Why we choose to do what we do. . .

So while surfing different web sites I found a fairly cool quiz. It shows what particular philosophical framework you use to decide your ethics. I'm not sure it's scientific at all, but it's a lot of fun. Also I'm not sure that I'm totally utilitarian, but that's a subject for another day. Let me know how you scored. . .

Click here for quiz

You scored as Utilitarianism

Your life is guided by the principles of Utilitarianism: You seek the greatest good for the greatest number.

“The said truth is that it is the greatest happiness of the greatest number that is the measure of right and wrong.” --Jeremy Bentham

“Whenever the general disposition of the people is such, that each individual regards those only of his interests which are selfish, and does not dwell on, or concern himself for, his share of the general interest, in such a state of things, good government is impossible.” --John Stuart Mill

Utilitarianism
70%
Divine Command
65%
Hedonism
55%
Existentialism
55%
Justice (Fairness)
40%
Kantianism
35%
Strong Egoism
10%
Nihilism
5%
Apathy
0%

Why one and not the other

I found it interesting how many critics talked about how much they did not like "The Passion of the Christ" because of how violent it was, but then liked other movies that had as much if not more violent. Perspective is an interesting thing. I compiled a few critics and their thoughts on both movies. Am I being a bit paranoid or is there at least a little bit of bias here?

Passion: "A very dour, pedestrian picture.” “One that catalogs his physical suffering in a businesslike visual database of flayed flesh and spurting blood”

Sin City: “It's a hard, viciously funny little movie, one with all the subtlety of a billy club. But there's artistry here, too."
-Stephanie Zacharek, Salon.com


Passion: “"Mel Gibson shows once again that he's skilled at depicting violence. But you'd be hard pressed to find evidence of 'tolerance, love and forgiveness' that the producer-director-co-writer insists he's trying to communicate."

Sin City: “"Sometimes it all seems as schematic as a theme park attraction. Mostly, though, the movie comes across like the fever dream of a smart, put-upon adolescent who'd been up all night watching every black-and-white crime movie made since the sound era."
-Gene Seymour, Newsday


Passion: "Gibson has made a movie for nobody, really, but Gibson.” ''The Passion of the Christ'' all but proclaims in his gaudily tormented, pornographically blood-drenched, anything but literal interpretation of the last 12 hours of Jesus' life.”

Kill Bill 2: “With the second installment, Tarantino -- famous as an inspired manipulator of genre, less proven as a filmmaker of soul -- shows his shy but ardent, cinephiliac understanding of American sentiment and yearning."
-Lisa Schwarzbaum, ENTERTAINMENT WEEKLY


Passion: "What graphic sex is to the use of the body in hardcore porno, graphic violence is to destruction of the body of Christ in this Passion."

Kill Bill 1: “Not only is this the work of a major and vital talent in full bloom, it's the most thrillingly entertaining American movie so far this year."
-Geoff Pevere, TORONTO STAR


Passion: “"The extreme violence does not teach a lesson; it's an end in itself, more suited to the S&M crowd than to anyone seeking an uplifting sermon on everlasting redemption."

Kill Bill 1: "This is Tarantino the ultimate movie geek, channeling all the best tee-hee-GROSS! moments from Hong Kong and Japanese splatter movies."
- Glenn Lovell, SAN JOSE MERCURY NEWS

Christian Scholar?!?

At a conference on Theodicy and Religion in relation to the Problem of Pain, I encountered some of the very things about which you are. In the back row, there was a man who seemed to be . . . against God at best. Whenever someone who was a Christian or even a Theist would bring up a question, he would snicker and shake his head. I could almost hear him saying, "Stupid Christians, never think anything through." Now I realize that I was at a conference where most people HAD thought things through and many might have been absolute geniuses. But this guy was really starting to rub me the wrong way. Was he smarter than me? Probably. . .then again that is not all that hard. He probably had more degrees . . . maybe he was a grad student or something, but the whole time I thinking, this guy isn’t even giving them a chance. . . acting all haughty.

Then on the stage, I saw three much respected scholars in the philosophical domain (William Rowe, and Paul Draper namely). Both Draper and Rowe made statements I will never forget.

Draper said "I'll never say that Christianity or any Theistic position is that way because they are too weak or too stupid, it is only because I think God is just literally too good to be true."

Rowe made a more powerful statement. "I was in seminary when I lost my faith . . .and I will say that I lost it quite reluctantly. I was grasping for something and even tried (other versions of Theism) but I finally found them, in my mind, lacking. But as a friendly Atheist I don't find the Theist position that which is intellectually irreconcilable, just more difficult that Atheism."

I was looking around wondering if my buddy in the back row had heard that. On the other hand, did it even matter? I guess my point is, I too hate it when some try to make it as if Christians cannot be scholars or have great minds, because no great mind could be a Christian if they really thought it through . . . there’s circular reasoning for ya.

Then after this initial upsetness, my thoughts went back to Rowe. And, as has happened so many times this semester, my heart broke. I saw a man who seemed to miss Christianity, or if I can take some liberties, at very least Jesus. I thought of Charles Templeton a man who toured with Billy Graham as an evangelist. I think of the rock that formed in the pit of my stomach as I read his words in Lee Strobel’s “Case for Faith.” “I miss Jesus,” he said frankly in the interview. As I wallow in my own doubt, sometimes I get scared. I am occasionally terrified that one day I will wake up and just not be able to believe any longer. I know that is not really, how it happens . . . or at least I do not think it is, but through all these studies, I view constant reminders that we are fragile.

Templeton did not say there was not a God, just that he could not believe in a personal, loving, all-powerful God who allowed the world to be filled with so much pain. Rowe said the same thing, as did many of the presenters at the colloquium. I do not know how to fix that. I am not sure that intellectually we ever really will. When it comes to questions like that, I find that most groups find the answers they are looking for.
Tonight I pray for the Templetons and Rowes in the world. God help them in their faith; give them grace as they seek. God, let them see you, as you really are, a God of love and a God of mercy. One who died for me, and for them, when neither of us earned or deserved it. God give me strength and discernment . . . and God, give me faith.

Church

So here's my thought. There are absolutely millions of people mourning the popes death. Millions are making a pilgrimage there to pay their last respects. At the Catholic church back home the one church in town was packed out. . . for the first time to my knowledge ever. Which is what kind of bothers me. The same people who will go to church the Sunday after the pope dies in rememberance of the pope, wouldn't go to church the Sunday before in rememberance of Jesus Christ dying and resurecting. Does that seem odd at all? I don't want to sound cynical because I do like the pope, and I do respect him, and you can read my reponses to other people to see my support, but it does bother me a little bit that the church is going to ride this for all it's worth. Once again a man died and people are going to exploit it for all they are worth. To all who care I give my prayers and condolances. . . and hope that this new wave of love for the Catholic chruch stays around.