Technique and Moral Instruction

As I prepared my paper and talk on blogging and theology I looked for examples of how blogging helps and hurts in the task of theologizing.  In my search I came across the post "On Blogging and informationism," at Prosthesis (aka, the best blog you are not currently reading).  In that post Macht, the author, interacts with Quentin Schultze's book - Habits of the High Tech Heart.  We preachers are told that, in every message we should give some application of the message or something to do.  Since Macht's post was so good I responded in the most natural way possible - I went out and bought the book.

Drawing on de Toqueville, Jacques Ellul and others Schultze looks at the way the information revolution brought on by technology in general and internet in particular is impacting and even replacing our ability to reason morally.  On page 19 Schultze illustrates this:

We also naively believe that for most personal and social needs there must be largely technological solutions, such as Web-filtering software designed to protect children from cyber-pornographers.

I found that to be a compelling example of Schultze's thesis.  Before the rise of the technological society, we were protected against immorality by moral and religious instruction, developing character traits, and habits of mind and heart that enabled us to resist the pull of immorality.

In our day, we assume that the solution to immorality is an online filter or giving away the TV, avoiding movies, etc.. I do think filters have their place and indeed, there are many TV shows and movies I won't watch.

But in assuming that the answer to immorality is a filter we are offering a technological solution to a moral problem.  Noting that the apostle Paul planted churches in such moral cesspools as Rome, Corinth and Ephesus, it strikes me that the Christians of the first generation had a faith that was assumed to be able to withstand temptation.  In my own experience, it seems that Christians today assume we can't withstand temptation, that none of us has the moral fortitude to do so. 

So, while acknowledging that web filters have a place and there are entertainments that ought to be avoided, I suggest that "the crying need of the hour" is the cultivation of the kind of moral reasoning and character development that can teach us to say no to immorality.  Moral problems have moral, not technological solutions.

Deeper than that, the greatest need is cultivating a taste for Christ that renders the various immoralities of the world tasteless.

Comments

[Rick Ritchie]

Thanks for the suggestion. I added prosthesis to my "New Finds" section of my blogroll on oldsolar. Jacques Ellul style cultural commentary is always welcome.

[David Wayne]

Macht really is good - I think he's one of the more under appreciated bloggers out there.

[The Dane]

I think that one of the most common non-moral solutions that is really nothing more than a glorified filter comes from the pre-tech era. Discipline. I've heard it time and gain described a valuable counter to the immorality that plagues the human frame. The problem is: discipline no more engages the moral being and brings about moral choices than does an internet filth-filter.

The habits of a disciplined heart and mind are as mechanical as any filter. But worse, I think, is that they persuade users into believing that they are making moral choices when really they are acting only as well-behaved zombies. If I have programmed myself to react a certain way in the presence of a given stimulus (e.g., flee sin), then there is nothing moral (or even noble) about acting in the way I have programmed myself to act. Part of the goal of a good discipline or habit is to remove other action from the realm of potential - to make a given course likely with as little thought or consideration as possible.

For it's when we give consideration to the things we can do that we show ourselves weak. It's all well and good that I have trained myself to rise and go to work without thought when the alarm wakes me every morning - but how much more valuable the choice to work when I actually give consideration to the possibility of sleeping in. It is not a Good choice I make when I automatically rise, but it is when I go anyway after stopping to consider that one day of laziness probably won't kill me.

I'm not saying discipline isn't a helpful thing. Just that it doesn't promote morality. Just that it is no better than the filter to block yucky sites from browsability. The seed intention behind the discipline (as with that behind the filter) can be morally good, but its hallmark disaster is that it alleviates us of the responsibility to act morally (while aiding us in believing that we actually are acting morally).

* note: I am not saying that to flee sin is a bad thing, just that it would be more heroic to flee sin out of genuine distaste for it rather than out of some knee-jerk reaction.

[Terry]

Last week in Chapel, the professor spoke on Romans 6. He said that we are no long have a sin nature because we have been resurrected with Christ. I'm still chewing on that. Perhaps it is an issue of nuance, but I'm still not comfortable with simply saying there is no more sin nature. Query your thoughts on that.

The idea of seeking virtue instead of settling for rules is of course what we want to do. A fully developed ethical system startes with rules in infancy and childhood but should mature into virtues. Unfortunately a lot of Christians and Christian institutions are stuck in infancy and childhood.

[The Dane]

Terry, I've thought about it a little in the past and it seems to me that we redeemed from our sin nature - but are sinning in our new nature. Granted, I still have a lot to work out along those lines and I probably don't have the kind of answers you'd like, but just a thought.

[Mark Swanson]

Actually web filters are technological solutions to technological problems. They don't solve the problem of lust, but since that problem is not fully solvable in this lifetime (though much progress is possible), filters (etc) solve a problem the same way child-proof caps on medicine bottles solve a problem and requiring ID's for liquor purchases, etc. You can't solve the problem of sin by such means, but unless you believe that there is no such thing as a harmful environment you will want to do what you can to create an environment more conducive to growth in godliness. And no, I'm not missing the point, just pointing out the other side! I believe every Christian male (and some females) should have a web filter, not just children. OK, I'll make an exception for eunuchs!

[Catez]

This is very interesting David. It leads me to thinking about the next step - we blame technology when it fails too. i.e. the filter didn't work and that's the reason sme-one spent an hour viewing stuff...
I'm not against the technology - but it has got me thinking about the whole resposibility/blame syndrome.

[jpe]

Very Kantian post, which suggests a reply in the mode of Schiller by moving from moral duty to virtue. A reasonable formulation of virtue would be the cultivation of the self such that bad actions are no longer a possibility, other things being equal. If we can characterize filters etal as technological supplements of virtue (postmodern implications of 'supplement' fully intended), then technological devices can be reinscribed within the moral sphere as practices of virtue.

Dunno if that's satisfactory, I was just thinking aloud. I lean to the Kantian myself, so I'm not sure if I find it satisfactory.

[Wacko!]

I'm not sure that I understand the thesis of this post. You state that "we assume that the solution to immorality is an online filter or giving away the TV, avoiding movies, etc." It appears that you suggest that these solutions are being seen as a replacement for the traditional methods you reference, including having the strength to resist temptation.

Moral reasoning and character development are not the entire solutions to the problem you pose. As humans, we are born sinners and unfortunately, that sinful nature is woven into our very being. Therefore, I might know what's "right" in my head, but this must translate to my heart. That's where the spiritual component begins, because only God can change my heart and cleanse my sinful nature.

Part of the answer to restoring moral reasoning and character development includes Terry's reference to discipline. It is this discipline that, in part, is built by adhering to principles of "filtering" or avoiding temptation. I laud the person who flees temptation moreso than the one who stares it in the face and wins - because, how long can this person do it on his own accord through his own moral reasoning and character development?

Your fundamental inference appears to suggest the following: that today's society does not pursue morality but instead uses both human and technical "filtering" to avoid immorality.

If I understand you correctly, I'm not sure if I agree with your thesis.

One incredible difference between living in today's Information Age and before the Internet is that we now have a much greater opportunity to be tempted as we are flooded with more information - Internet, television, etc. Much of this immorality is becoming more invasive, whereas before it had to be invited.

Rebecca Hagelin appears to understand that we must actively "filter" using both human and technological methods. Of course one should not replace the other. In addition, if we are actively pursuing God, then our human "filter" becomes sharper than any technological filter.

--
By the way, good to know you're a neighbor. I live just down the road from you in Bowie!

[Charlie]

You called for "...the cultivation of the kind of moral reasoning and character development that can teach us to say no to immorality," as opposed to relying on technology to keep us from sin. That view syncs well with Rom. 5:3-5:

More than that, we rejoice in our sufferings, knowing that suffering produces endurance, and endurance produces character, and character produces hope, and hope does not put us to shame, because God's love has been poured into our hearts through the Holy Spirit who has been given to us. (ESV)

There is an important process of character formation that comes out of testing and overcoming. Think of Jesus in the desert. Discipline itself is not the end, but developing the sort of character that produces a reflexive, love-rooted desire to obey God.

Technology has its place as an aid to making right moral choices. But sometimes technology invites me to play games. Software can remove damning evidence of where I've been surfing. Condoms allow me to be sexually promiscuous with little risk. A radar detector lets me violate the speed limit when the police aren't watching.

When my desire to be like Christ motivates me to make right choices, especially in the face of temptation, I am developing the sort of moral character that will stand me in good stead when I'm out there somewhere with my shields down and only my moral convictions to protect me.

[Diane R.]

I really liked what catez said. Much of the time it comes down to the blame game. But of course, wasn't that the second sin (of Adam blaming Eve for his poor decision)?

Alcoholics are now told they can't help it because they have a "disease." Geneticists are telling them they were born with the "disease," while Christian psychologists are telling us we are depressed because of chemical imbalances in our brains (which hasn't been proven by the way). All of this has come about through advanced medical technology.

David,
I really liked your post...a lot of food for thought. Think I will email a lot of my Internet friends right now and suggest they mosey on over here to read it too....:)

Diane R.

[Brad H]

I think Colossians 2 fits nicely in here too.

21"Do not handle! Do not taste! Do not touch!"? 22These are all destined to perish with use, because they are based on human commands and teachings. 23Such regulations indeed have an appearance of wisdom, with their self-imposed worship, their false humility and their harsh treatment of the body, but they lack any value in restraining sensual indulgence.

We are not better people if we simply avoid a particular activity (obey the letter of a law). Our goal is higher than that - God wants us to be transformed people who think and act in Love and Wisdom all the time.

But by all means use a filter if you need to. The transformation of our character takes time (at least mine sure has). Even though it is not our only goal, we should guard our hearts and minds against the real and lasting damage that sins like anger, lust, pride, and selfishness cause - that is why he told us it was wrong after all.

To RELY on a filter to make us good is foolishness. But to NOT use a filter when it is needed could hinder the very "cultivation of the kind of moral reasoning and character development that can teach us to say no to immorality" that we are seeking.