Is God Really Dead?

"God is dead!" claimed Nietzsche, a German philosopher, philologist, and a cultural critic. His pronouncement, though, is not literal –in the sense that a God is literally lying dead in a coffin.  He rather implies a cultural fact –that is, at modern times, people are living their lives as if God is dead.  There is another implication of Nietzsche’s pronouncement, as commonly agreed by scholars, which is a sort of nihilism.  Nihilism is a philosophical belief which claims that there is no foundation or whatsoever to one’s belief, knowledge, morals, and so on.

Let me elaborate each implication in this article.  Firstly, the death of God is a cultural fact. During his times, Nietzsche observed that people's obsession or their fundamental concern in life has dramatically changed.  This paradigmatic shift was spawned mainly by industrialization.  In its primitive form, industrialization replaced the traditional means of producing goods such as garments, shoes, textiles and so on by means of machines.  The invention of machines somehow shaped the dawn of industrialization, which generates the philosophy of materialism.  In highly-industrialized cities, the cathedrals which were once the centers of the lives of the people are dwarfed by shopping malls, high-rise industrial buildings, and many other business-oriented institutions.  In fact, in some European countries, there are only few people going to church to worship God.  Many are going to church as tourists who are more interested of the socio-cultural, historic and aesthetic value of churches. 

In feudalistic (agricultural) society in Medieval Europe, what was at the center in the life of the people was the church.  It was in the church where people prayed before going to their farms and after working in the farms.  It was in the church where some people spent their lives in prayer and devoted their whole life serving God in prayer and doing corporal works of mercy. Even how the village was arranged, the church was located at the center of the village.  The municipal hall and residences surrounded the church. 

In modern times, people are busy in doing business or busy spending their waking hours earning income.  The obsession of people today is money and how to get more money.  God is placed at the side-line.  To put it succinctly, the idea of God is fading, or waning like the moonlight in a dark night, in the minds of people caught up in the web of industrialization and of the materialistic philosophy.

Secondly, the death of God also implies nihilism.  Nihilism is derived from the Latin word nihil, which means “nothing.”  If “God is dead,” there is nothing which serves as the foundation of man’s existence, man’s moral sense, man’s knowledge, and so on.  Among Christian thinkers, God is regarded as the cause and foundation of man’s existence and the existence of all things.  Without God, we are nothing.  Moreover, God sets all foundations of other realities.  God implants the fundamental principle of morality in all of us so that each of us, by nature, knows what is good from bad.  God is also the source of true knowledge, and the one who truly knows the truth is enlightened by God.  “God is dead,” everything is lost as well.

How to Overcome the Death of God?

Nietzsche does not preach the glory of God in his mournful death.  Instead, he eventually buries God in his graveyard.  I mean, Nietzsche settles with the idea that God is really dead, and he is completely gone.  With God’s absence, man is left flying in the vacuum.  Man is left to exist without God to look upon for his salvation and ultimate purpose in life.  For Nietzsche, man has to overcome God’s absence by becoming an “ubermensch” (superman).  He has to fly without wings.  Otherwise, he lives without any purpose in life.  As a superman, he has to exert his “will to power.”  With “will to power,” man shall create and impose his own values in life, his own standards of right and wrong, of what is true.  He has to become what he wants to become without determinations of someone powerful than him (like God).  He has to turn himself into a god.

Is God Really Dead?

Let me attempt to answer this question.  Yes, the idea of God is dead!  But, the historical God who became man (Emmanuel) in the person of Christ is not dead.  He is really alive and has impacted the lives of saints and martyrs for centuries, and the lives people who are still within the signal of God’s presence.

It’s true that people, in modern times, are drifting away from God.  But it doesn’t follow that He’s dead.  He is still there inside the church waiting for his prodigal sons and daughters to come back and pay him homage.  

Pragmatism and Philippine Education

I envision pragmatism as a permanent solution to the decaying Philippine educational system.  Our current practices in education are still highly influenced by rationalism and empiricism in many respects.  For example, in the curriculum design, the focus is still on the three R’s: reading, writing, and arithmetic; on the mastery of the English language (both written and oral); mastery of mathematical operations, and so on. 

Let me discuss specifically on two topics.  First, English as a medium of instruction has been a big problem among Filipino learners because it’s the second language and Filipino educators and policy-makers still believe that what is written in English is reliable and true.  Filipino learners and educators still have the idea, “maayo na mo-eninglish, utokan na!.”  (You're fluent in English, you must be bright or intelligent).  The measurement or indicator of a learned Filipino is fluency in English language (both oral and written).  With this assumption, the influence of rationalism is apparent.  English is a medium of communication and instruction to acquire knowledge and cultivate the intellect of students.  Anyway, knowledge is “constant across time and context,” regardless of race.  So, in the Philippine context, curriculum design should include the mastery of English language.

Mother-tongue based instruction is deemed as the solution to the problem but if you come to think of it mother-tongue based instruction causes more confusion among Filipino learners.  First of all, there is no clear definition of mother-tongue based instruction.  Another is that private schools are not employing mother-tongue, thus ensuing to the disparity of private and public education.  Pupils in private schools speak English, whereas those in public schools speak the mother-tongue.  I think, in pragmatic perspective, the right question to ask is, “What language that really works among Filipino learners?”  In my opinion, if Philippine education system aims for “education for all,” mother-tongue based instruction is the “better” option –better, in the sense that it works in this particular situation.  For a pragmatist, what is important is “students’ interest, as is integration of thinking, feeling and doing.”  Yet, if Filipino learners are struggling in the use and mastery of English language, they have a problem of integration of thinking, feeling and doing.  The fact is: there are thoughts or feelings that Filipino experienced, which cannot be appropriately expressed in English language.  This is because of cultural difference.  What is the pragmatic solution?  Use mother-tongue as a medium of communication and instruction in schools, and make English or any foreign language as elective.

Second, teaching mathematics causes also a lot of problems among Filipino learners.  Math subjects can be classified into elementary and advance.  In college level, many of the advance math subjects are taught among college students.  The rationale behind it is to enhance the thinking skills (rational capability) of students despite the fact that all these advanced mathematical operations cannot be applied in real world of work.  For example, a tourism graduate who took algebra in college is not actually going to apply algebraic operation when he is tour-guiding, or even when he works as front desk in hotels.  In pragmatic perspective, that algebra subject is useless.  It does not “work” in the situation of students.  I believe that there is a need to get rid of subjects in our curriculum, whether required by DEPED or CHED, as long as they are useless or do not serve the purpose of training or “educating” our graduates.

In relation, K-12 program is laudable but still not pragmatic.  Laudable in the sense that the program intends to produce skilled workers needed in industry but not pragmatic in the sense that there are still liberal subjects offered such as Sociology in Grade 11 and Philosophy of Man in Grade 12.  Inclusion of these liberal subjects in K-12 curriculum is still trapped with the problem of rationalism and empiricism.  In pragmatic perspective, we ask the question, “Why is there a need to include those subjects?  Inclusion of liberal subjects doesn’t sound pragmatic.

As an educator (with progressivist and constructivist perspectives), what is important for me is for graduates to develop positive values and life-skills needed for them to survive in the real world.  As Karl Marx said, “philosophers try to understand the world but not change it.”  If we intend to enhance students’ intellectual capability, we train them to become philosophers/ thinkers, who simply understand the world we live in.  This is a very rationalist or an empiricist perspective, or if you like, “perennialist or essentialist”.  To make it sound pragmatic, let’s train our students for them to effect changes in the world in the coming future.   

For me, in essence man is not rational or a “thinking being”, as what rationalist and empiricist suppose.  But, man is a species who tries to survive against the vicissitudes of life.  He is one who struggles in the “survival of the fittest.”  In the process of survival, he develops his rational skills as his coping mechanism to survive in the hostile environment.  Thus, it’s wrong to say that man’s rational capacity is built-in, natural in him but a “product” of his ways and means to survive in the hostile world. 

Based on this reality, we can further unpack two other implications: (1) human reality is not “fixed”; (2) man is guided by “survival instincts.”  In education, the reality of learners is not something fixed and universal.  It’s hard to believe that American learners and Filipino learners are the same –only that Filipinos are second-language learners.  I believe that no two learners are the same.  What is considered true of one is not always true of the other.  In this regard, I advocate the theories of multiple intelligences and differentiated instructions.  On the other end, students are driven by “survival instincts.”  Teachers should teach them how to “survive.”  They need to instil in them the values and necessary life-skills for them to survive in the real world of work.  In this regard, I advocate K-12 law but in a more pragmatic version.

Driven by “survival instincts,” man is selfish in nature.  To survive, he has to advance his self-interest.  In history, battles are fought because a king is protecting his personal interest to remain in power, and many other similar cases where a person or a group of persons waged war to protect their self-interests.  But, there is nothing fixed in man’s nature.  Maybe, at the first stage of man’s development and growth, he is that “brutish and selfish.” Yet, in the higher level of development and growth, man is able to develop moral and intellectual capacities, which eventually leads to develop in him the feeling of sympathy and care for others and his environments. 

In education, students come to school for one main reason: “to survive.”  A student does not come to school to learn how count the food they have in the table or learn to count the money in his pocket (since in the first place there is none –no food, no money), but he is in school looking for food to fill his hungry stomach or looking for money to put in his empty pocket.  With this kind of students in our classroom, it is useless to fill in their minds with “boring lessons.”  As a pragmatic teacher, I teach these students with “positive values and life-skills” to survive in a constantly changing world.

In conclusion, Philippine education system fails because of one reason: we don’t have a clearly defined philosophy of education.  Philosophy defines the system of education but without defining it clearly, philosophy fails so as the system.

Tomas de Aquino and His Philosophy

Tomas de Aquino is very well-known in the academe as St Thomas Aquinas.  Aquinas is not actually his surname.  During his times, the use of surname or family name was not yet in practice.  It is rather part of the tradition of these times that if one is born to a noble family, the name of his birthplace is added to his name.  Tomas was born in Aquino, Italy –thus, his name is Tomas de Aquino.  He is Tomas of Aquino.

At a young age, he wants to enter in a monastery.  Of course, during these times, entering in a monastery at a young age is anyone else’s desire.  It’s part of the “collective perspective” of the people of these times to offer their life to God.  A young child is happy to serve the Lord in prayer inside the monastery or in doing corporal works of mercy.  Unlike today, entering in a monastic life or a seminary life is like a burden to teenagers.  They may find monastic or seminary life boring.  For our young today, life becomes colourful only in listening to music, watching videos, going out to parties, going out with friends, and many more.  Life of prayer seems out-dated because of the comfort afforded to us by modern technologies.

Historians of philosophy commonly agree that St Thomas is very much influenced by Aristotle.  St. Augustine, on the other hand, is much Platonic.  Two great saints sprout from two great schools of thought.  St Thomas is typically Aristotelian.  In fact, he often mentioned “The Philosopher” in his writings referring to Aristotle.

St Thomas answers practically all questions in philosophy.  That’s why, he produced voluminous literary works.  In this article, I’d like to focus on his idea of man.

Like Aristotle –“The Philosopher,” St Thomas believes that man is a composite of body and soul.  But unlike St Augustine, he doesn’t make emphasis of either body or soul.  Man is the whole of his body and soul.  No part of man is more important than the other, which is contrary to what St Augustine claims that soul is more important part of man.  In this line of thought, we see a fibre of thought connecting Aristotle and St Thomas. 

If we also recall, Aristotle claims that, as a composite of body and soul, man is meant for a purpose.  His purpose is embedded in his being composite as designed in the mind of his creator, the Demiurge.  With elements of Christian thought, St Thomas puts some colours of the pagan philosophy of Aristotle with pigments of Christian thought.  God created man.  As a creature of God, he is beautifully designed in the divine mind of God making him ranked next to angels.  He is meant for a purpose since God must have thought intentionally of creating him.  Otherwise, God must have created of something else other than man.  Because of this, man is a clear reflection of his creator, God the Father.  His Creator is good, so as man.  This line of argument leads us to a conclusion that man is naturally good. 

This theme –man as naturally good, is not uncommon, or say, peculiar in the thought of the medieval thinkers.  In ancient China, Mencius also claims the same theme.  He likens the natural goodness of man to a virgin forest –pure and untouched by human civilization.  But when civilization touches and denudes its virginity, it will gradually lose its purity.  By nature, man is pure of heart.  But because of outside influences (good or bad), man will gradually lose his purity or goodness of heart.  Eventually he will possess some tendency to do evil.

As a Christian thinker, St Thomas elaborates this theme in the context of Christian thought and beliefs.  At the moment of conception, the principle of morality, which states, “Do good and avoid evil,” is implanted in the heart of man.  As commonly claimed by medieval thinkers, St Thomas makes use of the idea of “synderesis” to mean the natural capacity or disposition of the practical reason (will) of man to apprehend intuitively the universal principle of morality.  Having this natural disposition to do good, man through his practical will has always the inclination to do what is good.  For years of looking for the right Cebuano term for practical will, I have found the word, pagbuot.  This Cebuano word, pagbuot is appropriately synonymous with the word will or practical reason.  In Cebuano, ang atong pagbuot –kanunay gyud pagbuot sa pagbuhat og maayo.  Practical will of man is always the will to do good.  That’s because of the synderesis –man’s natural disposition to apprehend intuitively the principle of morality.  

On this basis, conscience in its literal meaning (Latin: con, with + scientia, knowledge = with knowledge) does make sense.  Conscience has the connotation that if one’s will (pagbuot) to do good is exercised in a concrete situation, one’s action is done with the knowledge of the fundamental principle of morality.  In its literal sense, conscience is primarily about action done out of the knowledge of the good.  If the dictates of conscience is not followed, then one has the feeling of remorse –a guilty feeling of not listening to the dictates of conscience. 

There are major challenges in listening to one’s conscience. The first challenge is when one is carried by his emotions or passions.  One’s emotions may be so strong that somehow makes the voice of conscience fade.  For example, when lovers engage in pre-marital sex because they are carried by their passions, they haven’t listened to the voice of their conscience.  But, in the first place, each of them knows what not to do in that particular situation.  The second challenge is when one acts not in the context of face-to-face interaction.  Modern societies facilitate various interactions which are considered as “faceless.”  For example, years back to withdraw money in the bank is done in the counter where a cashier facilitates the release of money.  But today, many withdrawals of cash are done in Automated Teller Machines (ATM).  If you withdraw PH1500 in the ATM and the machine dispenses PH2000, then you have the moral dilemma whether you are going to return the excess or not.  Most of the time, that transaction will discourage you to return the excess since you are transacting a machine –a faceless entity.  The point is that conscience becomes dull when dealing with non-persons.  The third challenge is that the will to do good must be constantly practiced.  The voice of conscience becomes weaker if it is not habitually exercised.  Again, like Aristotle –the Philosopher, St Thomas emphasizes that the exercise of conscience must be in a form of a habit.  As a consequence, the man who habitually listens to the voice of his conscience is a happy one since he actualizes what he is intended to be by God.

Finally, St Thomas thinks of man’s ultimate purpose, which is to go back to the heavenly paradise.  And, the only way to go back to it is by being a man of conscience.

"My Heart is Restless until It Rests in Thee, O God."

Historical Background

St Augustine of Hippo is an epitome of Christian world and culture.  Most scholars believed that he is much influenced by Platonism and Neo-Platonism, which were then part of the Hellenic culture and philosophy.  The Hellenic (or the Greek) culture died out when Rome conquered Greece and some neighboring states in the Mediterranean region including Nazareth (then part of Judea) –the natal place of Christ.   

The dominant Roman culture was characterized by legalism in that laws, not philosophy, governed the life of the Romans.  At the height of the Roman power and culture, Christianity emerged as a religious community regarded by some Roman leaders as deterrent to the unity of the vast empire.  During these times, all apostles of Christ, except John (the youngest apostle) were martyred; many other devout followers of Christ were martyred as well.  But when Christianity became the official religion in the Roman empire, great scholars and philosophers sprouted within Christian religion.  One of them was St Augustine of Hippo, who is considered as one of the Fathers of the Church.  He is known as the Father of the Church because he ardently defended the Catholic faith from the attacks of the Greeks’ pagan culture and philosophy.

One major problem St Augustine addressed during his times is the pagan philosophy of the Greeks.  Christians believed that Christ is the God incarnate.  Christ is the God in human form.  He is 100 percent human and 100 percent God.  In the mind of the Greeks, who are trained to reason out without resort to faith, the idea that God became man is absurd.  How could a God who is transcendent, eternal, all-powerful become a man –a mortal being, subject to decay and destruction?  Yet Christians accept this fact or idea by faith, without rationalizing it or without subjecting it to rational demonstration.  Christ himself encouraged his apostles to believe in him, without a slightest doubt.  “Faith can move mountains,” Christ exhorts his followers.  But faith doesn’t fit in the Greek’s culture and life.  Greeks were trained thinkers, who subject everything to rational demonstration. 

As a defender of Catholic faith, St Augustine struggles to reconcile faith and reason, which is I think the very heart of the problem.  What one can’t explain using rational demonstration like the idea, “God became man,” has to take a leap of faith.  And, what one has already accepted by faith can be hinged in the balance of doubt by his reasoning capability.  In the process, St Augustine has to make use of Greek philosophy to help explain the Christian faith –thus, making philosophy a handmaid to theology.  He finds Plato’s philosophy a right blend to Christian faith.  As some scholars claimed, St Augustine “christianizes” Plato’s philosophy.  As mentioned, he is influenced by Platonism and Neo-Platonism.  Hence, we can find some elements of Plato’s thought in our Christian faith. 

My Heart is Restless until It Rests in Thee

Though St Augustine is greatly influenced by Platonism but we can find some unique and peculiar elements of his philosophy.  One of his important thoughts is his prayer, “my heart is restless until it rests in Thee (You), O God,” which is found in his Confession (his greatest work).  This beautiful prayer is somehow a conclusion of a restless –literally “restless,” Augustine, who was born to a pagan family.  In his teenage, he studied different schools of thought such as Neo-Platonism, Manichaeism, etc.  Yet, none of these has satisfied his desire or longing of his heart to know what truth is.  As a young man, he engaged in exclusive relationships with two women.  Yet, none of them has satisfied what his heart longs for.  His heart desires or longs for something he knows important like a deer longs for a stream to quench its thirst.  St Augustine finds it nowhere but in God.  He will find his final rest when he has gone back in the bosom of the Father.  His “restlessness” expires until he rests in God.

A prayer –coming from the very depth of the heart of a pagan converted to Christianity is such a meaningful prayer.  A heart which once is a “dry place” quenches its desire in the glory of God.  Yes, his conversion is not his own labor all alone.  His mother, St. Monica, prayed ardently for his conversion.  St. Ambrose, a priest, also touched his heart for such metanoia.

His philosophy is typically a Christian one –grounded in a strong faith in God.   Some scholars criticize that his thought is not properly philosophical.  It is appropriately theological since it talks about God and his faith in God –the one who can give him full rest of heart.  However, we cannot discredit the fact that St Augustine was addressing the problem on how to reconcile faith and reason.  In consequence, we can expect that his philosophy is leading that way –combining reason with faith. 

In conclusion, St. Augustine is a man who willingly submits himself to God –the final fulfillment of our earthly life.