WHY DIALECTIC MATTERS Socialism by William Michael February 8th, 2010

[Intro] 

Every wise man in the ancient world knew at least something the art of Dialectic.  Socrates obviously knew Dialectic, since it was called by his name, "the Socratic Method".  Plato knew it as he made a living writing Socratic dialogues.  Aristotle studied Dialectic and taught it systematically.  The Church Fathers studied Dialectic.  St. Augustine explained its value in biblical interpretation in his work On Christian Doctrine.  St. Thomas studied and taught Dialectic. 

Modern schools don't teach Dialectic and that should concern us.  It should concern us because for well over 2,500 years, Dialectic was the core of liberal education.  In this series, we will examine the effects of the neglect of the art of dialectic in modern society.

My name is William Michael and I'm the director of he Classical Liberal Arts Academy.  To demonstrate how our society suffers from the neglect of this classical liberal art, I'm presenting this series titled "Why Dialectic Matters".  These lessons will be pretty simple to understand and surprising in the end.

In this first lesson, let's talk about Socialism.

[Music]

Socialism is an economic system--but don't let that disinterest you.  This is not going to be a boring lecture on economics.  All we need to know is that socialism is system by which a society is ordered so that all goods and the means of producing goods belong to the state and are distributed among men as the state sees fit.  Everyone receives all that they need as the resources of the state are shared among all.   In many places Socialism is being promoted by politicians who believe it will solve many of man's problems.  It will prevent one man from becoming very wealthy and will keep others from becoming very poor.  It will ensure that everyone has what they need to be happy.  It is not a system based on individual work, but on the sharing of resources. That's all you need to know about socialism for now.

Among the strongest opponents of socialism, we find the conservative Christian crowd.  They have some real problems with socialism.  First, they argue that, in denying men the right to own private property, socialism is ultimately a form of slavery.  After all, stealing is a sin and it appears that one man can steal only where there is private property to be stolen. If stealing is bad, private property must be a human right. Slavery is traditionally understood as a state in which men work for the happiness of other men, rather than for their own.  It would appear that Socialism, inasmuch as it requires men to work for the happiness of other men and not necessarily their own, is a form of slavery. 

Second, conservatives argue that if men have no hope of a personal reward for their individual labor, but see that the non-worker enjoys the same benefits without working as diligently, the all the natural motivation to work diligently will be lost in society.  This would certainly be true.

Thus, the two most popular arguments conservatives make against socialism are that (a) it destroys freedom and (b) it discourages work.

Now, Dialectic is not the study of absolute truth.  That belongs to Philosophy and Theology, which are studied by the art of Logic or "Analytics" as Aristotle called it.  We will not know whether the number of stars in the universe is infinite or countable.  Modern science will not tell us.  Dialectic will not tell us.  Theology and Philosophy may--but Dialectic won't.  Dialectic is concerned with what people say is true, not with what actually may be true.  This art examines whether or not it is possible for a person's opinion to be true.  Ultimately, it seeks to discover contradictions in principles or definitions that prove an set of opinions to be impossible.  The key mark of a man ignorant of Dialectic is self-contradiction.  When questioned by a skillful examiner,  he will be found full of contradictions and confusion--not because the examiner confuses him, but because his confusion is brought into the light by the art of Dialectic. The conservative Christian position on Socialism provides us with an example of this confusion.

We said that those most vehemently opposed to Socialism--at least in America--are economically conservative Christians, most of whom are Evangelical Protestants.  When examined, these conservative views on economic issues are found to directly contradict Protestant views on religious issues, which suggests that they are wrong in at least one area of their thinking.

Protestants deny the Catholic doctrine of Purgatory more vehemently than they deny the benefits of Socialism.  The doctrine of Purgatory teaches that when Christians die, they face one of two immediate destinations.  The first is Heaven itself, where the pure in heart--who we call "saints"--see God.  These are Christians whose souls have been purified during their lives on earth and who are therefore prepared for direct entrance into the presence of God.  The second destination is for those Christians who die in friendship with God, but whose souls were not purified during their earthly lives.  These Christians did not live with the purity of heart that the saints did and do not receive their reward until it has been justly earned through purification.  Protestants find no reason to accept this doctrine and reject it as Roman Catholic additions to the true faith of Scripture. 

What do the Protestants believe then happens to Christians after death?   They believe that, at death, every single Christian goes directly to heaven.  Some believe they sleep until the Resurrection and then go directly to heaven, but what is plain is that there is no intermediate state of purification needed for Christians--all go directly from Earth to Heaven.  Furthermore, some believe that there are different rewards for Christians in heaven, but if examined, this will really not make a whole lot of sense when the other details of Protestant doctrine are pressed.

All of this makes for very nice sermons, letters and evangelistic altar calls.  Protestants tell people that "if they believe in Jesus" they will go to heaven when they die.  When they speak to those suffering in the world, or taking in their least breaths on their deathbeds, they comfort them with thoughts of the perfect happiness to be known in Heaven, where:

God shall wipe away all tears from their eyes: and death shall be no more. Nor mourning, nor crying, nor sorrow shall be any more, for the former things are passed away.

Thus, whether one has loved sacrificially for 80 years or whether one has faintly recited "the Sinner's Prayer" in last seconds of life, both receive perfect happiness in heaven. This is the grace of God, who is the source of every man's good deeds.  Since every man is evil, there is no difference between any man--no matter how relatively good he may appear.  He is admitted into heaven for one reason:  because he believes in God.

That all sounds wonderful, but so does Socialism when listened to carelessly.  It is in the examination of Socialism that we find its moral troubles and it is in the examination of this Protestant doctrine--as shocking as that may be to Protestants--that we discover something in the conservative Protestant mind to be impossible.

In this Protestant system, human freedom is destroyed.  This is why most of the Protestant teachers closest to the Reformation were led to teach that individual men were elected or predestined by God for eternal life.  They understood the consequences of the ideas--and embraced them.  The grace of God consisted in random acts of kindness bestowed on selected individuals.  If all of the spiritual merit is God's and that which seems to belong to any man is also God's, then man himself has no private property as far as spiritual things are concerned and works entirely for the happiness of others.  All that he possesses belongs to God and to the rest of the citizens of the kingdom of God and God can redistribute it at any time as He wishes.  The Christian works--not to store up for himself any private treasure in heaven--which would imply that the work and merit was actually his own, but simply because it is necessary for him to do so as a citizen in God's kingdom.  There is no sense of inheritance or reward, but only a common sharing in the happiness of heaven.  In fact, if a Protestant is pressed to answer the question, "Why should we work sacrificially for God if we are saved by grace?", his answers will be awkward at best.  Usually it is said that, "We should work out of gratitude for all that God has done for us.".  Is this not the language of slaves?  The Protestant doctrine destroys human freedom, just as Socialism does.

Secondly, as can be seen from what was just said, when heaven becomes the immediate reward of every man, Christians are generally discouraged from performing any great works of sacrifice or devotion.  After all, the Protestant system, like Socialism, teaches that you will not be denied your benefits if you do not work.  Of course, most diligent Protestants struggle at this point and develop strange ways of trying to explain that even though their salvation has nothing to do with their works, their works will necessarily be produced by their faith, but this is nonsense.  If faith necessarily produces works, then works prove faith.  The Protestant doctrine of "faith alone" does not teach that works are necessary for the rewards, but that those rewards are gained by believing that you will get them.  Most diligent Protestants actually deny their Protestant teaching in their own lives, yet pretend to still be Protestants in doctrine.  The internal confusion caused by the doctrine of rewards without work is known to all Protestants who are inspired to live holy lives and the lack of motivation for good works is seen in those worldly Protestants who arrogantly wave their "faith alone" banners as justifications for their spiritual idleness.  Even worse, there are Protestants who eagerly assert that a person full of good works will still be denied the reward if they don't profess the Protestant doctrine with their lips!  Not only are works not necessary for the rewards, they are denied to have any influence at all on one's deserving them!  

Now, what conservative Protestant, who opposes the principles of Socialism, would admit these principles of Protestant teaching?  It is quite incredible how contradictory they are, but these are the consequences in a society that neglects that art of Dialectic.  Dialectic will not necessarily provide us with the answer to the question of whether Socialism is a wise option for a state, or whether Purgatory is true or false.  However, what Dialectic does show us is that it is impossible that the principles of Socialism and those of Purgatory can be false at the same time.  If one denies the principles on which Purgatory rests, Socialism must be embraced.  If one denies the principles on which Socialism is based, the doctrine Purgatory should be appreciated.  Nevertheless, we find this great contradiction when the religious principles of Protestants are compared their political and economic views.

Of course, some will lazily respond, "Well, we're talking about two different things here--religion and economics.  These require different principles."  This leads to another contradiction, for in the Lord's Prayer, we pray: "Thy will be done on Earth, as it is in Heaven."  There is no doctrine that earthly principles may contradict heavenly principles!  This is the whole problem with the world we live in, after all.  Whatever is true on earth will be true in heaven, and whatever is true in heaven must be true on earth, for God's will is the law of both.   As one attempts to defend these contradictory views, the contradictions will multiply endlessly.  The two positions cannot be reconciled and we must embrace one of the following options:

• Purgatory is true and Socialism is false
• Purgatory is false and Socialism is true

Because the effects of Socialism are so clear to our view on earth, it is easy to speak more reasonably of Socialism than Purgatory.  Thus, conservative Protestants easily see the need to oppose Socialism, but unreasonably deny the necessity of Purgatory, which takes a bit more reflection.  It is a doctrine they will actually find quite satisfying if they would abandon their unreasonable prejudice against Catholic doctrine.  Most reject it because it is Catholic, not because it is impossible.

Thus, we see that without studies in Dialectic, the minds of men are full of contradictions and confusion when examined.  This was the work so famously carried out by Socrates in Athens 2400 years ago, but increasingly neglected for the past 400 years.  By restoring the knowledge of the Art of Dialectic, the Classical Liberal Arts Academy will restore clear  thinking and eliminate these glaring contradictions.  This is why Dialectic matters.

[Exit music]