
So more and more I am conviced that there is no such thing as a split between the sciences and the humanities. What passes for "humanities" these days often does more damage to humanity than anything else. On the other hand, if we are honest we all know that the scientist at his lab poking around with different formulations of reality is no different than Oscar Wilde sitting at his desk with his cigarrette and coffee laboring for hours over the placement of a comma. All our major scientific advances come from a hunch; all our best poetry comes from the same hunch. Yes, both have the capability to be inhuman and cold--but that can only be said if the converse is also true.
As Christians we need to uphold the dignity and splendor of humans as image-bearers and sub-creators of the Triune God. One pastor writes, "Man's first mission was to subdue and have dominion over the earth (Gen. 1:28). Genesis 2:15 restates this commission in terms of tending and keeping the garden of God. The concept of man as a gardener is highly suggestive: a gardener does not destroy nature, nor leave it as it is. He cultivates and develops it, enhancing its beauty, usefullness, and fruitfulness. So God expects his servants to bring all creation under his lordship. Science, engineering, art, education, government are all part of this responsibility. We are to bring every dimension of life, both spiritual and material, under the rule and law of God." from Tim Keller Ministries of Mercy
There is no "sacred" and "secular." There are no loggerheaded "humanities" and "sciences." There is only the Lord, His world, and His people. Science, whether people acknowledge it or not, it profoundly personal, human. The humanities, as its name betrays, is profoundly personal. And this is true because our Lord is personal. Under His Lordship, economics and literature converge.
The prompt for this little soapbox moment: a bizzarre melding of economics and music. It is "experimental music that integrates concepts and related source data as part of structural compositions ... and is based on patterns found in the stock market, economic indicators, and related algorithms."
2 Comments:
Even economists are artists, relying on their emotions to do the work they do, not cold analysis.
A truly rational person, even a economist "who drains the humanity from their work", could never make a truly rational decision in the work they do.
Think about it. Rational decision making (supposedly) takes into account a number of objective facts that allow people to make informed decisions. But how many facts are enough?
The answer is that there are an infinite number of variables that go into every decision, and an equally large number of potential outcomes. Thus, a rational person would have to take all of these into account before making a truly informed decision, and would never finish the analysis needed for that decision before expiring.
Economists, physicists, fed reserve chairman, all eventually have to decide that on an emotional level they feel comfortable that they know enough to make a decision. This is a gut level decision, an emotional one, akin to any painter deciding where to put the next brushstroke.
i agree!
Post a Comment
<< Home