Kim Gentes

What are the ideas and people that changed classical mediterranean world into pre-modern Europe? How did the Romans become the Italians? These are the questions the Thomas Cahill tackles in his installment of his "Hinges of History" series, entitled "Mysteries of the Middle Ages". In this volume of his series he continues his modus operandi of inspecting the character and lives of the story-altering individuals that brought change into the time period investigated. This is not a geo-political, civilization-tracking history of the European basin through the middle-ages. Cahill intentionally skips much of the obvious historical weightlifting done by technical textbooks and goes right to the people of the narrative- and (of course) the narrative of those people.

Cahill starts further back than I'd expect, and in fact pauses at classical foundations to review the Greeks before covering the classical extension of that inheritance down through the Romans. From there, he begins in earnest with an extensive "introduction" that leads the reader through the characters of classical Roman society (from 4th century) all the way to the end of the 11th century where we are deposited into the "high middle-ages" with an investigation into the origins of the cult of the virgin.

The author pushes against the personalities of several historical figures to shake a sense of life into the ancient personalities for us. Philo is teaching Moses in a greek class, Gregory the Great is dining with the poor, Hildegarde is singing from the enclosed living coffin of her monastery, Franciss of Assisi is struggling with a smile on his face, Dante is fleeing from one earthly hell to another (all the while writing his "Divine Comedy") and many vile figures of history are put in their place by fictitious literary backhands from Cahill. Each character is exposed for the good (or evil) that Cahill sees in them. Most are generous where deserved, but some are treated with such excessive ferocity, we see in the author a bit of the resentment presented by those who just can't stand anyone disagreeing with them.

One example is Cahill's blistering repartee of Bernard of Clairvaux. Like many high-profile eccentrics, Bernard does have a mixed contribution of greatness. His books on love remains some of the most articulate volumes ever written on the subject (I reviewed a selection volume of Bernard's works here). However, he also had faults including supported a crusade and being painfully dogmatic in defending the church against opposing views (to the point of using political and positional force to make his opinion win). Seen on the whole, Bernard seems human, but not monstrous. However, through Cahill, we see a darkly vengeful and impetuous Bernard. And the author does this with a couple figures in the book- vilifying their dark side without giving due credit to their positive contributions.

The book serves as a sort of "who's my favorite characters" narrative by the author (or worse depending on the subject at the time), but it's also obvious that Cahill chooses the stream of intellectual and philosophical personas over the political and high-labeled historical figures. What the author is doing is exploring how the ancient world died culturally and intellectually (if not in many other ways), contracted and eventually gave way to the European renaissance. The "movers and shakers" on Cahill's list are the poignant women and men (and their pivotal ideas) who propelled feminism, science and art out from under the gloom of a disintegrated western world in which the road of Romanitas had eventually taken civilization over a cliff.

While he treats Bernard conspicuously, the author saves copious praise for some of the truly great (and celebrated) figures, especially Hildegarde, Eleanor of Aquataine (queen of both France and England at times, mother of Richard the Lionhearted), Francis of Assisi (and Claire), Abelard, Thomas Aquinas (the brilliant scholastic), Giotto di Bondone (the foundational Italian painter/artist/architect), and Dante Alighieri (the famed poet/writer of "The Divine Comedy").

"Mysteries of the Middle Ages" weaves the stories of these characters, their significant lives, the triumph's (and failures) and how they left an enduring contribution to the culture, thought and science of Western Civilization. The author lucidly connects the narratives through a chronological map, even going so far as to transition from Giotto to Dante by having them meet.  This is Cahill at his best, exploring what did, and what could have happened, all the while making the important points thread through history as though they were meant to find us now. You feel a providence in the grand narratives that Cahill writes (even from book to book) and his affirmation of faith is never kept shyly away. Still, the book is hardly an endorsement of Christiainity, and certainly not an empty-eyed smile to the Catholic church.

Cahill rails against every injustice that creeps its way into the clerical realm, unjustly at times, since he has the benefit of hindsight to beat his historical whipping boys with when they step out of line. But one has to give an acknowledgement of realism to the author for taking the current church to task (all the while not disowning it from his personal faith) for its abysmal failure in the modern scandal of sins of clergy sexual abuse amongst Catholic priests and the children given to their care. It is out of this angst from Cahill that there are a few R-rated moments in this book, when his rage boils over the top and he throws a good chunk of established Catholic church leadership and clergy over the perverbial cliff.

I ended up reading this book two full times and a third time reskimming it again. It is almost as much a story as "How The Irish Saved Civilization", though focusing on a good many more characters. It is less historical, geo-political or national than "Sailing the Wine-Dark Sea" or "The Gifts of the Jews", but this is clear and repeatedly warned.  Overall, it is a vivid and brilliant picture of Cahill's post-classical, pre-rennassaince Europe. It is especially engaging and enjoyable if you know the historical context and chronology before you read this book. Reading this book will make you live through the hidden secrets of the middle-ages rather than recite the historical headlines.

Amazon Book Link: http://amzn.to/SRdMBR

Review by Kim Gentes

“The Spiritual Brain” by Mario Beauregard, Denyse O'Leary is subtitled “A Neuroscientist’s Case for the Existence of the Soul”, but it represents as much a philosophical examination of modernity and materialism as it does a thoughtful examination of the brain and its abilities/limits explored by scientific methodological rigor.
 
Before the authors enter deeply into tests, hypothesis and results, they delve deeply into the conundrum of how the current scientific community predisposes itself to the modernist and materialist worldview, even (at times) in the face of scientific evidence that points elsewhere. The authors seek to expose some of these philosophical foundations to allow them to confront some of the underlying worldview issues.
 
But before going deep into reviewing “The Spiritual Brain” and its premise, let me examine the context of thought that is being dealt with here. How can we question and evaluate a framework (IE. modernity and materialism) that has served mankind for the last few hundred years with increasing absolution from critique? In this, post-modernity does us a service in opening the door for questioning long established assumptions. The most essential assumptions to be confronted are modernity and materialism (in the classic philosophical sense).

Modernity and materialism (both scientific and cultural) have played key roles in western thought for the last 300-400 years. The impact of these ideologies has been felt not only in secular life but the Christian community as well. The deep impact of modernity in the church, and even in its pastoral leadership, is echoed well by Thomas Oden, who says:

Modern chauvinism has assumed that all recent modes of knowing the truth are vastly superior to all older ways, a view that has recently presided over the precipitous deterioration of social structures and processes in the third quarter of the twentieth century. My frank goal has been to help free persons from feeling intimidated by modernity, which while it often seems awesome is rapidly losing its moral power, and to grasp the emerging vision of a postmodern classical Christianity.[1]

Oden’s statement scratches the surface of a festering boil within our faith community - we have lost our foundational trust in the classic wisdom of our tradition. We have replaced it with an underlying trust in society’s secular pillars of modernity and materialism, and those have influenced almost every pastoral and leadership discipline in Christianity. We have tried to nuance our statements and practices with faith language, but our underlying assumptions were still founded on the principles within modernity and materialist reductionism.

Challenges to the materialist worldview have not only come from pastoral and theological leaders such as Oden (above), but also from scientific experts themselves, such as Dr. Mario Beauregard. He and Denyse O’Leary are the authors of the recent book “The Spiritual Brain: A Neuroscientist’s Case for the Existence of the Soul.” Hence, we get to our promised review of this book.

In this work, Beauregard appropriately confronts the philosophical constructs of materialism before getting to the scientific theories, experiments and studies. He does this to explain how the scientific findings are being interpreted through the materialist mindset, and bent to reinforce the same. The following extensive quote gives an example of one such point where Beauregard deconstructs the materialist arrogance that has been injected into the scientific work of neuroscience.

American culture critic Tom Wolfe put the matter succinctly in an elegant little essay he published in 1996, “Sorry, but Your Soul Just Died,” which expounds the “neuroscientific view of life.” He wrote about the new imaging techniques that enable neuroscientists to see what is happening in your brain when you experience a thought or an emotion. The outcome, according to Wolfe, is:

Since consciousness and thought are entirely physical products of your brain and nervous system—and since your brain arrived fully imprinted at birth—what makes you think you have free will? Where is it going to come from? What “ghost,” what “mind,” what “self,” what “soul,” what anything that will not be immediately grabbed by those scornful quotation marks, is going to bubble up your brain stem to give it to you? I have heard neuroscientists theorize that, given computers of sufficient power and sophistication, it would be possible to predict the course of any human being’s life moment by moment, including the fact that the poor devil was about to shake his head over the very idea.

Wolfe doubts that any sixteenth-century Calvinist believed so completely in predestination as these hot young scientists. The whole materialist creed that Wolfe outlines hangs off one little word, “Since”—“Since consciousness and thought are entirely physical products of your brain and nervous system…” In other words, neuroscientists have not discovered that there is no you in you; they start their work with that assumption. Anything they find is interpreted on the basis of that view. The science does not require that. Rather, it is an obligation that materialists impose on themselves. But what if scientific evidence points in a different direction? As we will see, it does. But before we get to the neuroscience, it may be worthwhile to look at some other reasons for thinking that the twentieth-century materialist consensus isn’t true. Neuroscience is, after all, a rather new discipline, and it would be best to first establish that there are also good reasons for doubting materialism that arise from older disciplines.[2]

We don’t have to be neuroscientists to understand the implications of the materialist reductionism being presented by Wolfe and his contemporaries. Beauregard works with careful tension between scientific and philosophical arguments to bring his thesis to the forefront - that we have built both our worldview and our scientific methodologies on a foundation that has begun to crack. We cannot move forward with true exploration (scientific or otherwise) without resetting those foundations in a system that incorporates the possibility of something non-materialist. Like the labels of modernity and post-modernity, Beauregard has no nomenclature for the new worldview, other than calling it the antithesis of its predecessor- “non-materialist”.

Without giving a essay length review of Beauregard’s excellent book, we can summarize his efforts to

1. articulating the presumptions of materialist reductionism within scientific thought
2. presenting an alternative non-materialist philosophical viewpoint
3. detailing scientific studies and findings that support the non-materialist viewpoint
4. presenting the specific details and summary findings proving the existence of the mind outside of the brain.

This work has some excellent power points made along the way. Each one confronting a remnant of materialist thinking that is answered with thoughtful nuance. One such example is this:

A teleologically oriented (i.e., purposeful rather than random) biological evolution has enabled humans to consciously and voluntarily shape the functioning of our brains. As a result of this powerful capacity, we are not biological robots totally governed by “selfish” genes and neurons.[3]

This is in direct response to scientific claims that genes force not only our structure and biology, but our actions and choices. Beauregard's response here is supported with much detail, but I wanted to highlight just such a conclusion that he comes to so you can understand the scope of the work he is attempting to do- to provide both a scientific and philosophical reset on the materialist/reductionist worldview which he says is wrongly assumed and embedded in the modern scientific community and work.

The book ultimately provides extensive study and data related to Beauregard’s thesis, along with summation of the reasons that he attributes the human soul with existence beyond the brain. But you cannot get to that conclusion without first travelling long (and sometimes hard) through the depths of his philosophical deconstruction and reconstruction.  That said, it is a worthwhile journey and I highly encourage you to make it if you are interested in the topics brought up here.

Amazon Book Link:  http://amzn.to/OCjQhg

Review by Kim Gentes

[1]Thomas C. Oden, “Care of Souls in the Classic Tradition” (Philadelphia, PA: Fortress Press, 1984), Pg 24
[2]Mario Beauregard, Denyse O'Leary, “The Spiritual Brain: A Neuroscientist’s Case for the Existence of the Soul”. (New York, NY: HarperCollins Publishers Inc., 2007), Pg 4
[3] Ibid., Pg 45

"Embracing Obscurity" is a book of challenge meant to confront the church of western society which lives squarely in a culture of self-seeking, goal-oriented, achievement-centered structures and people. For the most part, the book starts with the premise that the church hasn't escaped these cultural trappings. The approach taken with "Embracing Obscurity" is to try to deconstruct the evils of the culture, explain how unbiblical they are and pursue a higher devotion to God’s purposes than the "me"-centric ideals of our western world.

At first blush, honestly, I found the book to seem weak in its theological composition of any ideas that weren't just a "U" in the Calvinistic acronym of TULIP. Yes, we are all bad, all worms, and God is great, up on His high throne. This is how the book starts, and it doesn’t help itself in starting this way. I understand the compulsion to begin with the affront on the standard culture infiltrating church and Christian values. Shock the reader into realizing they are attaching their actions to values that aren't Christ-centered. But ultimately this approach may scare away people who might want a more substantive foundation of understanding of where to center their lives and value. The patient reader will find that the book does indeed make its final claim of human worth in the valuation as being through being God’s family and finding our eternal rewards in Him (as opposed to the temporal rewards of self-centeredness).

I say this upfront to make the point that the book starts weak but ends strong. In fact, by the fourth chapter, the author (who has notably remained completely anonymous to make a further point about their thesis) turns the ship towards reconstructing a new understanding of self, of value, and of living life within the obscurity of the world so that one might be known by the One to the glory of God.

By the end of the book, I was wanting more. It felt like the author had turned the ship towards God's goodness enfolding man's destiny, leaving us squarely with a hopeful understanding of where to pursue life. The author sparks the conversation about eternal significance and eternal rewards- and the validation that pursuing God’s offered rewards are proper and just for the Christian. This is joyous and good. The reason I say that I felt like the author ended the book too soon was that while they centered the conversation properly, they didn't really explore the obvious next step of significance based on the imago dei, a concept of human value centered in God from creational theology. I kept waiting for this to be a main point and the author seems to leave without making the point, which is where the book seemed to be leading.

Like almost all modern Christian books, it has some weaknesses in presentation that are partly due to needing to fill the needed number of pages for publication. I felt like a reading of CS Lewis' "The Weight of Glory" would have accomplished much the same adjustment of heart and mind (with a similar goal and topic) in less than 20 pages. I also am not convinced that the author remaining anonymous really accomplishes the goal the author intends, since even within the book the reader is encouraged to embrace the spotlight that God brings, but with a new perspective of giving glory to God. I originally had a printed pre-release version of the book to use for my reading, but (after forgetting the printed copy in seat back pocket of an airplane seat) I ended up purchasing a Kindle version of the book. Because of the extensive notes and support references used in this book, I found the Kindle version to be better simply because I like working through all the support material while reading through the main text. Something to consider for those of you who might be reading for school studies or such.

Those things said, this is a topic that needs to be addressed, and addressed with new words and new perspectives to our generation. For that I am grateful and this work accomplishes that goal. Given my critiques above, the book ends up being strong and worth reading.

Amazon Book Link:  http://amzn.to/WS7VwO

Review by Kim Gentes

There are few cultures which ring as much interest to the historian as the Ancient Greeks. As part of his "Hinges of History" series, Thomas Cahill endeavors to appropriate history, archeology, legends and song into a unique narrative of the Greek origins, expanse, collapse and ending. In "Sailing the Wine-Dark Sea: Why the Greeks Matter" Cahill leans so prominently on the texts of Greek lore, one is scarcely able to sift between myth and matter. This frustrated me at first, since he seemed to imply that the Greek psyche was built (along with the language) as an indistinguishable amalgam of story and reality. A story of Zeus would give way to information about archeology; quotes of Iliad and Odyssey fade into history about Plato and Socrates. This was the first of a series of pains you must endure to get to the point of enjoying this book. Let's get those out of the way before we move on to the admirable qualities of this volume.

For the person looking for scholarly insight into Ancient Greek culture, they may come away saddened by Cahill's narrative here. Only a few pages are given to some very important subjects, such as the development of pre-historic Greek culture (and what is told leans strongly on the questionable sources of Heinrich Schliemann- though he admits this). Even more strange is the almost complete absence of any telling of the story of Alexander the Great, who would seem to be one of the most prominent figures in the history of the world, let alone the Greek narrative. In just 3 sentences, Cahill introduces, explains and kills off Alexander. This seems like a vast exclusion to me.

In addition, Cahill seems to be overly assertive that classical historians of academic stripes should be the final authority on theories of sociological progress and development. He takes swipes at Jared Diamond's efforts as a scientist/historian, when he says :

Nor can we legitimately trace some single simple element—say, the way microbes worked in our favor or our strategic geographical position—as giving the West its superiority. Hanson takes to task the popular biohistorian Jared Diamond (Guns, Germs, and Steel) on just this point: “The efforts of those who seek to reduce history to biology and geography deprecate the power and mystery of culture, and so often turn desperate.… Land, climate, weather, natural resources, fate, luck, a few rare individuals of brilliance, natural disaster, and more—all these play their role in the formation of a distinct culture, but it is impossible to determine exactly whether man, nature, or chance is the initial catalyst for the origins of Western civilization [emphasis mine].”[1]

If his jealous jab of calling Diamond a "popular biohistorian" doesn't seem overt enough (Cahill would seem to be the last person who should be snubbing people for writing for the masses on scholarly subjects) his self-serving intentions manifest full force in his next paragraph, when he says :

To inquire into the ways in which an unpredictable historical combination—in this case, the combination of dogged military practicality with unprecedented citizen responsibility—may generate a new cultural force that has tremendous impact on the world over many centuries brings us as close as we are likely to come to the deep mysteries of the historical process.[2]

Apparently for Cahill, the only thing that can "bring us as close as we are likely to come" is to use the study of the "historical process" (IE. the kind of process that apparently only a historian as Cahill can use), and ignore biological science, linguistics, anthropology and archeology that don't support his own theories. It feels more than a bit childish to begin a book by slapping all the other kids on the playground, but hey, it's Cahill.

Finally, the last angst that is embedded in this book is the author's unceasing use of the f-word. Presumably sex is a topic of great interest to the Greeks, and therefore makes it a point for much writing. But his colloquialisms assumed in translation are added to by his backhanded writing style that leans into the cursing mode whenever he gets the chance. And he gets a lot of them.

But with those slights taken care of, the story told in "Sailing the Wine-Dark Sea" is both lush and human, grand and yet debasing. Cahill isn't shy about his goal, as he states:

"For me, the historian’s principal task should be to raise the dead to life." [3]

This is precisely what this book does. Cahill weaves a story that one can imagine a 5th century BC Greek telling. The figures of Agammemnon, Achilles and Hector seem as real as the the scientific progression of Aristotle. Even more so. The book focuses on the chronological progression of Greek language, culture, art and thought.

Because Greek becomes the lingua franca of the ancient world, and (along with latin) essential to a large portion of remaining historical documents, Cahill reminds you throughout the book of the concepts and words that continue to impact our own world to this day (as well as important ways it has impacted it historically). Probably here is an area where even more time could have been taken to draw the link between Greek conquest of the ancient world (via Alexandar) and the language and trade routes created by the same, and how those essentially "paved the way" for Roman domination of the ancient world. But again, since Alexander recieves no space, those points are left untouched.

Culturally, as I mentioned Cahill discusses varying degrees of detail on areas including womens roles/rights, government, sexuality and politics. Art becomes a main point for the book particularly around the depiction of humanity as epitomised through the statues of kouros - the ancient Greek classical renditions of the young male, traditionally nude. You learn much about how the depiction of humanity from Cahill's understanding here. How the Kritian boy (a famous example of a kouros) came to be, how this art form was aided by (and helped develop) out understanding of both anatomical structure of the human body and would later color our psychology of how we see ourselves. The book explores even the impact of the kouros model into the 20th century when Nasa represented human beings in a similar fashion the first discs that were sent deep into space on early Pioneer space craft (particularly the figures of the man and woman, where you see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pioneer_plaque#Figures_of_a_man_and_a_woman that NASA themselves recognize the rendition as being tied to Greek antiquity). Cahill belabors the point of kouros to the point that he states, without reservation, that it may have been the most impactive single concept the Greeks passed down to the rest of civilization. 

Of course, there is a sea of regular characters that aren't forgotten, such as Socrates, Plato, Pythagorus, Artistotle, Hypocrates and more. The roots of such foundational thinkers that are located in ancient Greek world come alive in this book. But again, much less is made of the details of scientific weight of these people or their theories than could be.

In the end, one feels as though they have experienced ancient Greek life more than taken a well structured series of lessons on Greek accomplishments. You understand the nuances Cahill is attempting (and succeeding) at making related to this ancient culture, and he is careful to point out that it is those nuances of thought that penetrate such vast areas of science, philosophy, language and art even today.

Having read all of the books in Cahill's "Hinges of History" (many of them multiple times), I needed two complete passes at this book to feel like I "got" enough out of it to both write a cogent review and digest the narrative. To be honest, this book seems the weakest of the "Hinges" series. Cahill does so much effusing on sexuality as to make it seem more his obsession than part of his investigation. The volume is certainly worth reading, but not as a matter of technical or scientific history or accomplishment. He does give you the sense of weight of Greek thought on world history, but does that without largely tracing extensive details in mathematics, science or philosophy other than list names and categories.

If you are thinking of reading it to cover the entire "Hinges" series, it is definitely a "must read". If you want to "get into the head" of an ancient Greek, this is about as close as possible as you will get. But if you are looking for a particularly strong historical reference for ancient Greek culture, thought and people, this isn't the right book.

Amazon Book Link: http://amzn.to/PHrJOD

Review by Kim Gentes

[1] Cahill, Thomas (2010-04-21). Sailing the Wine-Dark Sea: Why the Greeks Matter (Kindle Location 912-917). Random House, Inc.. Kindle Edition. 

[2] Ibid., Kindle Location 918

[3]  Ibid., Kindle Location 117

Tracing the history of financial development seemed like a good idea at the time. But what I found most often (in books I perused before buying) was that most books focused on economics, whose cogent thinkers don't arrive on the scene until the 18th century. Then I found "The Ascent of Money", whose apt title keeps a sharp focus on the instruments of exchange rather than the philospohies of theories, political bents of champions, or minute formulae of econometrics.

"The Ascent of Money" begins with ancient times in Mesopotamia and accounts for us the tale of first ledger accounts that were made with clay markers- the first instance of bonafide money. Since those first signs of tokens of exchange, humans have invented ways of marking wealth with various devices. Without spending time on economy, Ferguson accelerates through history, reaching mideavil Europe in fairly short order.

His goal is clear- trace the uses and demands of how people, leaders and governments invented mechanisms for exchange, funded expansion, waged wars, invented industries and toppled kingdoms. All with the tool of money.  He explains the details of how various forms of exchange, from metals to paper to digital balances made their way into society.

The book is exceptional writing, with dizzying amounts of information, but all kept sharply in focus of the topic. Even as he explains M1, M2, M3, securities-backed derivatives or the failure of LTCM and more, the reader never feels left in the dark by a harried professor trying to overwhelm you with all their brilliant knowledge. Ferguson is obviously a brilliant scholar, but he doesn't lean on details to impress the student, he weaves a thoughtful narrative that calls out the minutia in appropriate amounts and at the appropriate times.  After reading several other books on the history of economics, it was wonderful to read a book that dealt with monetary development without being theory driven or school biased.

If you love history, you will love this book. I learned an exceptional amount about money in all its forms and enjoyed the writing the entire way through. An excellent book. I highly recommend it!

Amazon Book Link: http://amzn.to/RJMVaB

Review by Kim Gentes