Daily Post #31

Unexamined Faith: Socrates is one of the most famous philosophers in Western history. Like Jesus, he never wrote anything down. We know about him and what he taught via his followers. Socrates is famous for saying: “The unexamined life is not worth living.” However, I found a faith-adaption of this quote in Burton Porter’s The Good Life. It reads: “We can also say that the unexamined faith is not worth holding.” We need more thinking Christians. When Thomas doubted, Jesus provided empirical evidence—He did not reply, “Just have faith” (Pearcey). Such responses aren’t helpful to non-Christians. Along these lines, I just started an audiobook that promises to be good and helpful: Nancy Pearcey’s Finding Truth: 5 Principles for Unmasking Atheism, Secularism, and Other God Substitutes. Here is one line: “Materialists deny the reality of the mind while using their minds to advance materialism. Determinists deny the reality of human choice while they choose determinism. And Relativists deny the fact of right and wrong while they judge you if you disagree.”

The Transformative Power of Travel: René Descartes is known as the Father of Modern Philosophy. He published his magnum opus in 1642: Meditations on First Philosophy. Yet, another one of his publications is a delightful read: Discourse on Method (published in 1637). In it, he takes time to talk about the transformative and liberating power of traveling outside of one’s country. It is worth considering. He writes: “For to hold converse with those of other ages and to travel, are almost the same thing. It is useful to know something of the manners of different nations, that we may be enabled to form a more correct judgment regarding our own, and be prevented from thinking that everything contrary to our customs is ridiculous and irrational, a conclusion usually come to by those whose experience has been limited to their own country.”

C.S. Lewis on Beauty: As I stated a few days ago, I am reading the collected letters of C.S. Lewis in chronological order. He is 22 right now in my reading. I was struck last night by what he said of beauty. He writes: “On the contrary beauty seems to me to be always an invitation of some sort & usually an invitation to we don’t know what. . . . [something] seen as ‘beautiful’ seems rather to say ‘come into me.'” Of course, when one begins to view and experience God as the ultimate Beauty and source of all other beauty, one can better understand Lewis’ claim that beauty invites us to “come into me.” This has been God’s desire all along: that we are in Christ and that He is in us.


Published by B.J. Condrey, PhD

Dr. Condrey holds a Bachelor of Arts in both Philosophy and Psychology from the University of Missouri-KC, a Master of Arts in Philosophy from the University of Southern Mississippi, and a Ph.D. in Ethics & Practical Theology from the University of Edinburgh. He is ACSI certified. Dr. Condrey writes courses and teaches Psychology, Bible, and C.S. Lewis at Enlightium Academy, where he began working in 2016. He has served as a youth, young adult, and small group pastor in the local church, and currently teaches Ethics at the University of Southern Mississippi. He has a book published by Wipf & Stock (Breaking Ground) along with other publications. In his spare time, he enjoys reading and writing, spending time with his family, traveling, trout fishing, family hikes, and drinking coffee! He is passionate about helping young people construct a biblical worldview so that their faith involves both the mind and heart. He has been married since 2009 and has two children.

2 thoughts on “Daily Post #31

  1. Not that I would agree with them necessarily, but working in The field of neuroscience I think that you misrepresent what they would say. They would Argue that they are not in fact using their mind too to support materialism, They would say that the concept of “mind” is still a product of the brain and therefore they are using materialism to support materialism.


    1. I am not sure if I get your meaning. There are different theories in philosophy of mind as to whether the mind and brain are separate, whether they are one and the same, or whether the mind is an offshoot of the brain but can’t affect the brain (Epiphenomenalism). Feel free to respond, but can you explain your point differently? Thanks!


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: