Comments on: Why We Need Pessimistic Church Historians

By: Stuart Koehl

Stuart Koehl — Sun, 24 Apr 2011 16:25:25 +0000

“I’m not sure I agree. Were people not mostly inclined to remain chaste (for fear of the consequences) before the pill came along or to be less wasteful (to save money) before everything was disposable?”

Boy, you certainly don’t know much about our ancestors, do you?

By: JB in CA

JB in CA — Sat, 23 Apr 2011 22:57:28 +0000

“The printing press helped fuel movements, but technology is only an amplifier of what people are already inclined to do.” —Kevin White

I’m not sure I agree. Were people not mostly inclined to remain chaste (for fear of the consequences) before the pill came along or to be less wasteful (to save money) before everything was disposable?

By: KEITH PAVLISCHEK

KEITH PAVLISCHEK — Fri, 22 Apr 2011 04:46:00 +0000

Cynical church historians: May their ranks increase and their progeny prosper!

By: Stephen P

Stephen P — Thu, 21 Apr 2011 22:27:33 +0000

An intellectual historian of even greater merit will tell you that Kuhn’s idea of “paradigm shifts” is self-contradictory. See this NYT article about it: http://opinionator.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/03/06/the-ashtray-the-ultimatum-part-1/

By: Smithborough

Smithborough — Thu, 21 Apr 2011 18:43:37 +0000

There was a big stir back in the 1960s about Bishop Robinson who wrote a book called “Honest to God” which was then widely regarded as a second Martin Luther moment. Who has heard of him now? Men Without Hats are more famous.

By: Alexander Anderson

Alexander Anderson — Thu, 21 Apr 2011 18:31:29 +0000

I like “men without hats”….

You can dance if you want to
You can leave your friends behind…

By: Kevin White

Kevin White — Thu, 21 Apr 2011 16:50:46 +0000

arty: We should probably be skeptical about the printing press (or more recent analogues) as driving a revolution in thought. It mainly meant more, and more affordable, books. Just as an urban-artisan “middling sort” was continuing its centuries-long emergence, it became more affordable for them to own books. It meant that universities could afford more books, and that complete copies of ancient texts started to supplant quote-collections from ancient works. Perfect to help the existing trend toward having more and more universities. Printed books started to appear as classroom aids in universities, but the basic university system saw only an incremental reform instead of a revolutionary change.

The printing press helped fuel movements, but technology is only an amplifier of what people are already inclined to do. Or a way of speeding up existing trends. That’s one thing that separates a lasting technological advance from a mere passing curiosity. Given time, technology can foster new ideas and reshape institutions and culture. But that is a process of decades or centuries, not years.

By: Stuart Koehl

Stuart Koehl — Thu, 21 Apr 2011 16:12:42 +0000

Good to know that I am not merely a killjoy, but performing a public service.

By: arty

arty — Thu, 21 Apr 2011 13:54:48 +0000

I can’t resist thinking about that “only two moments” claim.

The invention of the printing press?