Friday, May 12, 2006


Thesis: The Oracle's ideas are great.
Observation: He has no following.
Maxim: Achieving a following (orthodoxy adjudicating the Biblical) is the truest measure of truth.
Or so everyone tells me as they point out that The Oracle has no following.
"Why don't you get a following?" they say. "Everybody in the thinky business should have one."
Maybe The Oracle's ideas aren't so great.
Contrary Maxim: Orthodoxy is meaningless regarding the truth of ideas. It is only meaningful regarding 1] reassuring the faint hearts of the following when they wish to believe without adequate epistemological support, and 2] a helpful lever for those who enjoy being followed when they, too, lack adequate support.
The Oracle still has no following.
Maybe his ideas are still not so great in spite of the lucidity of two sentences earlier.
Nope. The Oracle has checked. They are great!
They just have a problem.
His ideas suggest that autonomous ideas should be held by others. These personal notions should be proved by personally appraised epistemologies because those are the only ones with meaning to an individual's knowledge that he believes truth.
See the problem?
Such individualism is faint support for Movements. It is not an area that will gain a great harvest of weak willed fanboys who can't be sure of which way to comb their hair without an orthodoxy promulgated by alpha-males.

Some say The Oracle is confused. Here he pushes individualism, radical Anabaptist autonomy of the worst stamp. There, he is all over the hierarchies and submission.
Actually The Oracle is all for hierarchies in ideas but an idea's claims to height is measured not by dictate of a governing church, school of philosophy, or the emotion of a movement. Ideas are only measured by epistemology. You cannot have an idea dictated by position. If you believe an idea because you were told to, it is not the idea you believe. It ceases to be an idea and becomes a loyalty. A husband cannot command that his wife think as he does, not because there is no hierarchy in thought, but because there is, and he has not adequately appealed to it.

No comments: