Is Critique Secular by Talal Asad (On the Immanent Frame blog)
The Ethical Soundscape - Cassette Sermons and Islamic Counterpublics by Charles Hirschkind
Formations of the Secular - Christianity, Islam, Modernity by Talal Asad
Saturday, February 12, 2011
Saturday, January 29, 2011
What does Mubarak and Prayer have in common?
This past year has been an interesting year both in personal growth and in world events. The increasing violent rhetoric of the far right, neoconservative Tea Party and all of the anti-immigrant, anti-muslim xenophobic behavior, the shooting of Gabrielle Giffords, the Mosque controversy, the collapse of Lebanon's governenment - and all the twists and turns taking place at this moment, the Jasmine Revolution in Tunisia and the ousting of Zine el-Abidine Ben Ali, the student protests in Yemen, and finally the most recent Egyptian protests now covering a significant portion of the U.S.'s larger media outlets. So what is a person to do? How are we to act?
It seems to me that in a world (and if you look hard enough, they are there and these people do care, even if they are unaware of the implications of what they do) where Christian activism is growing, that there is a need for these groups of religiously sympathetic people to inform and reform how the church approaches politics and activism. Do we show solidarity with our Muslim, Christian, Jewish, and Athiest brothers and sisters fighting for their right to represent themselves how they best see fit en lieu of American interests. Or do we let dogmatic, divisive politicians and pundits determine how faith is lived out in a world that seems to be fighting more of an economic battle than a ideological one. Is faith alone in God enought to make a difference in this world? Does HE/SHE ask for more?
I wonder these things as the conversation the in the coffee shop is just audible enough for me to hear the discussions taking place about faith and God's grace and the news screen in front of me sends minute by minute updates about how people are taking their fate into their own hands and God only knows how this will end up panning out.
as for all of the frustration that builds in attempting to articulate myself, it should be apparent in the level of incoherency present in this entry.
It seems to me that in a world (and if you look hard enough, they are there and these people do care, even if they are unaware of the implications of what they do) where Christian activism is growing, that there is a need for these groups of religiously sympathetic people to inform and reform how the church approaches politics and activism. Do we show solidarity with our Muslim, Christian, Jewish, and Athiest brothers and sisters fighting for their right to represent themselves how they best see fit en lieu of American interests. Or do we let dogmatic, divisive politicians and pundits determine how faith is lived out in a world that seems to be fighting more of an economic battle than a ideological one. Is faith alone in God enought to make a difference in this world? Does HE/SHE ask for more?
I wonder these things as the conversation the in the coffee shop is just audible enough for me to hear the discussions taking place about faith and God's grace and the news screen in front of me sends minute by minute updates about how people are taking their fate into their own hands and God only knows how this will end up panning out.
as for all of the frustration that builds in attempting to articulate myself, it should be apparent in the level of incoherency present in this entry.
Friday, January 7, 2011
Possibly the most incoherent thing I have said yet
It is rather late and I cannot sleep. I do not think that it is not due to the noise of friends and roommates two rooms over laughing and enjoying their time together, or the coffee I drank 3 hours ago, nor do I think it is the fact that my mind is processing the pages of books that I just read and attempted to comprehend. I think, rather, that this sleeplessness, this existential mental-wandering, is derived more from a spiritual state of unrest as I attempt to understand the world around me, the beliefs I grew up with (and have interpreted and reinterpreted), and the role of the self in a society (that I do not wish to embrace but yet cannot and will not abandon in sheer dismissal). There are a few things that have been rather important to my thoughts lately, whether they make this entry cogent or continuous with my previous statements does not really interest me.
Now, I have never been an art critic and I have probably dismissed more art as pointless than I have appreciated, but their are two artists (but I will only briefly discuss one) that evoke certain emotional dispositions within me that I feel are worth mentioning: Andrew Wyeth and Salvador Dali. I know very little of these two artists and their work, but I have had memorable experiences with seeing both of their exhibits at the High Museum here in Atlanta.
Recently, upon visiting the Dali exhibit, two things srtuck me as important. First, the term "nuclear mysticism" and its understanding by Dali as an expression of the existence of God through nuclear physics and Catholicism. Second, the "discontinuity of matter" in which Dali expresses that in drawing a table artists are more aptly portraying the world by drawing said table as composed of millions of tiny flies as opposed to drawing it as one continuous piece of matter.
Is it possible that God exists in these two statements? Is it absurd to ask what these two statements tell us about our modern sensibilities of rational enquirey, actual lived experience, and the secular/religious binary? Now, I don't really know what I am trying to achieve in this journal entry, nor do am I really aware of the possiblity of answers that could emerge. I am more interested in the profound understanding of God espoused by Dali in light of what I would view as possibly constested understandings of art, modernity, and artistic interpretations of society, culture, and God.
In the end, I am no art critic and I am no theologian. But I am interested in what we can learn from both.
Now, I have never been an art critic and I have probably dismissed more art as pointless than I have appreciated, but their are two artists (but I will only briefly discuss one) that evoke certain emotional dispositions within me that I feel are worth mentioning: Andrew Wyeth and Salvador Dali. I know very little of these two artists and their work, but I have had memorable experiences with seeing both of their exhibits at the High Museum here in Atlanta.
Recently, upon visiting the Dali exhibit, two things srtuck me as important. First, the term "nuclear mysticism" and its understanding by Dali as an expression of the existence of God through nuclear physics and Catholicism. Second, the "discontinuity of matter" in which Dali expresses that in drawing a table artists are more aptly portraying the world by drawing said table as composed of millions of tiny flies as opposed to drawing it as one continuous piece of matter.
Is it possible that God exists in these two statements? Is it absurd to ask what these two statements tell us about our modern sensibilities of rational enquirey, actual lived experience, and the secular/religious binary? Now, I don't really know what I am trying to achieve in this journal entry, nor do am I really aware of the possiblity of answers that could emerge. I am more interested in the profound understanding of God espoused by Dali in light of what I would view as possibly constested understandings of art, modernity, and artistic interpretations of society, culture, and God.
In the end, I am no art critic and I am no theologian. But I am interested in what we can learn from both.
Saturday, December 11, 2010
Just cause you feel it, doesn't mean its there
"Great are the works of the Lord; they are pondered by all who delight in them."
-Psalm 111:2
Its a difficult situation to be in. The space between two spaces. I have started to wonder if this in-limbo-position is precisely where I am supposed to find myself. I think that between two traditions, and I don't mean traditions in the sense that is typically understood, lies the truth. To borrow from MacIntyre, a tradition is a present reality rooted in a past action that is teleological precisely because it has a future. I take this to be the state of mental dispositions that limit and simultaneously de-limit all aspects of action/knowledge rooted in an authorizing power. It's discursive.
It is here that I find myself. In between the in-between. In every sense of the word, I believe myself to be a skeptic. Possibly a mystic as well. God, whose words and actions I ponder in indirect ways, the abstraction of being, I think, presides in this space. This space between traditions acting and partaking in aspects of the two, but also existing precisely in the traditional interaction, this space between two modes of thought.
I call this intercultural spirituality. Please excuse the term. I am aware of the history of colonization that has authorized the present usage of 'culture' or 'civilization' in its exploits, but I use the term for the lack of a better one. Indeed, this 'intercultural spirituality' is a mystical point to be in, but nonetheless, I think this is precisely where I am to be. Moving between and to the limits of discursive knowledge, I find myself skeptical of the types of discourse that authorize our daily thoughts and actions, knowing full well that I am inherently limited. Perhaps in this limitation I am free. Remember, this is neither logical or illogical. It simply is - beyond the "shackles of reason."
Maybe truly being free is the ability to choose your own limitations. And in that sense, Perhaps I am free.
-Psalm 111:2
Its a difficult situation to be in. The space between two spaces. I have started to wonder if this in-limbo-position is precisely where I am supposed to find myself. I think that between two traditions, and I don't mean traditions in the sense that is typically understood, lies the truth. To borrow from MacIntyre, a tradition is a present reality rooted in a past action that is teleological precisely because it has a future. I take this to be the state of mental dispositions that limit and simultaneously de-limit all aspects of action/knowledge rooted in an authorizing power. It's discursive.
It is here that I find myself. In between the in-between. In every sense of the word, I believe myself to be a skeptic. Possibly a mystic as well. God, whose words and actions I ponder in indirect ways, the abstraction of being, I think, presides in this space. This space between traditions acting and partaking in aspects of the two, but also existing precisely in the traditional interaction, this space between two modes of thought.
I call this intercultural spirituality. Please excuse the term. I am aware of the history of colonization that has authorized the present usage of 'culture' or 'civilization' in its exploits, but I use the term for the lack of a better one. Indeed, this 'intercultural spirituality' is a mystical point to be in, but nonetheless, I think this is precisely where I am to be. Moving between and to the limits of discursive knowledge, I find myself skeptical of the types of discourse that authorize our daily thoughts and actions, knowing full well that I am inherently limited. Perhaps in this limitation I am free. Remember, this is neither logical or illogical. It simply is - beyond the "shackles of reason."
Maybe truly being free is the ability to choose your own limitations. And in that sense, Perhaps I am free.
Friday, November 5, 2010
Rescuing myself from cynicism
This update cannot bear the burden of summarizing all of the recent developments in my life since I have last updated. I can confidently say that they have been many and they have been vast, but to that end, I will stop myself from carrying on with the subject.
What I really want to adress is partly vary personal and individual and the same time something I percieve to be very pertinent to the community of people that I would call the Christian community but maybe even on a less parochial scale that of religious communities in general. The article that has encouranged this endeavor is "Studying My Movement: Social Science Without Cynicism" in the Internation Journal of Middle Eastern Studies 40 (2008) by Abdelwahab El-Affindi.
This article, written by a Muslim, is about the ventures of social science into the realm of Middle Eastern studies and the metaphysical/historical/discourse-oriented ramifications of this endeavor with all of its problems and illuminations.
"Having lost their original faith, but not attained a new one, they advocate an agnostic pluralism: let us all drop our claim to the Turth and accept the multiplicity of "truths": let us camp here, over these multiple "planes of activity and praxis," which are "not one topography commanded by a geographical and historical vision."" Here I find myself recalling the work done by Talal Asad and William Connelly, calling into question the underlying themes of modernity and secularism, and hence advocating a paradigmatic pluralism that gives credence to multiple truths. Although, I think that religion was largely the victim of such claims, I am not sure that I disagree, essentially, with this claim. "We are all for pluralism and the self-critical attittude underlying it. I certainly took great careto present my study in such a self-critical mode," says the author of this article. I feel that within the Christian tradition, many have claimed to have a monoply on the truth, a hegemony over interpretation, but few have been willing to be as self-critical as the author has claimed of himself and his own endeavors into the intellectual sphere. While one could attribute this to a feeling of anti-intellectualism current within modern and populist understandings of Christianity and the Christian tradition (and I admit this is largely only applicable to my own understanding in the Western world).
I feel the same pressures in my own faith as the author outlines here. The intellectual/spiritual balance between self-criticism and "rational" logocentric western enlightment ideals as well as that of differring values and systematic approached to understanding life, metaphysics and the like. To be apart of this critical shift is important, but to view this as the author says, "to be apart of this as Muslims."
I agrue the same. To be apart of this world, or as the cliche goes, in this world, we must articulate outselves in a way relevant to recent intellectual endeavours while simultaneously not giving into the hegemony of interpretation, leaving roomn for us to do this as whatever it is that we may be, or ascribe to.
What I really want to adress is partly vary personal and individual and the same time something I percieve to be very pertinent to the community of people that I would call the Christian community but maybe even on a less parochial scale that of religious communities in general. The article that has encouranged this endeavor is "Studying My Movement: Social Science Without Cynicism" in the Internation Journal of Middle Eastern Studies 40 (2008) by Abdelwahab El-Affindi.
This article, written by a Muslim, is about the ventures of social science into the realm of Middle Eastern studies and the metaphysical/historical/discourse-oriented ramifications of this endeavor with all of its problems and illuminations.
"Having lost their original faith, but not attained a new one, they advocate an agnostic pluralism: let us all drop our claim to the Turth and accept the multiplicity of "truths": let us camp here, over these multiple "planes of activity and praxis," which are "not one topography commanded by a geographical and historical vision."" Here I find myself recalling the work done by Talal Asad and William Connelly, calling into question the underlying themes of modernity and secularism, and hence advocating a paradigmatic pluralism that gives credence to multiple truths. Although, I think that religion was largely the victim of such claims, I am not sure that I disagree, essentially, with this claim. "We are all for pluralism and the self-critical attittude underlying it. I certainly took great careto present my study in such a self-critical mode," says the author of this article. I feel that within the Christian tradition, many have claimed to have a monoply on the truth, a hegemony over interpretation, but few have been willing to be as self-critical as the author has claimed of himself and his own endeavors into the intellectual sphere. While one could attribute this to a feeling of anti-intellectualism current within modern and populist understandings of Christianity and the Christian tradition (and I admit this is largely only applicable to my own understanding in the Western world).
I feel the same pressures in my own faith as the author outlines here. The intellectual/spiritual balance between self-criticism and "rational" logocentric western enlightment ideals as well as that of differring values and systematic approached to understanding life, metaphysics and the like. To be apart of this critical shift is important, but to view this as the author says, "to be apart of this as Muslims."
I agrue the same. To be apart of this world, or as the cliche goes, in this world, we must articulate outselves in a way relevant to recent intellectual endeavours while simultaneously not giving into the hegemony of interpretation, leaving roomn for us to do this as whatever it is that we may be, or ascribe to.
Monday, August 23, 2010
I swear to God that he'll surf
Time creeps up on you, as does responsibility. Today my best friend left to go to school in California. A month and a half ago, I was in Lebanon, unaware that this day would be coming. Now I am aware that I am obviously not in Lebanon, nor is he here, but on his way there. My mother summed it up best in her recent text message to me - "Bittersweet :-("
So now the question remains. Why do we allow time to assail us? Why do we acquiesce our lives over to the violent but often wonderful passage of time. Most moments are over before we are cognizant of their being here - I am self aware. And I, too, regret that fact now and more than likely will again soon as my emotional disposition will soon change causing me to evaluate and become aware of what I have lost, gained, and forgotten.
But I do remember as well, and I smile, and I congratulate Ryan on his new future for the next two years. I am nonetheless excited for him as he experiences new things and wakes up in California to a far away but not necessarily distant life.
So now the question remains. Why do we allow time to assail us? Why do we acquiesce our lives over to the violent but often wonderful passage of time. Most moments are over before we are cognizant of their being here - I am self aware. And I, too, regret that fact now and more than likely will again soon as my emotional disposition will soon change causing me to evaluate and become aware of what I have lost, gained, and forgotten.
But I do remember as well, and I smile, and I congratulate Ryan on his new future for the next two years. I am nonetheless excited for him as he experiences new things and wakes up in California to a far away but not necessarily distant life.
Tuesday, August 17, 2010
Music doesn't treat me like it used to
Its really difficult to articulate the way I feel. At least on most days. I wish everything wasn't so cryptic. Is it possible to master the mind only using the mind? Is it possible to shed this self-awareness in which I move and locate myself and my emotional responses? Everything I feel is paired with an alternative emotion or a more global idea or desire. I think about myself then I think about my culture. I think about agency (do I have any?) and determination. I haven't read enough to know what I feel and if that feeling is worth knowing. Maybe everything I do is justified by an emotional response to that action or question or combination of the two.
What's worth knowing in this world? Is it worth thinking? Is it worth not thinking?
I want to know what that emptiness in my head is the result of, or lack thereof.
"getting a grip on letting go..."
Existence is more complicated that I assumed it would be. I can't blame "them" because they are just as susceptible.
"blithar blithar blithar"
What's worth knowing in this world? Is it worth thinking? Is it worth not thinking?
I want to know what that emptiness in my head is the result of, or lack thereof.
"getting a grip on letting go..."
Existence is more complicated that I assumed it would be. I can't blame "them" because they are just as susceptible.
"blithar blithar blithar"
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)