Sister Mary Peter and Cecilia help Maria Pilar

As the weather warms up, we are watching the snow and ice on our ponds, streams, and roads melt away. Last month, right before the rink closed, we took the entire school ice skating (at a “real rink”). You will notice that this is a very practical lesson in physics! Here are a few pictures.

Grand Prize - Luke Bednar - Grade Seven

For students in grades seven through twelve, the first half of the school year carries the excitement (and anxiety!) of getting ready for the year’s Science Fair. Each science project includes a research paper, experiment, oral presentation, and presentation board upon which each student is graded (usually this is most of the second quarter science and research grades). At the public portion of the project, the Fair itself, the students are judged by Fair judges (pun intended). This year the junior-high students make an excellent showing. The winners are:

Grand Prize: Luke Bednar (grade seven) – Duct Tape

First Place: James Bednar (grade ten) – Electromagnets

Second Place: Maria Bosonetto (grade eight) – The Effects of Sugar

Third Place: Samuel Bednar (grade ten) – Left Brain/Right Brain

Congratulations! Other interesting projects covered hair color and IQ, the comparative merits of specific chainsaws, persuasion, kinesiology, pain tolerance in men vs women, the effect of video games on vital signs, and

Table of contents for Hands-on Civics Lesson

1. American Civics and Economy (Current)
2. Letter to President Obama – On Life
3. Letter to President Obama – On Climate Change
4. Letter to President Obama – On Education

John McCann - Class of 2010

February 11, 2010

Dear Mr. President,

I am a nineteen-year-old citizen who is imploring you to note an issue that is holding back this great nation from reaching our fullest potential. I can’t tell you how glad I am to hear you say that you look at man-made climate change with scientific consideration. With scientific backing, one can reaffirm that his opinion can be proved; and people who base their opinions off of scientific proof are wise indeed.

The issue that I feel needs noting is that man-made climate change isn’t scientific. Opposed to the popular belief, many reputable scientists state that the amount of carbon created by man’s technology is minute compared to the massive amounts being emitted from the planet’s wild life and oceans (not to mention the fact that carbon doesn’t affect the temperature; the temperature affects the carbon). These facts and other scientific evidence against man-made climate change are stated in Martin Durkin’s “The Great Global Warming Swindle.”

The fact that such a scientifically shaky theory of man-made climate change is getting so much credibility, publicity, and funds is ridiculous. And if this foolishness were going on when we were strong and not twelve trillion dollars in debt, it would be just that foolishness. But, sadly, we are far from being strong; we are twelve trillion dollars in debt and still digging. What I propose is that you revaluate your view on man-made climate change and question the reliability of this “irrefutable scientific evidence.”

I’m sure you can see the folly of this current state of affairs. There is absolutely no reason why we should let these alarmists keep stealing from the people of this great nation by use of fear. You can inform the people of the real impending danger of our economic standing and re-channel the “fear money” that is currently being put toward man-made climate change and put it toward the real threat. Thank you for your time.

Sincerely,

[signed]
John McCann
15 Morgan Road
Richmond, NH 0347

Variations of this letter were sent to NH Representative Barbara Richardson, NH Senator Molly Kelly, US Congressman Paul Hodes, US Senator Jeanne Shaheen, and US Senator Judd Gregg

Received 3/15/10 – A handwritten, handmade card with the following quote from Thomas Jefferson: “In matter of style, swim with the current; in matter of principle, stand like a rock.”

3/13/10

Dear John,

Thank you for your thoughtful letter. I respect your views on global warming. I am concerned about what is the result of the melting glaciers, etc. in whatever is the way in which these changes are occurring. In any event I do believe our dependence on coal burning plants for much of our energy is not helpful for us and our planet. I hope we will develop more environmental-friendly sources of power.

You sound like a very thoughtful young man and I wish you success in your future.

Sincerely,

[signed] Barbara Richardson

Received 4/2010

March 17, 2010

Dear John,

Thank you for contacting my office about climate change legislation. I appreciate hearing from you about this critical issue.

It is time to get America running on clean energy. We have a historic opportunity to transform our economy and become a global leader in clean energy technologies. Reducing the amount of greenhouse gas emitted in our country, in concert with the global community, is the only way we will begin to curb the negative consequences of climate change and drive our transition to a clean energy economy. It is time to act.

Confronting climate change is an environmental and economic imperative for our state. In New Hampshire climate change is already altering the beautiful landscape of our state, and scientists have documented warmer winters with less snowfall and the earlier arrival of spring. As a state where tourism is our second largest industry, we simply can’t afford to lose our ability to offer snowmobiling, hunting and fishing, or our first-rate skiing — a $650 million annual industry alone.

As we consider legislation establishing a clean energy incentive program for our economy, keeping household and business energy costs low is a priority for me. I support a market-based climate program that keeps costs to consumers low, incentivizes clean energy technologies and makes meaningful reductions in carbon emissions. An economy-wide, clean energy incentive program is the best way to achieve significant carbon reductions. Most importantly, this program will drive innovation in American-made clean energy technologies like wind, solar and biomass, creating American jobs and helping to reduce our dependence on foreign oil. The Senate is still working on the details of its energy and climate bill that we hope to bring to the Senate floor later in the year.

New Hampshire is already leading the way in market-based clean energy incentives as a member of the Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative (RGGI). RGGI is a regional effort to reduce carbon emissions from power plants. We must continue to build nationally on the important work of this regional program to restore our global leadership and get America running on clean energy.

Thank you again for sharing your thoughts with me, and please do not hesitate to contact my office with any future concerns.

Sincerely,

[signed] Jeanne Shaheen

United States Senator

Received April 22, 2010

April 23, 2010

Dear Mr. McCann,

Thank you for contacting me about the scientific evidence of our planet’s changing climate. I truly appreciate hearing from you, and I am working hard to stand up for New Hampshire’s interests in Congress.

Since 2007, when the diverse panel of scientists on the Intergovernmental Panel on Global Climate Change published their report, countless other peer-reviewed scientific studies have supported their finding that greenhouse gas emissions are warming our planet. In fact, many studies in recent years show that greenhouse gas emissions by humans are warming our planet even faster than what was previously predicted. If we do not take action to prevent the most extreme effects of global warming, the results could be catastrophic to our public health and safety, as well as our global economy.

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) recently completed a detailed scientific analysis, and found that six greenhouse gases “threaten the public health and welfare of current and future generations.” More information on this study and finding are available on the EPA’s website at http://www.epa.gov/climatechange/endangerment.html.

Our nations’ defense and intelligence agencies have also recognized the scientific evidence of global warming, and are taking action to understand the threat it poses to our national security. The Department of Defense will include an assessment of security threats posed by climate change as part of its Quadrennial Defense Review, to be published in 2010. The National Intelligence Council has already issued a series of reports entitled “The Impact of Climate Change to 2030.” These reports can be found at http://www.dni.gov/nic/special_climate2030.html. I hope you find this information useful.

On June 26, 2009, the House of Representatives passed H.R. 2454, the American Clean Energy and Security Act. This bill would set a declining cap on greenhouse gas emissions and make significant investments in creating clean, renewable energy in the United States. Transitioning to these new energy sources will cerate new jobs in the U.S. and reduce our dependence on foreign oil. This bill is now awaiting action in the Senate. Please know that I will keep your views in mind as this bill moves through the legislative process.

I encourage you to continue to contact me about the issues that are important to you. Please feel free to visit my website at www.hodes.house.gov where you can share your ideas with me, learn about the services I can provide to you, and sign up for my periodic e-mail updates on what I am doing to help New Hampshire.

Sincerely,

[signed] Paul W. Hodes

Member of Congress

Received 5/3/10

The White House

Washington, DC 20500

April 29, 2010

Dear Friend,

Thank you for contacting me. I appreciate hearing your perspective on global warning. Few challenges facing our Nation are more urgent. The facts are clear, and the science is beyond dispute. We know that we cannot keep burning fossil fuels and adding greenhouse gases to the atmosphere without consequence. If left unchecked, our continued dependence on these sources of energy will further weaken our economy and threaten our national security.

We are addressing the climate crisis first and foremost by pursuing a clean energy future that makes our country safer and more prosperous. The American Recovery and Reinvestment Act puts Americans to work weatherizing homes and buildings, doubling our supply of renewable energy, and advancing scientific research. My 2010 Budget makes further investments in a clean energy economy that will create good-paying jobs through funding for wind and solar power, advanced biofuels [sic], clean coal, and fuel-efficient cars. In addition, my Administration is pursuing comprehensive legislation to move toward energy independence and prevent the worst consequences of global warming while creating incentives to make clean energy profitable in America.

The response to global warning, however, must be global. Just as we work to reduce our own emissions, we must forge solutions that ensure every country does its part.

Our choices as individuals and as a Nation will ultimately define the world we leave to our children. To learn more about my plan to act boldly on global warning and meet our obligation to future generations, I encourage you to join me online at: www.whitehouse.gov/energy-and-environment. Thank you again for writing.

Sincerely,

[signed or stamped] Barack Obama

Can you tell why the Sisters named this poor little bird "Sine Fine"?

We are getting another foot (and a half?) of snow . . . And I just told someone the other day that it felt like April!

This would be a good time to introduce you to our latest guests. Behind the Sisters’ refectory is a little deck and garden the Brothers built for us years ago. Someone called it our “Portuguese pavilion.” We have many visitors to the “pavilion,” especially when the bird feeders are full or we’ve put out stale bread. Our winter guests include Blue Jays, Chickadees, Hairy and Downy Woodpeckers, Red-breasted Woodpeckers (Who named them? They don’t have any red on their breasts, only on their heads . . ), Tufted Titmice (Is the plural of Titmouse “Titmice”?), red squirrels, gray squirrels — they have quite a party outside! Several of the classrooms look out into the garden: Science class is never limited to one period!

What a prize!

The Sisters' garden during a December storm -- the snow is now three times as high.

Another chickadee -- not "Sine Fine" -- for comparison

by Brother Francis Maluf, M.I.C.M.

The "Little Boys'" Tug of War - Field Day 2008

Now in an attempt to determine the influence of mathematics on the mind of a Christian, it would be folly to ignore the fact that after twenty centuries of Christian living, it is impossible to name one single patron saint for mathematics. There are Catholics indeed who occupied themselves considerably with mathematics and as far as we know kept the faith; but I know of no mathematician whose faith burned so brilliantly as to earn him a place among the stars of sanctity. Nor is this a mere coincidence, for any one of us can look into his own mind to find that there is no other kind of human knowledge or human experience which offers less in terms of value for the Christian message than mathematics. Almost all that one needs in the way of mathematics in order to learn all of Holy Scripture and all the Doctors of the Church, does not exceed the ability to count up to a thousand and to distinguish between a vertical and a horizontal line. Whatever it is you talk about in mathematics, it is never anything you can carry over to your meditations, or employ in your prayers; it gives you no courage in your moments of despair, and no consolation in your loneliness.

In the field of philosophy, mathematics has always been fertile grounds for sophistry. There is hardly any other intellectual interest which has contributed more to confuse men about fundamental truths regarding God, man, and the universe, than mathematics. Just to mention the names of Thales, Pythagoras, Plato, Descartes, Spinoza, Whitehead and Russell, would suffice to convince one even slightly acquainted with the history of thought about the great number of minds that were deceived by the mirage of mathematics, and misled to accept fraudulent substitutes for the saving truth. I believe that an unprejudiced consideration of the nature of mathematics and of the nature of its objects would reveal clearly that all these charges leveled against the mathematical mind are rooted in the very nature and essence of things.

The other side of the "Little Boys'" Tug of War - Field Day 2008

But what kind of a science is mathematics? Is it a practical science which envisages the achievement of a good, or a speculative science which envisages the attainment of truth? A practical science, like medicine or ethics, would be eliminated by the elimination of the corresponding good. For example, if men were indifferent to health and its opposite there would be no criterion for distinguishing between a right prescription and a wrong one, and consequently, medicine would cease to be a science. In a similar way, if men per absurdum were suddenly to become neutral to the attainment of happiness or its opposite, that would be the end of ethics. But what good, if ceasing, would determine the end of mathematics? None whatever, for the simple reason that mathematics prescinds from all good and all value. Mathematics talks the language of a speculative science. It utters propositions which must be either true or false. Now a proposition is true or false depending on whether it is or is not in conformity with reality. Just as a practical science envisages a good to be achieved, which good functions as the criterion for right and wrong precepts in that science, so a speculative science considers some part or aspect of reality, which stands as the measure of truth and falsehood in that science. If there were no stars there would be no astronomy;’ and theology would be sheer nonsense if God did not exist. But what part of reality would destroy mathematics by being eliminated? What does the mathematician talk about? Is the object of mathematics a creature or a creator? Is it a substance or an accident? Is it something actual or merely potential? Is it changing or changeless? Temporal or eternal? Material or spiritual? Tangible or intangible? If one were to compose an inventory of all the subsisting realities of the whole universe, including God, the angels, men, animals, plants and minerals, would the objects of mathematics be on this list?

A proposition is true or false depending on whether it is or is not in conformity with reality.

Am I asking too many questions? Well, here are a few answers whose reasons will either be supplied later, or be left to the reader to discover for himself. Mathematics is a speculative science whose value can only be in the practical order. It has no speculative value, because it does not convey any essential knowledge about any subsisting reality. It is not contemplative knowledge and therefore not essentially good for man, because it occupies the intellect with objects which the will cannot love. It is knowledge which does not proceed from understanding nor does it resolve in wisdom. It does not proceed from understanding, because the mathematical expression of any reality, never conveys any understanding of it. It may however convey the means for the control of that reality. You are not one inch closer to the penetration of the mystery of light and color when you know the number of Angstroms in each of the colors of the spectrum; nor about  the nature, cause, or purpose of gravity when you resolve its laws into mathematical formulas. And it does not resolve in wisdom, because neither is mathematics concerned with the First Cause, nor does it lead to the First Cause. The manner by which mathematics deals with its objects abstracts completely from any dependence upon God, and as a matter of fact, attributes to these objects a species of eternity and turns them into quasi divinities completely independent in themselves. This explains the autonomous nature of mathematics, according to which, left to itself, it never leads to anything non-mathematical. A mathematician might be led to think about God by an accidental non-mathematical reason, but never from the very needs of mathematics.

. . . Mathematics [is not] concerned with the First Cause, nor does it lead to the First Cause. The manner by which mathematics deals with its objects abstracts completely from any dependence upon God, and as a matter of fact, attributes to these objects a species of eternity and turns them into quasi divinities completely independent in themselves.

Two members of the Class of 2003 - both are now married and they each have a boy and a girl.

As for the object of mathematics, it is not a physical entity but a mental entity; it is not real but ideal. There is nowhere in the world, outside of the mind of a mathematician, a point without dimensions, a line without width or thickness, or a square root of minus one. But these fictions of the mind are founded on reality, and their foundation consists of the accident of quantity and its properties and relations. Arithmetic is founded on discontinuous quantities or multitudes; geometry on continuous quantities or magnitudes; while algebra is founded on abstract quantity considered generically, prescinding from whether it is number or magnitude and therefore potentially capable both of an arithmetical as well as of a geometrical interpretation. Other mathematical objects, more distantly removed from this real foundation of mathematics, are rooted in these simpler elements and in the relations which hold among them. Having experienced the three dimensions of bodies in space and having represented these three dimensions by the three variables of an algebraical equation, nothing prevents the mind from creating the fiction of a space corresponding to an algebraical equation of four variables – hence four-dimensional space.

But what do we know about this accident of quantity, on which is founded, proximately or remotely every object of mathematics? We learn from philosophy that quantity is an accident of material sub-. stances, and that in contrast with the accident of quality, quantity manifests the material and not the formal aspect of these substances. Therefore the real foundation of mathematics is found in the material aspect of material things. Further, an accident when conceived as an accident always brings you back to its substance; but in mathematics the accident of quantity is conceived as if it were a substance. Further, a material substance concretely considered, has a nature through which this substance moves to the attainment of an end, but the mathematician considers quantity as a substantialized material accident devoid of any principle of change and abstracted from any movement to attain an end. The concrete material substance manifests itself through its sensible qualities by means of which it is known, but the object of mathematics, without being a spiritual substance like an angel, prescinds from all sensible qualities and can be known only by the intellect and not by the senses. Hence we have the apparent paradox that while the only foundation for the mathematical object is the material aspect of material things, still mathematics represents its object such as matter could neither be nor be known. For matter is nothing but a principle of change, while mathematics prescinds from change; and matter can only be known through the senses while mathematics prescinds from sensibility.

The object of mathematics is therefore an accident parading as a substance, a material reality pretending to be immaterial, an ideal entity which poses for something real. At the basis of all these antinomies is the fact that mathematics arises only when an intellectual mind, directs the light of its spiritual intelligence, not for the purpose of contemplating being, but for the purpose of controlling potency. The mathematical object is the shadow that matter cast on spirit. For when spirit knows spirit, there is not even the foundation for mathematics; when material cognition (sensation) knows material things, the objects of mathematics cannot arise; even when a spiritual being knows matter contemplatively it understands a material substance through its form and its qualities. It is only when a spiritual being concerns itself with matter and for the purpose of sheer control that mathematics finally finds its grounds.

But how about the truth in mathematics? If the objects of mathematics are mental entities (entia rationis) what is it that determines the truth or falsehood of a mathematical proposition? What reality stands as the measure to the judgment of the mind? In the classical branches, arithmetic and geometry, the foundation in reality was close enough to preclude any statements that are not justified by the real properties of multitudes and magnitudes. But as mathematics branches out and develops into newer mathematics, and higher mathematics, and purer mathematics, that control becomes less and less until finally the mind remains its own measure. Consistency and not conformity becomes the touchstone of validity.

In the classical branches, arithmetic and geometry, the foundation in reality was close enough to preclude any statements that are not justified by the real properties of multitudes and magnitudes. But as mathematics branches out and develops into newer mathematics, and higher mathematics, and purer mathematics, that control becomes less and less until finally the mind remains its own measure. Consistency and not conformity becomes the touchstone of validity.

Apart from mathematics, there used to be three other distinct types of knowledge: physical, logical, and ethical. All three led ultimately to God, the physical sciences under the aspect of Ultimate Cause; the logical sciences by way of the Prime Truth; and the ethical sciences by way of the Supreme Good. But in mathematics, the mind reigns supreme, lord of all it surveys. The mind finds in itself a sufficient cause for the kind of being the mathematical entity enjoys. It is the only ultimate measure for the truth of its judgments. It prescinds completely from the aspect of goodness. Of all the intellectual pursuits, mathematics alone does not lead to God.

A local wolf spider

It is like the web of a spider, it proceeds from the very substance of the spider and ends up being its own jail. It gets more involved and more intricate the more it is extended, and finally, when the web is intricate enough, the new threads do not have to measure up to any real independent distances of walls or furniture, for when the new-thrown thread fails to meet a point of support, it sticks on another thread of the same fabric.

From the spider of mathematics, may God deliver us.

[Editor's note: This article was originally published in From The Housetops back in the 1940's. Brother Francis has been teaching mathematics longer than any subject (for more than eighty years); he certainly knows its uses. However, in this article, Brother points out what happens when mathematics becomes a monism.]

Nothing could be more distinctive of the age in which we live than the overpowering prominence of mathematics. All through the Catholic centuries, arithmetic and geometry constituted all the mathematics that an educated Christian was asked to learn. Even these two subjects were treated from a more contemplative point of view, which made them far more harmonious with other liberal studies. Arithmetic consisted in the study of the properties of numbers; geometry in the study of shapes and figures. When not overdone, and when counterbalanced by the proper correctives from the other types of knowledge, geometry and arithmetic, as they used to be taught, cultivated a few desirable virtues of the mind like clarity and precision, and sharpened the mind for the perception of harmony, rhythm, and pattern in the study of nature and of Holy Scripture. But even then, many saints and sages warned against the excessive preoccupation with such studies, and especially against the seductive clarity of mathematics; for it is not enough for the mind to be accurate and clear; we are bound to ask “accurate and clear about what?” Since in mathematics accuracy and clarity are achieved at the price of the reality and the goodness of the object, it is a danger of the mathematical mind to continue to sacrifice reality and goodness for the sake of clarity in every other field in which man must seek and find the truth.

This problem is getting too long!

But in our time, education is overwhelmed by mathematics and on more than one score. For, while a contemplative interest in the properties of shapes and numbers is almost completely extinct, an illiberal and utterly inhuman form of mathematics dominates the years of learning of our boys and girls, almost completely from the very first year of the primary school to the very last year of college. In place of arithmetic and geometry, whose relation to reality is definite and understandable, there is now an indefinite confusion of branches which go by the name of mathematics, the nature of whose objects nobody understands! Such topics as topology, non-Eudidean geometry, Boolean algebra, transfinite numbers, projective geometry; not to speak of other more recognizable subjects like algebra, trigonometry, integral calculus, vector analysis and the theory of equations. These new subjects are not only more confusing but much more difficult to acquire, and therefore much less likely to leave the mind at leisure for other liberal studies. But the predominance of mathematics today is not restricted to those courses which go by its name, because mathematics, in some form or other, in matter or in method, has crept into every other corner of the curriculum. According to the modern positivistic conception, mathematics and not wisdom is considered as the prototype of science. In subjects ranging from physics to education, covering every field of human learning, there is an evident tendency to assimilate all knowledge to mathematical knowledge and to resolve all realities into mathematical formulas. This trend reaches its apex in the development of symbolic logic, in which guise mathematics invades even the field of philosophy, to distort all the basic conceptions of the mind, and to deflect all the activities of thought from attaining their fulfillment in true wisdom which consists in knowledge about God, by keeping them whirling endlessly around the nihilistic circle of sheer mathematical emptiness.

To be continued . . .

Truth, Goodness, Beauty

Plato and Liberal Education

III. The Epochs in Plato’s Educational System

The key for Plato’s system of education is the Greek word μουσικε (sounds like “musikay”) which has survived in our modern languages in such words as “music” and “museum”. To the Greeks the term had a wider signification, including within its comprehension all the liberal arts. Greek mythology personified the liberal arts, making each one of them a goddess, a Muse, who guides, inspires, and stands as a type and an ideal. Thus we have the Muses of history, poetry, astronomy, eloquence, music, dance, tragedy, comedy, and lyric poetry. The Greeks saw beauty everywhere; whenever reality is known, it reveals rhythm and harmony, and hence education must progressively direct the mind to higher and higher aspects of beauty. The mind rises from beauty in the plane of sheer sense experience, the rhythm and harmony of sounds, shapes, and movements, to the beauty of law and order manifested in the visible world, the music of the spheres; and finally to the source of all beauty, Beauty in itself, the eternal Logos, attained by the art of dialectics. Every one of the arts and sciences is called μουσικε in this sense; and it is in this sense that we must understand the passage in the Republic where Plato makes Socrates say: “When the modes of music change, the fundamental laws of the state change with them.” Corresponding to the different planes of knowledge, we can distinguish four epochs in Plato’s educational plan. Here is a brief description of each of these epochs in their sequence.

1. The first twenty years are concerned mainly with the body and with the organic faculties. The children, as early as the age of three are introduced to mythology; this is meant to train their imagination, and to cultivate love of valor and heroic deeds. The mythology must be purged of any references to the gods which might degrade the concept of divinity in the child. The fact that mythology does not give the factual or historic truth does not matter, but it must be censored and purified from anything that might give a permanently false impression of reality. Factual truth is not so important at this stage, because it is an intellectual concern, and this stage of education is mainly concerned with the senses. After mythology, follow in sequence: gymanstics, reading and writing, poetry and music, and mathematics, until finally this epoch is rounded off in two years of military training, from the eighteenth to the twentieth year. Plato recognized the imitative tendencies of the soul, and thus he prescribes that the child must be surrounded from early childhood with beautiful objects which embody the truth he will come to understand later on in life. Hence the surroundings and environment are tremendously important in this formative period.

Brother Francis (2003)

2. The second period, extending from the year twenty to the year thirty, is concerned with the sciences of measurement and understanding. Plato mentions plane geometry, solid geometry, astronomy, and harmonies. He conceives their role as a prelude to dialects. Evidently, he envisaged a patient treatment of these topics, with sufficient time for creative reasoning on the part of the students, and meditations on fundamental truths and notions which prepare the way for philosophy. This is clear from the amount of time he allows for this kind of work, although the amount of facts, principles, experiments, in such a variety of sciences, and in such a short time, that we leave him no leisure for reflection, meditation, wonder, nor for any creative work on his own initiative. Furthermore, the language of these experimental physical sciences today, is so little related to the language and truths of philosophy, that instead of being a prelude to philosophy as Plato intended, these positive sciences stand in our day as a tremendous handicap to philosophic thought.

3. The third epoch, which occupies the years thirty to thirty-five, is concerned with the art of dialectics, “the art which elevates the mind to the contemplation of what is best in existence”. This is the crowning mark of liberal education; the mind’s eye, which so far had been trained only to recognize the reflections of Good, must now be exercised to see the Good itself, the ultimate source of truth and beauty in the universe. To Plato, philosophy was not an organized science, or a system of sciences. The task of organizing truths of philosophy was to be carried out by his disciple Aristotle. This is why Plato was mainly concerned with the art of attaining philosophical knowledge, and this art he called “dialectics”. In our days, we possess not only the fruits of Plato’s and Aristotle’s efforts towards discovery and organization of philosophical truths. We have, in addition, the results of centuries of collective effort on the part of scholastic philosophers, ending in a body of logically related sciences, full of precise notions, clear definitions, and well established truths. This philosophic tradition was accomplished through gradual steps, beginning with sense experience and common-sense knowledge. We must remember that the individual also must grow to philosophic understanding through the same way. Philosophy is a science, but philosophizing is an art. If we realize this truth sufficiently, we would not depend so exclusively in our teaching on the presentation of philosophic truths as finally and definitely formulated. The dialect method of Plato can still teach us a great deal as to how to teach philosophy effectively, and how to train the student to raise philosophic problems, to attain a realization of a philosophic truth, and to formulate and defend this truth. We can make philosophy much more of a living tradition by reviving the Platonic method, if not the Platonic science of philosophy.

Not yet philosophers!

4. The fourth and last epoch, requiring fifteen years of life and terminating at the age of fifty, is a period dedicated to real experience in the world. It is significant that Plato did not try to carry the world into the school; the only way to know what life is, is to go through it. No man is truly wise enough to be entrusted with the destiny of a state until he has seen the real world in the light of universal truth. Philosophic ideas alone may be sufficient for the purpose of philosophic contemplation, but the philosopher-king, must make practical decisions for the common good, who must have more than ideas, namely, experience. Nor would experience without the philosophic discipline and knowledge of the Good suffice, because experience can move on a plane of insignificant facts unless illuminated by the idea of the Good.

It is twenty-three centuries since Plato opened his academy and invited the youths of Athens to seek the knowledge of the Good. Since that time, something has happened on our planet; the Eternal Truth, the very Person of Good, has broken the bounds of eternity, plunged into our world, and lived as one of us. If Plato were to come to life today, how would he respond to our tidings of great joy? What would he think of our response?

The End

A discussion with Brother Francis (Fall 2008)

Plato and Liberal Education

II. What is Liberal Education?

We are used to distinguishing between two kinds of education: liberal and vocational. But Plato, while recognizing the need of developing the practical arts and professions, reserved the term “education”, at least in its absolute unrestricted sense, to what we would call liberal education. “This is the only training which, upon our view, would be characterized as education: that other sort of training which aims at the acquisition of wealth or bodily strength, or mere cleverness apart from intelligence and justice, is mean and illiberal, and it is not worthy to be called education at all.”

From following the thoughts of Plato we get a hint as to the essence of liberal, or in his language, true education, which distinguishes it from all kinds of training for useful skill or for useless cleverness. Liberal or true education is education whose end is man himself. It is the education of man as man. When a man is trained for the perfection of what he makes, he receives vocational training, or, if we call it education, we are using the term in a forced sense; but when a man is trained and instructed for the perfection of what he is and what he does (immanently) within himself, then we may say that he is being educated in the most absolute sense of the term. We may teach a man to become a carpenter, a farmer, a physician, or an engineer. We may also teach a man to become a good man, good not only in the moral sense but primarily in the ontological sense, in the sense of perfected, developed, accomplished, in the sense that he can exercise and apply his faculties coordinately and for their natural purposes.

You are as likely to produce a well-constructed bridge by accident and without aiming at it, as you are to produce a well-educated man by a scheme of training thoroughly directed to other ends.

When men are trained vocationally we have every right to expect better products (potatoes, chairs, medical services, or efficient machines), but we have no right to expect better men unless somewhere in our educational plans and activities we aim at the proper perfections of a man. You are as likely to produce a well-constructed bridge by accident and without aiming at it, as you are to produce a well-educated man by a scheme of training thoroughly directed to other ends. It should go without saying and as part of nature’s justice, that in a society where leaders receive specialized vocational training without liberal education, no sound norms can rightly be expected and no human values are secure. When the present trend towards vocational training finally succeeds in overwhelming and washing away the last vestiges of liberal education, we can expect to live in a world of good things and bad men. We shall have, to give one good example, unintelligent and confused leaders, on the one hand, and excellent atomic bombs, on the other!

It should go without saying and as part of nature’s justice, that in a society where leaders receive specialized vocational training without liberal education, no sound norms can rightly be expected and no human values are secure.

What are, then, those human perfections which constitute the end of liberal education? Plato’s answer to this question is in a way the major theme of all his writings. If one dares put it briefly and succinctly in one sentence, this is what it would be: man’s proper perfection consists in the knowledge of the absolute good, and in response to beauty. The absolute good is the good-in-itself and the source of the goodness all other things.

Expanding sense knowledge

It is good, not mediately as being the cause of something else, but immediately, ultimately, as being the end to which all other things are means. Man seeks this end, not only by his senses but by his intellect, and can attain it only with his intellect. But man must begin with his sense experience, and gradually advance, through higher and higher aspects of the good, reflected in the world of contingent things, until he is finally ready to see the primal source of all goodness. On the way to this absolute good, beauty is the sign-post. Man, therefore, must begin by learning to respond to beauty as given to the senses and as found in the visible universe, but he must not dwell in it nor let it conceal that invisible beauty it is meant to proclaim.

Not all knowledge, therefore, is conducive to the perfection of man, and consequently, not all knowledge has value in liberal education. All the sciences of space and time, of experience and experiment, of statistics and measurements, such sciences as mathematics, physics, chemistry, biology, history, economics, etc., must find their justification primarily in the practical order, in the order of what man makes outside of himself. Man’s perfection consists in a growth from the fragmentary knowledge of sense experience to a unified vision of the mind; and hence all the above mentioned experimental sciences, can figure in the course of liberal education, only in so far as they lead the way to philosophic science; they must be treated as preludes to philosophy. Their end must be the understanding of the eternal truth, first as reflected in the visible world, but finally and consummately, as it is in itself. The climax of liberal eduction consists in philosophy and theology, and all its earlier stages must be ordered to this end, both in the selection of their subject matter and in the mode of their presentation.

It is especially remarkable that Plato, who is the greatest pioneer in the field of philosophy, should recognize the necessity of revealed truth, and admit the superiority of such truth over the highest truths of human reason working on its own. Although he was handicapped by an inadequate pagan religion, he still had the genius to see that those intimate truths of the inner life of God could only be known if God Himself were to reveal them, and that once known, such truths would unquestionably be the crown of all human knowledge, and the summit of wisdom in this life. Thus in the Republic, after making Socrates describe the building of a state by the guidance of reason, Plato makes one interrogator raise the question as to whether any thing is left out. “Nothing to us,” replies Socrates, “But to Apollo, the god of Delphi, there remains the ordering of the greatest and noblest and chiefest things of all.”

“Which are they?” asks again the interrogator.

“The institution of temples and sacrifices, and the entire service of the gods, demigods, and heroes. . . These are matters of which we are ignorant ourselves, and as founders of a city we should be unwise in trusting them to any interpreter but our ancestral deity. He is the god who sits in the center on the naval of the earth, and he is the interpreter of religion to all mankind.”

To be continued . . .

Table of contents for Dangers of Scientism

1. The Dangers of Scientism – Part One
2. The Dangers of Scientism – Part Two
3. The Dangers of Scientism – Part Three
4. The Dangers of Scientism – Part Four
5. The Dangers of Scientism – Part Five
6. The Dangers of Scientism – Part Six

Seeking causes

by Brother Francis Maluf, M.I.C.M.

Put in the language of philosophy, this difference between philosophy and the sciences can be expressed in the following terms: philosophy seeks the ultimate explanation, while science is satisfied with the proximate causes of things.

Now as far as the mind is concerned, proximate explanation is really no explanation at all. It explains only for practical purposes. To know that water can be decomposed into oxygen and hydrogen is useful information in case you are interested in manufacturing either of the two gases, but it certainly fails to explain the mystery of chemical union. And besides, the problems of science presuppose those of metaphysics. Man would not seek the precise cause of malaria unless he knew that things like malaria must have a cause.

Philosophic scientists

For obviously the scientist does not try to determine whether malaria has a cause, but rather what the cause is.

The scientist obviously knows that a contingent thing like malaria must have a cause, although he does not develop the notion of a “contingent being” and the notion of a cause, nor does he care, as a scientist, to reason out all the implications of what he implicitly asserts with regard to these notions. Were the scientist to stop and reflect on these matters, he would move out of the field of science and into the field of philosophy.

Philosophy, therefore, not only has the title to be called science, but has it in the highest degree: it is, as already intimated, the queen among the sciences. Beginning with ontology, and running down the hierarchy of sciences, we would get something like the following arrangement:

I. Ontology (or general metaphysics) of which the most important part is Theology.

II. The Philosophic Sciences (the sciences of special metaphysics): Logic, Cosmology, Rational Psychology, Ethics.

III. The Mathematical Sciences and the General Sciences of Observation and Experimentation: Arithmetic, Geometry, Physics, Chemistry, Astronomy, Biology, Politics, Economics.

IV. All the practical arts and sciences whose primary purpose is not the understanding or the explanation of reality but some practical utility. Their number is very great.They correspond with the variety of crafts and professions, especially those which are intricate enough to require the development of a science or perhaps many sciences. E.g. , all the sciences of medicine, engineering, farming, pharmacy, navigation, metallurgy, banking, jurisprudence, electrical engineering, etc.

One glance at this table reveals the root reason of scientism. The lowest order in this hierarchy of the sciences is the foundation of our material civilization: it builds our machines, runs our hospitals, and fights our wars. In order to maintain our culture we are bound to devote a great part of our time and attention to the cultivation of these lower sciences.This trend has been crowding out of existence those sciences of the highest two orders, which guarantee cultural unity and a balanced perspective.

An Innocent Crafter

The general science of the third order, like physics and economics, came to be regarded as the core of liberal education, but these sciences are ordered primarily to the practical interest and not to the speculative. Physics, biology, and economics are not innocent crafts like carpentry and masonry, which require the development of special skills, without distorting the truths of common sense. The latter are sciences of a kind, without being sciences to the limit. And when the mind is made to perform on the plane of science, it must either be led to final and correct answers, or find false substitutes in sophistry and ideological error.

We must restore philosophy, religion and common sense as valid means of knowledge, or else we are going to die from the sickness of scientism. It is nice to have a nose on one’s face, but when you see a nose swelling and about to efface the remaining features, you know that there is disease and danger. Culturally speaking, scientism is such a pathological inflation of science, at the expense of all other forms of human knowledge.

As for common sense, little can be done for it deliberately. As soon as common sense becomes reflective or methodical, it becomes something else; that is, it becomes either philosophy or science. Common sense cannot formulate or defend its convictions against the attacks of false philosophies and false religions, and therefore, unless the fundamental certitudes of common sense are developed and defended by good philosophy, false doctrines are bound to arise.

And as for revelation, it is foundationally in God, under His disposition; and, as long as we do not confuse ourselves by perverse use of our natural faculties, God can talk to us and lead us to the saving truth. Our own responsibility consists in using our natural powers according to the purposes intended by God, and God gave us intelligence, primarily, so that we may know Him and love Him, and, secondarily, in order that we may rule the material universe. We are putting a tremendous effort towards the attainment of the second of these objectives, but if we are to be faithful to the first objective, we must restore philosophy to its place in liberal education.

Seeking the kingdom of God (Auriesville 2008)

Of course, this advice cannot be given except to those who know where to find the one sound tradition of philosophic truth. This tradition is protected, and will always be secure, only in the shadow of the Catholic Church. Here is another confirmation of Christ’s promises, where he says: Seek ye first the kingdom of God and His justice, and all these things will be added unto you.

Here is another temporal problem, which shall never be solved by those who do not care to discover the kingdom of God, as it exists in this world. If the place of philosophy is usurped by the confusion of all the false doctrines and perverse opinions of all times, then certainly that kind of philosophy will offer no remedy to the confusion of scientism.

They say, “You want to bring philosophy back to the modern man; but he already suffers from the complexity and diversity of his interests. Wouldn’t philosophy add just one more item to this complexity?” This is like saying about a man trying to find his way around in a crowded dark room, “Why crowd him further with a lamp?”

For that is precisely what philosophy contributes to the complexity of modern civilization: a lighted candle in a crowded dark room.

The End