Outtakes 09.07.07

Outtakes — By on September 7, 2007 at 11:40 am

Hey, Big Spenders — The average Democrat in Congress sponsors more savings bills than the average Republican, says the National Taxpayers Union Foundation. An examination of the cost or savings of all bills introduced in Congress found that on average, a typical House Democrat sponsored 5 spending reduction bills, versus 2 for the typical Republican.
Unfortunately, each House savings bill was outnumbered over 20 to 1 by bills to increase spending. For each bill introduced in the Senate that would reduce federal spending, there were over 30 bills to raise spending.

°°°°°°

A Little More Jesus, A Little Less Amway? — Brian Hollar, from Thinking on the Margin, wonders, ” Whatever happened to Christians believing in the power of the Holy Spirit moving in the hearts of men? Why is it necessary to supplement the gospel with cheesy slogans and blatant manipulation?”
°°°°°°

The Geek King of Hip Hop — Move over Timbaland. The greatest hip-hop composer in music today is Ronald Jenkees, a brilliant, goofy white kid with wicked keyboarding skills.

Check out more on his YouTube Channel
°°°°°°


°°°°°°

Worldview in AcademiaInteresting news on our friend Nancy Pearcey, author of Total Truth. She recently accepted a position as Scholar for Worldview Studies with the rank of professor at the Center for University Studies at Philadelphia Biblical University (PBU), based in Langhorne, Pa. Since secular universities often offer programs in Queer Theory, Gender Studies, Post-Colonial Studies, etc., why don’t more Christian universities have programs in Worldview Studies?
°°°°°°

For the Mohler Fans — Alex Chediak has Al Mohler’s high school yearbook picture.
°°°°°°

In Memoriam — Sarah Flashing reflects on the legacy of Dr. D. James Kennedy.
°°°°°°

Game of the WeekBloxorz is an addictive, frustrating web based game that will challenge your spatial reasoning. It’s simple to play but difficult to master (I never got past the fourth level). (HT: collision detection)



  • http://www.sufficientscruples.com Kevin T. Keith

    why don’t more Christian universities have programs in Worldview Studies?
    ‘Cause it’s a made-up concept and kind of a stupid one?

  • http://www.evangelicaloutpost.com Joe Carter

    Kevin ‘Cause it’s a made-up concept and kind of a stupid one?
    First, what concepts are not “made-up”? Second, is it really any more stupid than Gender Studies, Queer Theory, Post-colonial Studies, Feminist Studies, Critical Race Theory, or any of the other programs that are “worldview” studies by other names?

  • Inquiring Minds

    Aside from being critical to understanding the thought process, reasoning and belief system of another person, I can’t begin to imagine what a study of Worldviews could possibly be worth.
    Conflicts & wars could be averted if we simply understood other worldviews, and closely examined our own.

  • http://www.sufficientscruples.com Kevin T. Keith

    What’s “made-up” about it is that it seems to be nothing more than “what people think”, as if that could be treated as a single subject. It’s a bogus subject given a name to make it sound substantive.
    You lump five completely different, actual bodies of knowledge into the same category, while implying that there are many “other programs that are ‘worldview’ studies by other names”. That same label was also widely used during the last election as if it was synomous with either, simply, “religion” or, expansively, “everything my candidate believes that makes me feel superior”. So in fact there’s nothing that is “worldview”, definitively – it’s made of of many, or possibly all, other subjects, apparently without discrimination. “Worldview” then becomes synomymous with “anything at all that I think is worth caring about”.
    Real scholarship doesn’t work that way. Real scholarship defines a problem, a cohesive body of related knowledge, or a general set of problems and methods, and investigates them. For any real subject, you can say reasonably clearly what is or isn’t part of that subject. “What people think about various stuff” isn’t a problem or a body of knowledge – it isn’t a real subject of study in itself. The history, oppression, and advancement of women or people of color, the definition and nature of sexual identities and behavior, or the nature and history of the occupations of some countries by some other countries are tractable and obviously important subjects for study. “Worldview”, meaning nothing, isn’t a subject for study.
    If you want to study religion, just study that. If you want to study politics, study that. If you want to study the fundamental assumptions that underly your religion or politics, study them. And if you want to study “the thought process, reasoning and belief system of another person”, study psychology, logic, or cognitive science. We already have well-founded bodies of knowledge and methods of scholarship for all those fields (none of which, aside from religion, are taught at PBU). But this fad of dignifying personal prejudices by calling them a “worldview”, and then dignifying that by pretending it’s an academic subject, is just yet another exercise in obfuscating knowledge by equating it with empty assertion.

  • http://www.newlibertycreation.com Matt Robison

    Currently on Level 7 of the game. Thanks for the recommendation.
    @Kevin,
    Just because you clearly don’t understand what all is possibly entailed in a “worldview” doesn’t make it worthless.
    “If you want to study religion, just study that. If you want to study politics, study that. If you want to study the fundamental assumptions that underly your religion or politics, study them. And if you want to study “the thought process, reasoning and belief system of another person”, study psychology, logic, or cognitive science.”
    But these are all subjects created from the foundation of a specific worldview. Plus, you separate religion and politics like they are completely unrelated entities, thus revealing a part of your worldview. Religion and politics were not always thought to be separate topics, nor are they by everyone even today.
    Studying the subjects you stated are all well and good, and not one is saying we should stop studying them. But what underlying assumption flow beneath the existence of the subjects themselves? What story brought them to existence?
    A worldview is what exists after you have stripped everything else away from a person. There are always certain foundational assumptions and stories that everyone has that create the filter through which they view absolutely everything. And you say the study of such is worthless? By no means.

  • ex-preacher

    So, are you conceding, Joe, that “worldview studies” is just as stupid as those other fields. We may have something to agree on.
    The problem here is that the worldview studies at most Christian universities wouldn’t really be about understanding other worldviews, but about learning to argue for and defend the “one true worldview.”

  • http://rustylopez.typepad.com/newcovenant Rusty

    Thanks, Joe. I just wasted half my afternoon on Bloxorz (but I did get to level 17).