"Masculine" Genius

http://www.zenit.org/english/visualizza.phtml?sid=106436
click here

Zenit has an interview of Anthony Esolen, who is a frequent contributor to Crisis magazine

The title parallels the term "feminine genius" used by the late John Paul II's 1988 apostolic letter on the Dignity and Vocation of Women, Mulieris Dignitatem, A good commentary on this document can be found here.

Briefly, feminine genius (genius here means unique qualities) refers to things such as women's ability to bear children, their relational nature, their nurturing nature, the reflection of humanity in general in front of God, their model of openness to God, emotions. Modern feminism has corrupted this by telling women that their dignity is based on power, money and control - the things that are reflective of men's (males) fallen nature.

So what are unique qualities of men that are natural to them? According to Esolen, these could include their affinity for organization, leadership, complex structures, etc.

On reading that, I thought "That's so me! This really speaks to who I am!" Then I realized that having these affinities no longer make me that special. Alas. But it certainly explains my affinity for complex structures such as the economy, airline industry, logistics, operations research, optimizing TV/Video settings, teaching, data reduction, etc.

And it also helps me realize that women in general are not so attuned to these things (I am sure there are women who are very good at these things) in the way men are. Therefore it is unreasonable to expect women around me to like these things like the way I do.

However, I need to become aware of their feminine genius and help them bring it out in them - although women probably can help each other much better than I ever can.

The Economist on "Evolution and Religion" -In the Beginning

Article available here:

http://www.economist.com/world/displaystory.cfm?story_id=9036706

I am rather surprised how well they covered this issue.

They bring three Catholic thinkers into the picture:
1. Father George Coyne, past head of the Vatican Observatory
2. His holiness Pope Benedict XVI (I recently learned that I simply can't read Roman numerals)
3. Fr. Joseph Fessio, Provost of Ave Maria University

What distinguishes these three?
Fr. Coyne has worked to preserve a Chinese Wall between physics and metaphysics, which allows him to side with agnostics in issues of science and the scientific method. He is among secular scientists who agree that agreeing on physics doesn't mean you have to agree to metaphysics or religion.

Fr. Fessio is of the opinion that while the Chinese wall is fine, but Darwinists (here I define them as those who hold Darwinism as a religion, even though they won't admit to it) and secularists are trying to tear it down. These are those who believe that scientific observations leave no room for religion or God (including those who say that religion itself is a phenomenon of man's evolutionary needs).

Benedict, brilliant as he is, can be more picky in what he means: scientific descriptions are valid as far as they go, but they are incomplete at the end. And the theory of evolution cannot be proven conclusively. He is anti-Darwinism, for sure, but he also does not support "God of the gaps" idea: gaps in the evolutionary science can only be filled by the supernatural.

All three men's critical insight is rather well portrayed in this article, and it does not do these men disservice.

Of course, there is nothing in natural sciences that derive from empirical data that can be "proved." Only mathematical theorems can be proved, because we have defined the language of mathematics. Observations can only support a certain idea, not "prove" it.

The current North American formulation of "intelligent design" suffers from some critical flaws:
1. most of it is a knee-jerk reaction to secularism, and hiding in the Biblical metaphysics for cover, when the issue of un-reason must be dealt in the realm of reason. This probably comes from the inadequate education we received in how to think.
2. By shunning science, it shuns reason, one of the critical element of the human intellect created by God. It downgrades the role of reason in scientific discourse, and does disservice to those of us who do science.
3. Secularism should be fought on metaphysical grounds, not on the turf of natural science.


Meanwhile, if anyone can read French and or German, please translate these for us Americans who can't:

"Atlas of Creation" by Harun Yahya (Adnan Oktar) - making waves in French, Arabic, Urdu and Bahasa-speaking places in the world. It is a criticism of Darwinism

Benedict et al published on Wednesday April 11th in Germany "Schöpfung
und Evolution" (Creation and Evolution).  More on this book here

This is the book referred to in the article, along with "Jesus von Nazareth." which was also recently published.