Resurrected threads, you have to love them. Actually I read this thread months ago, and wrote portions of my post back then. I was cleaning some of the junk out of Word when I came across a copy of my reply. Actually, a lot has happened in my life since then (a dissertation defense, a move, and a job change), so it’s kind of like a resurrection for me as well.
The term “Dark Ages” is what is in question. It no longer refers to an actual historical period, but to our “dark” or scanty knowledge of the years roughly from AD 500 to roughly AD 900 or 1000 in western Europe. Even this is being changed by recent archeology, and a growing realization of the interconnectedness of other cultures, not the least of which are the Arab, Byzantine, and, more subtly, Chinese cultures. 20th century scholarship increasingly demonstrates the need for medievalists to analyze the diffusion of ideas and technology from the east (well documented in their own right) during this time. In other words, the term “Dark Ages” is too Euro-centric to reflect the direction of modern medieval studies. The term is one of those unfortunate carryovers from the days of Gibbon.
At any rate, the people of the sixth or seventh centuries were just as curious about the natural world, and were just as self-critical, as we are today.
The optimist vs. the pessimist; the eternal struggle. I definitely see the glass half full. I’m not so naïve as to say there are no serious problems in our world or with many modern attitudes. However, from many years of working night and part time jobs in public service including a patient representative/advocate and social worker, and from being a seminarian studying to be a priest, I’ve had the opportunity to meet many different people, to actually step into their homes and private lives, and deal with them during times of suffering, crisis and joy. These first hand experiences proved to me the validity of Christian optimism: all things are fundamentally good.
On the surface, we all seem to be living shoebox lives, safely shut behind locked doors, situated squarely in front of the TV. To a degree, this is an accurate view. However, the human person simply is not that one dimensional. The people in those houses are people with loves and hates, joys and sorrows, dreams and values. Like people of all times, only a very few will change the world with these longings of the human spirit. But the world will be changed by the few, it always is.
What do you consider a “truly generous impulse”? Are you setting the standard too high? No act of generosity goes with out reward. So does that make generosity, itself, ultimately selfish?
Quote:
|
We are talking about the same human race, aren't we?
|
I’m not sure I know what you mean by this. The study of history’s worth in making a person a better person is totally up to the individual. Once again, it’s not what you know, but how you live with what you know.