Bookmark and Share
My Photo


    Opinions expressed on the Insight Scoop weblog are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the positions of Ignatius Press. Links on this weblog to articles do not necessarily imply agreement by the author or by Ignatius Press with the contents of the articles. Links are provided to foster discussion of important issues. Readers should make their own evaluations of the contents of such articles.


« The Network Combo Deal: Good at dissenting, bad at counting! | Main | My first guest appearance on Andrew Sullivan's blog »

Thursday, March 18, 2010



One for the "DUH!" department. It's amazing to me that anyone would find this idea counterintuitive.

Brian J. Schuettler

"... if you go into the existential depths you’ll be unhappy,” Dr. Mehl said." Maybe it's counter-intuitive for him because he associates the existential depths with Fear and Trembling!

There is a kind of learning which would presumptuously introduce into the world of spirit the same law of indifference under which the world of matter groans. It is thought that to know about great men and great deeds is quite sufficient, and that other exertion is not necessary. And therefore this learning shall not eat, but shall perish of hunger while seeing all things transformed into gold by its touch. And what, forsooth, does this learning really know? There were many thousands of contemporaries, and countless men in after times, who knew all about the triumphs of Miltiades; but there was only one whom they rendered sleepless. There have existed countless generations that knew by heart, word for word, the story of Abraham; but how many has it rendered sleepless?

Stephen J.

Suggest you need one vital caveat: the deep discussions have to involve at least some element of mutual respect and at least partial agreement or acknowledgement of merit.

I've seen plenty of arguments over the most profound of topics like the meaning of sexuality, the definition of life and the source and value of morality, but they are not reinforcing or satisfying at all if they're hostile and contemptuous on both sides. (At least, I've always found them dissatisfactory.)


Studies confirming the obvious are part of modern scientism, under which nothing is truly real unless confirmed scientifically. By extension, under this ideology, that which isn't subject to scientific calculation isn't truly real.


Deep, substantive conversations are not usually with strangers but with good friends. Maybe those who report being happy and having deep, substantive conversations are actually those people who have good friends where those whose conversation is short and shallow may have more acquaintences than friends. Maybe it is the good friends vs acquaintences which is the determinign variable here. I can see the need for another study.

The comments to this entry are closed.

Ignatius Insight


Ignatius Press

Catholic World Report


Blogs & Sites We Like

June 2018

Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
          1 2
3 4 5 6 7 8 9
10 11 12 13 14 15 16
17 18 19 20 21 22 23
24 25 26 27 28 29 30
Blog powered by Typepad