It’s almost Christmas and I had thought to desist from blogging for the duration of the celebrations. Then I caught a link on the Guardian website to a video of an interview with the great Sir Terry Pratchett. So, here we go again…
I will not hear a word against Terry Pratchett. His books (especially the Discworld series) have been holiday reading for me for years and he is one of the very few authors to make me laugh and think in equal measure. I still think Small Gods is wonderful and should be read by anyone who claims to be a theist. But, I am mystified at how such a bright man can make such elementary mistakes when it comes to writing off theism. That said, however, at least he does it with the charm and self-effacing humour that advocates such as Richard Dawkins singularly lack.
I don’t know who the audience is (in the Guardian video), but they are clearly on his side and haven’t engaged their critical faculties. Well, why should they? After all, this is entertainment and not the place for having your assumptions challenged, isn’t it? Well, let’s start with a few quotations:
We [human beings] are shaped by the universe to be its consciousness. We tell the universe what it is.
I’d love to see that unpacked. He hints at an unpacking a little later:
I’d much rather be a rising ape than a falling angel.
This statement follows a romp through evolution and the assertion that we are monkeys who have achieved rather a lot. But here is where the problems start. Pratchett is working with what used to be called ‘the conflict metaphor’ which assumes that science and faith are in a battle for either/or supremacy: we can either have religious faith or we can trust science. This false positioning is given away when he says (earlier):
In my religion the building of a telescope is the building of a cathedral.
He dismisses the Judeo-Christian tradition on the basis that he read the Old Testament through in one sitting, thought that God comes over as a maniac who sanctions genocide and rejected Genesis as anti-scientific nonsense. Oh dear…
First, humanity is neither ‘rising ape’ nor ‘fallen angel’, but (according to Judeo-Christian thought) what Bruce Cockburn called ‘the angel-beast’ – made in the image of God, yet as frail as strong, always needing to learn and grow and develop. Science is integral to this ‘project’, not antithetical to it. This is the bit that leaves me a bit boggled: why does someone as intelligent as Pratchett not allow himself to get beyond false alternatives such as ‘faith versus science’ – when (to put it crudely) science is addressing questions faith does not, and faith asks questions for which science has no remit?
Have you seen the latest Hubble photos? They are amazing – awe-inspiring. I don’t understand a lot of the science around this sort of work, but I do marvel at what it shows us of the universe(s). The cathedral and the telescope are not inimical to one another – they open us up to awe and understanding and faith and worship, but in different ways. Why does Pratchett think they must be alternatives or opposites?
Understanding the workings of the universe is no threat to Christian faith – rather, it is integral to it. We are made to explore the world and why it is the way it is and how it came to be the way it is. But, as the ethicists always insist, you can’t get an ‘ought’ from an ‘is’ – so we need a different way of asking about meaning, values and significance in that universe. The creation-evolution divide is a false divide and most Christians got over it a long time ago.
Second, Sir Terry would be horrified (presumably) if we read his books as if they were scientific text books. The genre of the literature matters and shapes how we read what we read. So, couldn’t he show a little more literary respect to the material he dismisses and read it for what it is and not for what it isn’t? His assumptions underline for me the charge I continue to make: that many of the loud new atheists such as Richard Dawkins are not stupid, but they are illiterate. They want us to read every text as if there were only one genre of writing. (Fundamentalist creationists fall into the exact same trap…)
Third, the great man goes on to say:
God help me if I ever become a Christian. You lot would suffer, I’ll tell you…
It seems to me that there is nothing here that should stop him from becoming a Christian (even if he was just having a laugh). Evolution would become more interesting, reading ancient texts (with a different set of questions) would become enriching and challenging, and the world would become more colourful. And I’d love to see him using his amazing creative imagination and humour to expose the false contradictions and dichotomies he once espoused.
I am off for a few weeks of uninterrupted reading in January. You can bet your life there will be the odd Pratchett book in the bag. And I’ll be wondering if people like Sir Terry – justifiably popular and sadly now experiencing Alzheimer’s – ever get challenged, or if their fame and popularity simply make every statement they utter acceptable without question.
December 23, 2009 at 6:23 pm
I love Terry Pratchett books, I have been a fan for many years, and Small Gods was the first one I read.
I would love to see the Wizards Library, which is never ending and books talk and think and actually seem, when opened to be a veritable Pandora’s Box.
At least he is entertaining, which is more than I can say for Philip Pullman, whose books I found to be so dark and desperate that I am afraid that I gave up before the end of the sequence.
Now, if the General Synod was organised like one of the Discworld reunions, what fun it would be!
December 24, 2009 at 7:59 am
Thanks, Nick, for your entertaining exposition of bits of Terry Pratchett – we have to keep saying over and over again that science and faith answer different questions, but that the knowledge that faith reveals is as valid, worthwhile, life-enhancing and suitable for the public domain as anything that science can show us. Long ago I came across a statement (Isaac Newton, I think, but can’t be sure) that science is the handmaiden of creation. I was an earth scientist for 12 years before being a teacher and always felt that the exploration of God’s amazing creation was the main reason I got out of bed each day…walk with the handmaiden and find God’s wonders.
December 24, 2009 at 8:01 am
And yes, you are right in your last sentence. Certain people (especially popular writers and those with huge creative imagination) do seem to be beyond scrutiny. Perhaps such people should go into UK politics to escape their bubbles…
December 24, 2009 at 8:52 am
I love Terry Pratchett’s books too (although not the man whom I met once and found arrogant and rude) and like you, I’ve always found it odd that he falls into the ‘it’s not scientific fact therefore it’s nonsense that can’t tell me anything’ trap. Why do so many people get stuck there? In many cases I suspect that it’s because they don’t read much, but that’s certainly not the case with Sir Terry.
My parents were always quite clear that the theory of evolution and the story of creation were different ways of expressing the same truth – as my mother was the devout daughter of Plymouth Brethren missionaries (who worked in Italy!) I think that says a great deal about the evangelical drift towards fundamentalism.
I’ve tried to arm my own children with understanding about genre and context, but it’s very hard to talk sensibly with people who have already decided that you’re just silly, and who have not interest at all in learning anything new or thoughtfully considering another point of view. Oh yes, you know all about that, don’t you?
December 24, 2009 at 11:51 am
He read through the OT in one sitting?
Somehow I don’t think he was reading for meaning then!
December 24, 2009 at 2:06 pm
All I know is a living relationship with Jesus, God’s own Son, makes a difference to life!
Why don’t people like Terry whatshisname(?) give it a try?
Anne.
December 27, 2009 at 9:54 pm
It’s absolutely ages since I read Small Gods; I’ll have to revisit it.
I think one difficulty I have with atheists who are harshly critical of theists is the implication that belief in God is based entirely on faulty reasoning or some sort of intellectual process gone wrong.
I’ll freely admit that my belief in God may not seem logical. I’ll freely admit that I cannot prove God exists using any kind of external logic. I’ll freely admit that, basically, I may be as crazy as some atheists think I am. I think the chances of such are very, very slim, but they could be right. It could all be a figment of my imagination.
But my belief in God is not based on taking objective information and weighing one set of arguments against another to come to a conclusion. It is based on perception which is subjective. It is based on my own experiences of the world, and my interpretations of those experiences. I can only experience the world as myself… and those experiences point to the existence of what I can only call God, though some simplistic ideas about God don’t make a conversation about it straightforward.
I accept that I might be wrong about the existence of God just as I accept that my vision, my hearing and my sense of smell may misinform me about the world from time to time. My senses are not infallible… I do hear things if I get far too overtired. I do need to wear spectacles — otherwise my eyes would have me believe that the world is mostly blurry and flat. My nose has even today confused goats cheese with cabbage. My perception or experience of the existence of God is far stronger than any of those senses, but by extrapolation I know on an intellectual level that it could be wrong.
But to say that belief in God is based on reason is like saying that appreciating a beautiful sunset is based on reason. I can talk about it until the cows come home, but I cannot prove its beauty to someone who is blind. I can analyse a piece of music down to rather frightening levels of detail, but I cannot prove the Bach B minor Mass to anyone, whether they’ve heard it or not. There is nothing for me to prove.
And just as my eyes need corrective lenses, I wonder whether my spiritual perception is accurate. Can I learn to perceive God more keenly, as I have learned to perceive musical harmony? Do some people have a greater natural aptitude toward knowing God than I do? how can such people be identified? And are some people born with a sort of spiritual equivalent of deafblindness? If so, I suspect some of our staunchest atheists may be among them. I do not know what their experience of the world is; they do not know mine. But their insistence that I must be mad, simply because I have different perceptions than theirs, is rather frustrating at best. I’m not one to swallow religious instruction with unquestioning obedience, and the implication that I haven’t spent some considerable time and effort double-checking my beliefs and trying to find a coherent framework for them shows a startling lack of good faith.
I don’t know at what point it makes any sense for me to get involved in intellectual discussions about the existence of God. If I turn around and tell them that their perceptions are wrong or incomplete I just display arrogance; if I tell them that their conclusions are incorrect I show the same lack of good faith in their reasoning that I have just complained about. I can always try to answer their questions about my beliefs — often a good exercise from my point of view anyway — but it will come back to subjective experience. And the best way for me to explain those subjective experiences is through music rather than discussion. So I keep working at that.
Have you read Good Omens, written jointly by Terry Pratchett and Neil Gaiman? It is excellent.
December 28, 2009 at 9:35 am
Song,
Your reasoning and perception of God based on your own life and experience is a wide ranging commentary of how God works.
Trying to explain a belief, which some might describe as wishful thinking, can be difficult.
I do not have deep theological training, and do not have the depth of knowledge of scripture to use it to refute arguments. I can only testify to what I have experienced and seen in so many real ways, of God appearing in my life and the wonder and joy that he has given me.
I am not afraid to speak openly about this if asked or the situation arises – I don’t go around openly proclaiming that ‘Jesus Lives’ as I think that I have the evidence and those who are receptive and care to listen will be prompted to ask the questions in a way that I am able to respond to.
I think that perhaps we have discussed in other posts that my simplistic view might be interpreted as naive however, I am content to accept God in the way that he has revealed himself in my life, and in that of so many other people who I live alongside and worship with.
In the same way – the call to serve is pretty direct and something deep inside which tells me that I must be doing more – and things just happen to progress it.
One thing I have experienced most recently, is a meeting for Spiritual Direction, which is really helpful and affirming and gives me so much to think and pray for – and will now be ongoing.
As for Terry Pratchet, I am afraid that I own all of the books he has written, in fact, they take a large amount of space on my book shelves – and why not! Despite his views, he has an instinctive ability to write quite entertainingly and perceptively, and provides a useful commentary sometimes on human nature.
I suppose that I don’t worry to much about the intellectual stuff – because I have so much else going on. Having said that, I have an Essay to deliver on Christian Ethics by the end of January, so I suppose I had better get my thinking cap on.
December 29, 2009 at 5:16 pm
Ernest – What training are you doing, or course are you studying, that requires you to write an essay on Christian Ethics?
Anne.
December 29, 2009 at 5:40 pm
I am currently in the process of discerning a vocation to Ministry within the CofE. As part of the preparation I am attending a part-time course at University. Part of the theme this term was Christian Ethics and Moral Absolutes.
Having attended the lectures, I have to deliver an Essay before the start of the next term at the end of January. There is a choice of 8 aspects to write on.
It is interesting and challenging for someone with no formal academic background or qualifications – however, I have had a long service career with lots of wide ranging training, which gave me the equivalent of a level 7 qualification in September this year as accreditation of prior learning.
January 1, 2010 at 4:14 pm
i really dont prefer fictional world of deities. the bible already contain huge amount of stories to get inspiration from. i prefer to get lessons or encouragement from God Words.