I am sometimes asked “why are you so interested in philosophy?” Usually the question comes in the context of a “the Bible says it, just believe it” moment.*
I like to respond to this question with a cookie analogy.
Some people go to the store and buy premade cookies – some taste good, some not so much, others are healthy, others are not. Either way, the cookies are ready made, all the person has to do is pick them up, eat and be nourished (to a greater or lesser degree). This is something of a one-way consumer experience in that there’s no preparatory “work” involved in baking the cookies – and there’s nothing inherently wrong with that.
There are also those who go a step further in that, rather than buying premade cookies, they buy a premix cookie kit – all they have to do is go home, follow the instructions on the box or packet, and happy days – they have their cookies.
There are pros and cons to this approach compared to the first; one pro is that there is room for slight customisation of the ingredients and/or baking process, but generally there is little wriggle room in that the contents of the premix and corresponding baking instructions constrain the possibilities. But where the first approach is a one-way consumer experience, this second approach does include the consumer in the baking process in a predefined kind of way, given their involvement in producing the final batch. Again, there’s nothing inherently wrong with this approach (providing the person doesn’t consider themselves a Patissier!)
There are also others who avoid going to the shops altogether and choose to whip up home made cookies from scratch (providing they have the required ingredients in their pantry). In contrast to the first approach, and to a lesser degree the second approach, this third approach requires a certain degree of knowledge and experience in that the person is baking without set instructions or set ingredients (for brevity, let’s ignore the approach of following a home made recipe!). Usually this knowledge and experience is the result of both education and much trial and error experience; these people know what’s in and what’s out of a ‘good’ cookie mix, and how to about the baking process to achieve the desired outcome from independent instruction and personal practice.
I think true philosophy (the love of wisdom) is like the third approach. The practice involves a critical analysis of the ingredients or the elements of our thinking in a constructive way (let me say in passing that “deconstructionism” never baked a cookie… it just leaves a mess for someone else to clean up!). In the context of what the Bible says, and the formulation of doctrine and theology, this third approach tends to get underneath the “why” of beliefs, rather than simply “what” they are. And for the teachers among this group, they can’t help but put those cookie’s on the bottom shelf for everyone to enjoy (in moderation!).
From my experience, the second group of people are like many Bible teachers who have been taught or trained in one particular theological tradition. It may not be a bad one, it may be a very good one (but how would you know without some degree of critical reflection?); either way, there is a tendency for inflexibility when it comes to straying too far from the “what” and “how” of the ingredients/process of doctrinal formulation and theologising. Inflexibility isn’t bad per se; truth, after all, can be very inflexible depending on the subject considered. What I am getting at here is the kind of inflexibility that can lead to outright intolerance for ‘the other’ which, unknown, can pose a threat. This isn’t always the case for all premixers, though, so I don’t want to generalise too much.
Also from my experience, the first consumer approach is more like the lay person or congregant. Again, nothing inherently wrong with this, apart from the obvious disclaimer that, at the end of the day, every individual is responsible for what they choose to consume, both “what” it is and “how” much of it they take in. The other aspect to this is the message the consumer approach sends to the baker / teacher / pastor in making sure they don’t feed junk to their people.
In short: I appreciate philosophy – the great, the good, the bad and the terrible – because it helps me to know, not simply “what” to think, but “how” to think and “why” to think at all.
*To be clear, I believe the 66 books comprising the Bible today are reliable to the original divinely inspired autographs. The problem with the, “the Bible says it, just believe it” mantra is not the “believe it” part, but the “says it” part. God’s word is the measure, our interpretation or what we think it says, may be mistaken. Humility ought to characterise our theologising.
