Science is Dead

It was Neitzsche who proclaimed God is dead. However, this wasn’t entirely a good idea according to Neitzsche. Until the age of Enlightenment, having faith in God established a system of justice and fairness through belief in a all benevolent, loving and grace-filled God. Faith in God is the cornerstone for moral and ethical conduct–pro-social interactions–and common core values such as, altruism, compassion (empathy), love, conscience and sense of justice (autonomy). According to Robert Wright (1994), “all these are the things that hold society together, the things that allow our species think so highly of itself, can now be said to have a firm genetic basis” (p. 12). Both Wright and Neitzsche, of course, are atheists. The infamous text, “God is dead” first originated in his treatise The Gay Science, which most people have never read and never will read. Today, the idea of moral relativism set forth by the social constructivists, has created a sense of selfish entitlement sowing seeds of moral and ethical confusion. More recently, “your truth is your truth and my truth is mine” has given way to a double bind, dualism where alternative perspectives, honest and open debate and search for truth and scientific inquiry has been replaced with group think and pressure to conform to the unreality of socially constructed lies. If you don’t go along with the charade, you are too fragile and a “racist” Deangelo (2020). Make no mistake, this movement is no “paradigm shift” or tipping point, it’s a malicious and cruel attempt to rewrite truth and facts, divide and separate God’s creations (Kuhn, 1996).

I have just finished reading two books with opposing views, White Fragility (2018) by Robbin Deangelo and Blackout (2020) by Candice Owens. Science requires we test so-called truths, ask questions and challenge assumptions. True scientists seek to understand alternative perspectives and epistemology. That’s what we do. It is unfortunate, but most scientists merely repeat old and spent ideas. In a word, they are biased. Some believe that undoing tradition leads to a new system (kingdom) of truly free agents–free from the bondages of natural core values, indeed, free from foundational American traditions and values. However, Nietzsche believed that “the removal of this system put most people at the risk of despair or meaninglessness. What could the point of life be without a God?” 

The universe wasn’t made solely for human existence anymore. Nietzsche feared that this understanding of the world would lead to pessimism, “a will to nothingness” that was antithetical to the life-affirming philosophy Nietzsche prompted. His fear of nihilism and our reaction to it was illustrated in The Will to Power, when he wrote that: “What I relate is the history of the next two centuries. I describe what is coming, what can no longer come differently: the advent of nihilism… For some time now our whole European culture has been moving as toward a catastrophe” (Abrams, Daniel, Haley Yaple, and Richard Wiener, 2016). He would not have been surprised by the recent events that plague American culture in the 21st century teetering on the precipice of Marxism, once again. Some people never learn from the past. Why? The spent and foolish idea of socialism is like a broken and scratched record playing the same old tune over and over again. This is most perplexing.

The fruit of the liberal progressive, social constructivism agenda to transform America has been selfish, vain contempt for science and narcissistic nihilism (Collins, 1998). In a prior blog I shared how we got here. So, we have been lied to about so many things for so long, and mainstream and social media has cancelled free speech, honest and open debate and obfuscated the truth, we no longer know what is valid, reliable and trustworthy knowledge. I believe that the, so called, Russian hoax paved the way for the death of science. We can can actually learn something from the Russians–those who have experienced socialism and survived Marxism. Solzhenitsyn feared that the West would abandon its own moral and spiritual ideas and identity. He viewed the West’s weakness, including its weakness in truly standing up to Marxism as the fruit of materialism, self-indulgent individualism, and narcissism. Solzhenitsyn, a legendary human rights activist, warned America and the West that we had become too focused on rights instead of personal responsibility. So the death of science is preceded by the loss of faith, family and virtue. There has been a solid declining trend in church attendance and traditional nuclear family values (Barna, 2021). And now, some educators are teaching children to feel shamed for the color of their skin (National Equity Project). This is nothing more than modern day babble and noise. It’s not the truth. “For the kingdom of God is not a matter of talk but of power” (1 Corinthians 4:20, NIV). By all means, God would have us consider carefully what we hear and the source of the information, but in all things we are instructed, Proverbs 15:2, “The tongue of the wise commends knowledge, but the mouth of the fool gushes folly.”  Proverbs 15:4, “The tongue that brings healing is a tree of life, but a deceitful tongue crushes the spirit.” 


Abrams, Daniel, Haley Yaple, and Richard Wiener. “ Physics ArXiv:1012.1375v2.” [1012.1375v2] A Mathematical Model of Social Group Competition with Application to the Growth of Religious Non-affiliation. N.p., n.d. Web. 04 Aug. 2016.

Aldridge, J. (2014). Hart and science of transform-action. Paper presented at the Forum International de L’Innovation Sociale: Autorité, Leadership & Transformation, Dourdan, France.

Collins, R. (1998). The sociology of philosophies: A global theory of intellectual change. Cambridge, MA: The Belknap Press of Harvard University Press.

Deangelo, R. (2018). White fragility: Why it’s so hard for white people to talk about racism. Boston, MA: Beacon Press.

Kuhn, T. S. (1996). The structure of scientific revolutions. (3rd ed.). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

Lash, S. (1999). Another modernity: A different rationality. Malden, MA: Blackwell.

Ornstein, R. (1991). Evolution of consciousness: The origins of the way we think. New York: Simon & Schuster.

Owens, C. (2020). Blackout: How black America can make its second escape from the democratic plantation. New York, NY: Simon and Schuster.

Wright, R. (1994). The moral animal. New York, NY: Pantheon Books.

Truth & Grace: Learning How to Learn

“Who Knows Only His Own Generation Remains Always a Child.”

This very interesting and relevant quote by Dr. George Norlin, former president of the University of Colorado, is inscribed over the west entrance of the University’s library where I spent hundreds of hours deep in the library stacks studying late into the night. I have learned to navigate the depths of that library in the dark and with my eyes closed.  But when it came to learning and understanding truth, my eyes were then, as they are now, wide open.  Learners ask questions and challenge assumptions. Learners have a desire to understand alternative perspectives and become knowledgeable with both sides or perspectives of ideas and so called facts. One must understand another’s perspective to have a civil conversation let alone formidable debate.   Why do so many college students today simply reciting the boring one-sided opinions and lectures their professors pedantically preach to them? What ever happened to critical thinking, epistemology and disciplined inquiry?  What about the merits of considering alternative perspectives while seeking the truth?  What is truth and how do we know what we know?

Recently, astronaut Scott Kelly posted a Tweet paraphrasing Winston Churchill. Below is the entire quote in context;

“In War: Resolution,
In Defeat: Defiance,
In Victory: Magnanimity
In Peace: Good Will.”

Kelly was attacked by some who considered the quote offensive.  So, Kelly back peddles and apologizes. He says something to the effect, “I need to get educated”.  Which brings me to the topic of this blog post, truth, grace and learning how to learn.   While I find nothing offensive with this quote, I am actually inspired by it, I am trying to understand how it might be offensive to some people? That’s an honest question. You see, I believe, words matter. However, there’s no question the truth can bite.  That is perhaps one reason why some people hide behind the safety of “political correctness” and postmodern relativism. It allows one to be wrong and still be right.  We are experiencing a division in perception of reality. Fortunately, truth and grace are interconnected, you can’t have one without the other.  What Kelly was responding to is the “pressure to conform” narrative, not truth and grace.  The political correct narrative, I believe, is part of the social constructivist agenda to rewrite history, not correct it nor to seek the truth. “Who knows only his own generation remaining always a child.”

If we lose the truth about our history, we lose our liberty. It is happening now at universities across America. Political correctness has crushed the spirit of truth and free speech.  This is why the First Amendment to the United States Constitution was so important to the Founders, it was first and foremost.

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

Why do so many people think history needs revision?  Perhaps it is because, for hundreds of years, churches and universities were the center of the community.  These were the places people gathered, church steeples marked the city centers. This is where people interacted with each other, learned from each other, shared stories and exchanged ideas, knowledge, goods and services in free markets. The city center or, market square were the very places truth and grace intersected as expressed through the First Amendment.  This idea, no longer fits with the current spirit of the time (zeitgeist).  Yes, there is a dark history of slavery. And slaveholding is a sin. Yet, many people falsely see religion as the source of legalism, bigotry and scientific ignorance. However, many more people, like me and perhaps you too, believe that faith in God expressly and implicitly guarantees individual liberty, justice and love. It is the very bases for social justice, human rights, democracy and equality; Jefferson referenced the Jewish and Christian God who made us free–“self evident”, he proclaimed as reflected in the Declaration of Independence. The Founders regarded religion as the duty of the independent and free individual to seek. The constitution assure this as an inalienable right and not a privilege to be tolerated. There’s a big difference.

Learning requires we enter a place I call the “epistemic gap”.  This is a place between the known and unknown, the natural and supernatural.  Stepping into the epistemic gap takes courage because it is more about learning than knowing. Cultivating a learning spirit requires humility.  We acknowledge the sins of our past and present and ask for redemption. Part of this “epistemic” journey involves understanding self in relation with God and His creations.  Thank God, we don’t all think alike.  This is a gift, not a curse.

Grace and truth’s perfect union can be cultivated in a community of diverse experiences and worldviews.  Truth and grace are integral and cannot be truly understood or experienced as an either/or concept.  Truth without grace breeds self-righteousness and legalism. Grace without truth breeds deception and moral compromise. The key to true intellectual and spiritual growth is to integrate these two qualities into life and learn how to learn all over again.

This is an honest question; how is the above quote offensive?  What are your thoughts?