Thursday open thread

All heresy is innovation, but not all innovation is heresy.

Comments

[Jesurgislac]

I'm still contemplating making bagels. Without Brooklyn water. Will this be innovation or heresy?

[burgundy]

Monday we had a guest speaker in class, and he said something about how his job entails working with "big steaming piles of data" and of course I wanted to say "drenched in butter!" but no one would have understood.

[Jos]

I'm not sure about Fred's opening statement.

I mean, I suppose, according to Wikipedia's definition of the word, one could say that the hypothesis of Intelligent Design is a form of heresy. But I wouldn't exactly call "God Did It" to be a particularly innovative look at life.

[Axiomatic]

All innovation IS heresy. Just ask the Imperium of Man.

[Bruce Baugh]

Surely it's not true, though, Fred? I remember a delightful Dorothy Sayers essay demonstrating just how many popular notions of Christianity were actually very old heresies, and reinventing gnosticism or whatever is a perennial pastime.

[Jos]

All innovation IS heresy. Just ask the Imperium of Man.

I came this close to making a similar remark. But I heroically resisted. Mostly because I wasn't sure if anyone here would get the reference.

All heresy is innovation, but not all innovation is heresy.

Rubbish! Much heresy comes from things that have been debunked (or simply declared heresy hundreds of years ago). All heresy was innovation once, but I wouldn't call either an Arian or a Flat-Earther particularly innovative.

[Francis]

All heresy is innovation, but not all innovation is heresy.

Rubbish! Much heresy comes from things that have been debunked (or simply declared heresy hundreds of years ago). All heresy was innovation once, but I wouldn't call either an Arian or a Flat-Earther particularly innovative.

[Mark]

"Surely it's not true, though, Fred? I remember a delightful Dorothy Sayers essay demonstrating just how many popular notions of Christianity were actually very old heresies, and reinventing gnosticism or whatever is a perennial pastime."

I second Bruce. I think that if you were pushed, you'd struggle to find any new heresies. They always boil down to Christ is not God, Christ is not man, or man can be saved by works. The latter of which is probably one of the first two anyway.

[Spalanzani]

Bruce Baugh: "I remember a delightful Dorothy Sayers essay demonstrating just how many popular notions of Christianity were actually very old heresies, and reinventing gnosticism or whatever is a perennial pastime."

I find it interesting how gnosticism is now popularly presented as having been a more balanced and life-affirming version of Christianity that was suppressed by the evil nasty Church Fathers, when in reality it seems to have basically been Left Behind's "This world sucks, let's move on to the next one" theology multipled by a factor of ten.

[Jeff]

Perhaps, then, it's safer to say that "All heresy was, at some time, innovation, but not all innovation was ever heresy."

[pepperjackcandy]

Jesu -- Just don't try to "innovate" a way to make bagels without boiling them. Boiling is the thing that makes a bagel . . . a bagel.

[Spalanzani]

Of course, all dogma was once innovation as well, if you think about it. There had to be that first person to say "Hey, that Jesus fellow isn't just really good at public speaking! He's the lord of all existence! Really!".

Then of course Constantine comes along and pretty soon it's considered real innovative to say that Jesus wasn't Lord and Savior and all that jazz, but just a really good public speaker. Innovative and deadly, of course.

So all heresy and all dogma is innovation. And all innovation is heresy and dogman. Or something.

[Spalanzani]

Yes, that's right: heresy and Dogman. Dogman, the new superhero with the innovative ability to ascertain the strengths and weaknesses of his opponents by sniffing their rear ends.

[twig]

Pajiba says Joss Whedon's doing a new show on FOX.

I mean, sure, it will get cancelled in 20 seconds but then the DVD and the subsequent fan-supported movie will be awesome.

[Richard Hershberger]

"I second Bruce. I think that if you were pushed, you'd struggle to find any new heresies. They always boil down to Christ is not God, Christ is not man, or man can be saved by works. The latter of which is probably one of the first two anyway."

Heh. I remember back in the '80s during the silly controversy over 'The Last Temptation of Christ' I saw a commentary by a fundamentalist minister. His specific complaint was that the movie presented Christ as a man, which he assured us was completely contrary to church teaching.

"I find it interesting how gnosticism is now popularly presented as having been a more balanced and life-affirming version of Christianity that was suppressed by the evil nasty Church Fathers..."

I interpret this presentation as having nothing to do with actual historical gnosticism at all. It is a reaction to perceived failings of modern Christianity, with "gnosticism" held up as an alternative merely because it is an alternative, not because of any of its actual teachings. A similar phenomenon is the candidacy of Fred Thompson. He was the Republican's Great White Hope until they were forced to actually look at the guy. They wanted a mythical "Fred Thompson", not the actual Fred Thompson. There not being any actual gnostics around nowadays, they present less of a problem.

[Jeff]

I mean, sure, it will get cancelled in 20 seconds but then the DVD and the subsequent fan-supported movie will be awesome.

I'm one of the few who didn't care for Serenity. Two many unnecessary deaths, not for plot or characterization reasons, but just to shake and shock people. Is that heresy? Is it innovative?

[twig]

I suppose if you have great change achieved without sacrifices made, it rings kind of hollow.

My biggest problems with Serenity were that it was obviously about 5 seasons worth of material crammed into a 2 hour movie, and I am frustrated for not having those 5 seasons.

I got over Joss's love of killing the cute ones when he axed Tara. (not that losing Wash and Fred didn't, in fact, end me) Now I just keep it in the back of my mind and try not to get attached.

[Rob]

"I'm one of the few who didn't care for Serenity. Two many unnecessary deaths, not for plot or characterization reasons, but just to shake and shock people. Is that heresy? Is it innovative?"

Unnecessary deaths are innovative in a show (and movie) like that. How many times have we seen the flick where a bunch of people go into a high-risk situation, the one we all expected to die from the very beginning dies, and every body else gets out alive.

For once the characters who died was not the only one with a kid waiting at home/the only minority/two weeks to live anyway/some combination of those three.

"They call me Dead Meat. Not sure why, though."

[Abelardus]

Here's something I left on the space heater a spell:

Hearsay is worse than heresy.

Correction -- Hearsay IS heresy.

This would be in the case of, say, the Left Behind series and rapture theology and the perfunctory espousal of the prosperity gospel ... who was it? Job's friend Bildad had just such a theodicy?... But I'll stay off that till Friday.

Give my comment serious thought at your own peril.

[Abelardus]

Here's something I left on the space heater a spell:

Hearsay is worse than heresy.

Correction -- Hearsay IS heresy.

This would be in the case of, say, the Left Behind series and rapture theology and the perfunctory espousal of the prosperity gospel ... who was it? Job's friend Bildad had just such a theodicy?... But I'll stay off that till Friday.

Give my comment serious thought at your own peril.

[Abelardus]

Here's something I left on the space heater a spell:

Hearsay is worse than heresy.

Correction -- Hearsay IS heresy.

This would be in the case of, say, the Left Behind series and rapture theology and the perfunctory espousal of the prosperity gospel ... who was it? Job's friend Bildad had just such a theodicy?... But I'll stay off that till Friday.

Give my comment serious thought at your own peril.

[Abelardus]

Ah, God! I'm sorry! I hit the reload button a couple of times! Is there anyone can remove at least the last two?

[Richard Hershberger]

"My biggest problems with Serenity were that it was obviously about 5 seasons worth of material crammed into a 2 hour movie, and I am frustrated for not having those 5 seasons."

That's pretty much make take on the movie. I see it as Joss telling us in abbreviated form what would have happened had FOX not been such a munch of poopy-heads. It is certainly much better than nothing, but he really is much better with long form.

Speaking of which, the Buffy Season 8 comics are worth checking out. I moved past my comics phase about fifteen years ago, but this has me back visiting the comic shop, complete with a table full of nerds playing RPGs: feels like home.

[Tom]

"There not being any actual gnostics around nowadays, they present less of a problem."

Not true. As Harold Bloom argued in his book "The American Religion" [sic, possibly], they merely use the labels "Latter-Day Saint" or "Southern Baptist," because they sound less heretical than "gnostic." And both groups present many, many problems.

[twig]

Speaking of which, the Buffy Season 8 comics are worth checking out.

My comics phase is kind of my only phase, but I agree with the sentiment - and he's apparantly going to do some Angel seasons in comics too, as if the show's ending never happened. I think the ending of Angel may be practically perfect on a number of levels, but I'm still excited.

Now I just need Joss to team up with Mad House or Gonzo (come on Joss, 24-26 episode series plus all the freedom of animation come on come on come on and it's all win, all the time.

[cjmr]

"You are accused of heresy on three counts: (holds up fingers) heresy by thought, heresy by deed, heresy by word, and heresy by action. Four, four counts!"

The Spanish Inquisition

(Sorry, couldn't resist.)

[MikhailBorg]

Pajiba says Joss Whedon's doing a new show on FOX.

I mean, sure, it will get cancelled in 20 seconds but then the DVD and the subsequent fan-supported movie will be awesome.

Errr, based on previous public statements by Whedon, wouldn't Hell have to have frozen over first? Or at least, a check appear with more zeros on the right-hand side of the number than Fox has got?

I missed all of Firefly and liked Serenity a fair amount, though I agree it felt rushed, and I can't buy the Reavers. Like the Kazon, all I could think while watching them was "How are these guys operating spaceships?"

Oh, and the bit coming out of the nebula made both me and my lady companion think of a scene from Galaxy Quest, causing us to laugh at a strange point.

[mmack]

"All heresy is innovation, but not all innovation is heresy."

I must confess I read this and thought of an non-religious example from one of my passions in life, automobile racing.

A current complaint by many reporters and columnists that's echoed by many message board posters is that there's no more real innovation in racing. The complaint is that sanctioning bodies have removed the initiative for dynamic thinkers and creative builders to create truly innovative automobile and powerplant designs that revolutionize auto racing, and by extension, our daily lives. There is always the undercurrent, explicit or not, that things were better in the "old days" when a man with a dream could tool up a race winning car in his workshop or garage and stun the "big name" teams with his groundbreaking design.

Whenever I read these articles that lament the lack of innovation I smile and think of what happened to the last "innovative thinker" who tried to "think outside the box" and advance the status quo.

Forty years ago this year, a man by the name of Andy Granatelli set out to revolutionize auto racing by building a technological masterpiece. Andy had owned racing cars and wanted to win the Indianpolis 500. He commissioned his team to build a four wheel drive, jet turbine powered race car to run in the Indianapolis 500. Immediately competing team owners complained about the car. Granatelli pointed out to any who would listen that the car's four wheel drive allowed it to handle high speed turns safely without resorting to drag inducing wings or spoilers. He defended it's high priced, aircraft derived turbine engine by pointing out that it had fewer moving parts than a conventional piston engine, which meant it would last longer with fewer expensive overhauls than a piston engine. Granatelli's "turbine car" dominated the 1967 Indy 500, only to fall out of the race while leading with three laps to go.

Less than a week after the 1967 Indy 500, his competing car owners complained to USAC (The United States Auto Club, the rulemaking body for the Indianapolis 500 and Indy Car racing), demanding the "turbine car" be banned. USAC was in a quandry: The STP Turbine Car was excellent press for Indy Car racing (newspapers and TV loved it because it WAS different), but they faced an open revolt by other car owners who didn't want the status quo changed and didn't want to build their own turbine cars. So USAC passed rules that restricted the turbine engine's power by reducing it's intake size, and restricted the use of four wheel drive to smaller diameter tires than were allowed for 1967. Thus satisfied, USAC figured the turbine car challege was dead.

Granatelli teamed with Lotus Cars of the UK for 1968 to build four new turbine cars within the new restrictions. The cars succeeded beyond his wildest dreams, with three making the 1968 Indy 500 starting field and one car winning the Pole Position for the 500 and breaking the 170 MPH barrier, setting a new track record. During the race the cars weren't as dominant as the lone turbine was in 1967, but one was leading the race before it fell out due to mechanical problems with less than ten laps to go. Even though the turbine cars didn't win and didn't outclass the field, competing car owners still complained.

USAC's response? They banned the use of all "non-automotive" turbine engines, and in 1970, banned four wheel drive.

In this case innovation is heresy if it threatens someone's bottom line.

P.S. As I promised Geds and Ecks on another thread, I won't talk about racing again.

[85% Duane]

Re:PS

They don't matter. Please continue.

[Elmo]

The concept of heresy is itself heretical.

[Geds]

P.S. As I promised Geds and Ecks on another thread, I won't talk about racing again.

I don't remember forcing any such promise. And if I did, it was probably in reaction to something specific.

Yeah, that's the ticket.

In fact, that particular story was quite interesting...

[mmack]

Geds and 85% Duane (and throw Ecks in too),

Just joshing on breaking a "promise". I can get quite long winded talking or posting about racing (ask mrs. mmack, and she actually enjoys attending and watching races with me) and I don't wish to prattle on too much. Other people who regularly post here can express themselves much better than I can about religious matters and theology. Fred's statement "All heresy is innovation, but not all innovation is heresy." spurred this particular memory about an innovator "tried" for heresy by his peers and a ruling body. Sort of a racing version of Galileo if you will.

The funny thing is I have mentioned (via e-mail or online chats) this story to many nationally published auto racing commentators when they get on their "Where are the innovators?" soapboxes, but some would rather wear their rose colored glasses than admit that "the good old days weren't always good".

[Tonio]

My interpretation of Fred's statement? There are some aspiring inventors/theorists/artists who rationalize rejection by claiming that their ideas are two radical or threatening. The stereotype of the performance artist involves this kind of mindset. "I'm coating my body with fudge to symbolize the oppression of the starving billions...Oh, you're just walking out in disgust because I'm speaking truth to power!"

[mmack]

(Sorry, couldn't resist.)

NOBODY expects the Spanish Inquisition. Our chief weapon is surprise. Surprise and fear. Our two chief weapons are surprise, fear, and an almost fanatical devotion to the Pope. Our three chief weapons are surprise, fear, and a fanatical devotion to the Pope. And these nice red uniforms.

Oh bloody hell! Should I go post somewhere else and come back with the Comfy Chair?

[Cake or death!]

"Cake or death?"
"Eh, cake please."
"Very well! Give him cake!"
"Oh, thanks very much. It's very nice."
"You! Cake or death?"
"Uh, cake for me, too, please."
"Very well! Give him cake, too! We're gonna run out of cake at this rate. You! Cake or death?"
"Uh, death, please. No, cake! Cake! Cake, sorry. Sorry..."
"You said death first, uh-uh, death first!"
"Well, I meant cake!"
"Oh, all right. You're lucky I'm Church of England!"

[Tonio]

Cjmr, your Spanish Inquisition reference should have come with the caption "DIABOLICAL POSTING."

[Tonio]

What is the source of the Cake or Death reference? At first I thought it was a translated version of the Crucifixion or Freedom exchange from Life of Brian.

[Bugmaster]

The Cake Is A Lie !

[hapax]

The concept of heresy is itself heretical.

There is some truth to that. The notions of orthodoxy and heterodoxy (let alone heresy) to a certain extent imposes restrictions upon an unbounded Deity, not the least of which is that propositional truths about that Deity must be comprehensible and meaningful within the limits of human speech.

On the other hand, there is a natural and justifiable tendency for members of a particular faith to be able to say (whether you're talking about pacifism or protecting our freedoms, gay clergy or anti-gay bigotry, unconditional love for the outcast or providing heroin to the addicted, and so forth and so on), "No, that is NOT who we are." A lot of the current controversies in Christianity (and I suspect in most religions) comes from exactly this sort of need for self identification.

I rather like Lindbeck's approach to doctrine, in which faith statements are not taken as propositional truths, but as exclusionary boundaries. E.g. the famous homoousios clause in the Nicene Creed does not say anything positive about the nature of the Second Person of the Trinity; it merely marks boundaries within which you can say anything you believe, as long as you DON'T say the Son is NOT God or IS the Father.

While he gives lots of lovely examples of how this has worked out historically, he unfortunately doesn't provide much guidance to applying them to current situations.

[hapax]

The Cake Is A Lie !

And Soylent Green is PEOPLE!

[An Unladen Swallow]

"Uh, death, please. No, cake! Cake! Cake, sorry. Sorry..."
"You said death first, uh-uh, death first!"

"What is your favorite color?"
"Cake... no, wait... blue!"
[Aaaauuuuuugggghhhhh!]

[ako]

What is the source of the Cake or Death reference?

Eddie Izzard. A stand-up routine.

[hagsrus]

Has anyone consulted Mrs Cake?

[Tonio]

I oppose the concepts of orthodoxy and heterodoxy in any human endeavor, not just in religion.

[twig]

not using the google is a heresy.

@Tonio: I oppose the concepts of orthodoxy and heterodoxy in any human endeavor

So you support the teaching of Creationism in junior high science classes?

[Tonio]

I don't think I've ever seen Izzard on cable. After reading on Wikipedia that Monty Python is his chief influence, I feel somewhat guilty for not knowing about him. I didn't see any CDs listed for him. Is the era of the comedy album dead? I have fond memories of listening to Steve Martin, George Carlin, Bill Cosby, and Richard Pryor.

[hapax]

admittedly provocative but still serious snark above @3:16 twas I

[twig]

and the cake is a lie.