Moralism – Faith alone in Christ alone by Grace Alone…. Again

At the heart of Moralism is our innate tendency to secure for ourselves some sort of favour based on our performance. There is an intrinsic mixture of fear (due to failure, doing wrong) and pride (an arrogance in our ability to do good, which is itself ironically not good, and wrong).

The human compass always points north to Moralism. It cannot be avoided, but it must be watched and guarded against actively as we walk by faith in Christ alone.

This north is built into all people. It means that we must be aware of it as we engage with others and as we consider ourselves before God. Whether people live to please their parents and honour them to win their approval and respect, or whether they live for themselves seeking to be “true to themselves” – the ever-changing enigma which itself has an impossible bar called “authenticity”.

Both lead to fear and pride, often a mixture of both which produces this strange burden of dissonance (not to mention the burden of fear and pride itself)! Fear of community acceptance or rejection, pride of being the top dog, fear of not living life to the fullest according to my feelings of the day, or pride of being true to myself unlike all those other plebs stuck in the system.

As Christians within the protestant reformed tradition grounded on faith alone in Christ alone by grace alone, we have a rich heritage to combat this moralism. But it is constant. We must remember, even if it seems like overkill to us, to proclaim faith alone in Christ alone by grace alone every time we mention living according to God’s laws, or holiness, or righteousness, or following the example of Christ, the wisdom of proverbs, heeding the warnings of Israel’s history, the warnings in Paul’s epistles or the teachings upon Jesus’ lips. To be lax on this issue will inevitably leave room for moralism to squeeze in. It’s a small price to pay sounding like a broken record repeating faith alone in Christ alone by grace alone over and over. But it will pay well.

Nobody will listen to a message that sounds just like the world they inhabit 24/7, a moralistic world. Moralistic Christianity is not Christianity, it’s moralism with Christianity tagged on the end for marketing.

Instead proclaim the unimaginable message of Christianity – a radically different message of faith and grace, a message only God could provide to a world burdened by fear and pride.

Efficacy of God’s Word

The efficacy of God’s word (the Bible) is predicated on its origin. The speaker is God and his speech is his work. As God speaks he has in mind his own purposes for his speech. He may make a promise to us in his word, desiring us to trust him. He may warn us in his word, desiring us to be cautious of something. He instructs us according to holiness, desiring us to obey.

God’s word comes to us in its written form. But also we are heralds of God’s word, teachers of God’s word, proclaimers of God’s word. In this sense, we are instruments.

When we are the instruments of God’s word (its proclaimer, teacher, defender, etc.) we have the experience of being associated with the effectiveness of God’s word. As we instruct according to God’s word, do people obey? If so I feel great, if not I feel a failure. Likewise, if I proclaim God’s promises desiring people to trust in them, or warn people desiring that they be cautious.

The obvious problem with this is that we associate the efficacy of God’s word with ourselves. If the outcome is not what we expected or hoped for then we may all too readily bear the burden of this seeming failure.

Let us remember then that we are heralds of the gospel, ambassadors for Christ. The origin of the gospel does not come from us, but God.

To this end, I really appreciate Spurgeon’s metaphor of the word of God being as a lion. Spurgeon says that as people attack the lion you do not need to defend it for the lion will defend itself. Spurgeon was talking about the authority of God’s word but I think this truth extrapolates to the efficacy of God’s word.

Much like a lion, the word of God is full of life. It is not dormant and static but powerful.

In times of discouragement, we may wonder at God’s mysterious work (or ‘tangible’ lack thereof). However, ironically, we may find the greatest remedy to discouragement in the word of God which will lift us up again. In our doubts or despondency let us not give up on the word of God, rather run to it, and in that way, run to Christ, the word of God, God himself.

One Greater than Solomon

To think, Solomon was one of the greatest leaders in the Bible. Certainly in his time he experienced a prosperity unmatched in the biblical record. Not only was he blessed but under his wisdom and leadership all of Israel were blessed.

He had fleets of trade ships bringing in all sorts of gold and silver and exotic animals. The value of silver plummeted, but only because gold was so prevalent and common. He had cities to keep his chariots. Cities for his chariots… And a reputation of great renown.

I read all of this as I flip through the book of Chronicles. But I have to consider the context of the book. Chronicles is written after the exile and the return of the people of Israel to their land. The discipline of the Lord regarding their unfaithfulness is in the immediate foreground.

So now as I ponder the rule and majesty of Solomon, I can’t help but read it in the context of the exile which chronologically is yet to come, and which in the experience of the chronicler (the author) has occurred. This is a unique perspective and offers a special moment of reflection. These kinds of narratives and stories don’t explicitly spell out the purposes. Rather it is implicit within the story itself. It makes me consider our own time particularly. Much like Solomon’s, broadly speaking, we have a time of great prosperity in the West. Again, broadly speaking, we have a time of general peace. We are not currently engaged in a war (unless you think we are in the midst of Cold War 2 with China). But these times come and then leave with varying degrees of drama.

In the biblical material we are told why Israel suffered military conquest and exile. It is because of their unfaithfulness (1 Chronicles 9:1). But we can’t say the same for our lives. The Bible is special revelation given to especially explain what happened to Israel (among other events). We can’t claim to have the same kind of special revelation for our own time. Is the West experiencing great prosperity because we are somehow more faithful to God’s laws or morally better people? You’d be mad to think so. Our sins are great and many! But does that mean that war and famine are coming our way very soon? Not necessarily (Although natural disasters seem to abound around us the past few years). Are they God’s judgement? We cannot say, at least not in regards to the specifics, but we can comment more generally – we live in a cursed world. We are not provided with any special revelation except with that of the Bible (which speaks about its own historical time).

However, what I do see as I read Chronicles is the way a nation can go from prosperity to (eventually) destitution through the road of division (which is superficially the cause but ultimately it was due to unfaithfulness to God). The King who succeeded Solomon divided the nation completely. The wisdom of Solomon was not at all present in his son Rehoboam. Wisdom such as, “a gentle answer turns away wrath, but a harsh word stirs up anger.”(Prov. 15:1). For this lack of wisdom a prosperous nation experiences a division so deep it never heals. Could there be a lesson from this for our day and age? Surely.

But this is really important to understand, it’s not a political lesson. It’s a spiritual lesson. It’s a lesson for the church primarily, for God’s people. That is because the people of God are no longer a ‘nation’ but rather people from every nation gathered and united in Christ our king. The lesson then?

Instead of thinking of earthly rulers, leaders or kings, let’s think of the heavenly king, King Jesus. One of the greatest Old Testament kings, King Solomon, is merely a shadow of Jesus who is the very wisdom of God. In time, even Solomon failed. However Jesus is always faithful. The unity of the people of God is secured in our union with Jesus, one who never lets us down.

Unlike the unfaithfulness of the king leading the people astray in Israel, it’s the people of God living unfaithfully to their King Jesus that causes such strife among them. But when we put outselves under his wise leadership again we experience greater spiritual blessings, peace and growth.

That being said, there is an example in the matter. We still have leaders over us, pastors, elders, etc. Much like Solomon and his son after him, all it can take is a foolish word, or decision, or unfaithfulness to God and suddenly the people under their care are scattered like sheep without a shepherd, hurt, divided, led astray or fallen away. There is also warning in the story.

However, remember that when earthly rulers fail, our heavenly ruler will not.

On Noble Bereans

How do we know what’s true about God and about Jesus?

Google? Smart people? Parents? University Lecturers?

Robbie and I recently finished preparing a kids spot for our church on Acts 17:10-15, where the gospel goes to the city of Berea. It can be viewed online via the Marrickville Road Church’s livestream for 24 October, or here on YouTube. 

In this passage, Paul visits the Jewish synagogue and tells the people there about Jesus. The Berean Jews eagerly examine the Old Testament scriptures to see if Paul’s message is true, and as a result, many of them believe his message about Jesus. 

Our application was, how do we know what’s true about God and about Jesus? We read the Bible – that’s how we know what’s true. And we looked at this from various angles, as the video will show.

In this post I wanted to reflect on this application.

As we were creating a kids spot, it was necessary to create a simple and clear message. And I think our application was good and right – the Bible is indeed our highest authority when it comes to knowing what’s true about God and about Jesus, and our children need to know this and to value its authority. 

However, as we prepared the kids spot, it also occurred to me that our culture can misinterpret this message by taking it to the extreme. That is, we can often think that all we need as Christians is just me and the Bible and the Holy Spirit guiding me. Our Australian culture is highly individualistic, and it is all too easy for us to devalue reading the Bible in community. For more on this topic, see Robbie’s video review of Tim Ward’s book, ‘Words of Life’. 

But in fact, for a thriving christian faith, we cannot afford to treat Christian community like a consumable thing that we can take or leave. As Christians we read the Bible in community – in the community of other local believers in the present, and in the community of Christians in the past – particularly those of the early church. To refuse to do this is to either stagnate in our faith, or to risk going astray. Examples of the former abound with people who have stopped going to church (is it any wonder that the writer to the Hebrews exhorts his readers to not give up meeting together? Hebrews 10:25), and examples of the latter include the modern day Jehovah’s Witness movement, who stray from the testimony of the early church and deny the divinity of Jesus, even mistranslating parts of the Bible to fit with their theology.

So let us teach our children to indeed value the Bible as the highest authority and to cultivate an investigative spirit like the noble Bereans. But let us also encourage them to value reading the Bible in community with other Christians – both locally present and past. 

A Framework for Testing Beliefs

In her book on the brain and consciousness, Sharon Dirckx presents an alternative to the materialistic view regarding the mind. In order to do this she starts by asking three simple questions about testing beliefs that we (or others) hold.

  • Is it internally coherent?

Does the matrix of the belief make sense according to its own frames of reference? Oppositely, are there internal inconsistencies? Inconsistencies from within undermine the belief in a self-defeating way.

  • Does it have explanatory power?

Is it able to explain the world around us in a way that makes sense? If something is true, then it illumines our understanding of reality as opposed to obscuring our understanding of reality.

  • Can it be lived?

Can it be authentically lived out with conviction? Or does life experience bring into question the belief’s truthfulness and validity? (I might add to this, can it be lived well by a society, by many people?)

First let’s apply this framework to the materialistic view of the mind/brain conundrum.

Is a materialistic view of the brain (that is, there is no immaterial mind) internally coherent? Science, the study of the material world, is by definition restricted to the material world. However, to make the leap that there is only a material world because science can only study the material world is a fallacy. It’s working on a presupposition which itself is not backed up by science (since science can neither prove nor disprove this).

Does it have explanatory power? Well, to reduce your conscious experience down to the firing of synapses and neurons and thus leave the experience of consciousness to be an illusion (as Dennet might argue) would in the end raise more questions than answers. So basically all of human experience is an illusion? What makes you sure that’s the valid viewpoint if you are yourself under the illusion?

And finally, can it be lived? The widespread presence of religions in the modern world such as Islam, Buddhism, Christianity, even new-age spiritualism, spiritualism in general, et cetera et cetera, shows you that very few people live as if they are merely the firing of their neural synapses. (See P.26 – 27, 52 – 53) Those who do claim its principles still speak as if there is someone doing the speaking, or thinking, like their thoughts actually matter and are not random firings of synapses.

This is the framework in action looking at a materialist view of the brain and consciousness. But this little framework applies so well to so much. We can use this framework to ask questions of big worldview beliefs or ask questions of particularities. Is Buddhism internally coherent? Does it explain the world? Can it be lived well by me and by many others? Or we could zoom in on some smaller aspects of a belief. Let’s take Karma for instance. Is the principle of karma internally coherent? Does karma best explain the world we live in? And can living according to the principles of karma be done well by me and by many others?

These questions are good to apply to the beliefs that people present us with and they are also good to apply to our own beliefs in a reflective way. For some of us we are more inclined to use these questions as a means of examining the rationality of beliefs held by other people. That’s fine as long as it’s done in good faith and with grace and respect. For others of us this framework will prove most beneficial as we run our own beliefs through it. More often, I would imagine that this framework actually raises more questions as it leads you to consider more and more particular aspects of beliefs.

On some occasions we don’t have to dig far to find issues because they lie close to the surface. Other times it takes a lot of digging and getting involved in the nuances and minutiae of a belief before we find any serious errors, or not even errors, just aspects we don’t understand or are ill-equipped to engage with. Generally speaking I think the harder you have to dig the better the belief is. Although that’s not always the case. Sometimes you have to dig a little but eventually you come across an issue that actually undermines the belief in a catastrophic way.

It may be a helpful practice for you to run your own beliefs through this framework. Or if you’re encountering another set of beliefs, run them through this framework. Doing so may illuminate important areas to deal with or show their relative importance. Otherwise it’s also a great framework to memorise as we encounter all sorts of people with different beliefs, or as they challenge our own beliefs. These three questions are another tool that may help you in being prepared for such an occasion.

Sharon Dirckx. (2019). Am I just my brain? The Good Book Company.

The Science of Personhood

Today, for good reason, science stands on a tall podium. The views of scientists are often the most sought after and influential ideas in Western society. Having labels such as “scientifically proven/tested”, are sure to gain keen ears.

Again, let me state, this guy is all for science (I have a bachelor in nursing science and practiced as a registered nurse for a time). But science is also bigger than itself. The practice of science and the scientific method in the modern age have come a long way. There is history to science, there is sociology to science, and there is philosophy to science. All of which must be taken into consideration.

Our history, sociology and philosophy affect our scientific pursuits because it is from these that we ask questions of science.

One such question that we ask science is, “what is a person?” Questions of human identity and personhood are exceedingly important to us, so it is only a matter of time before we look to science to answer this.

Scientific responses to this question tend to be physiological in nature (unsurprisingly) – we are the molecules that make up our body. Specifically however, scientists/philosophers might respond (I am thinking of people like Harris, Dennet, Pinker and the like), ‘we are our brains’. As neurons fire, memories are recalled or made, emotions are felt, actions are taken. Some look at this and say the brain is synonymous with the mind (even the person). Proponents of this view are working from a philosophical standpoint of scientism, generally speaking – which is a reductionist framework. One might say that if we can describe and explain everything to do with the ‘what’ of the brain, then we have come to the end of the grey matter regarding what a person is – it’s just that black and white.

However, when it comes to questions of personhood, we must deal with a greater scope of information and data than what science alone can interpret, while certainly taking on board all that science can illuminate. The question of personhood needs a variety of disciplines collaborating together to give a robust explanation. Sociology, philosophy, science, and theology are all involved.

For example: our jobs play a role in who we are as people, our relationships to other people play a role, as does our influence and status in society, our physical bodies dictate part of who we are, our view of who God is and therefore who we are to God (or not) plays a role (I’d argue, it is the key to unlocking the rest), our lived experience and history as a person says something about who we are.

So it is that in our search for who we are, we might be misled if our brain finds its ultimate refuge in itself. But it’s worth being aware of this stance because it’s not necessarily an uncommon one.

I think that part of the reason behind the uptake of such a view is our reliance on modern medicine. We are asking science such weighty and burdensome questions about personhood because as a society one of our prized values is our health. As science comes to solve problems that have plagued the human condition, it slowly but steadily gets a reputation for itself – ‘is there nothing that science can’t solve?’

Linked to this sentiment, we then habitually ask science to define the person (something very important to us). But it may not be such a healthy place to look for answers (if it is the only place we look for answers).

So what are you as a person? Are you just your brain? I think you know that you are more than that (or if you don’t ‘know’, you feel that you are more than that). Even as you ponder what you are, what is doing the pondering? The mind, the conscience… Is that you? Of course it is. It seems that the most complex component of all life – the physical entity of the brain – is unable to capture and sum up all the complexity of what a person is. To reduce ourselves down to the materials and mechanisms of the brain is an ironic way of dealing with the most complex organic organism known to mankind.

For me, the ever persistent presence of the mind, the first person experience, the intangible essence of a person, is one of the undeniable realities of a life that is not reducible to the material. When the arguments of scientism and materialism want to reduce you down to molecules, the conundrum of the mind fights back. Ultimately (although it is premature to discuss it now) it allows for an explanation beyond the physical. We venture into the spiritual, the transcendent, might we even say the mind after which all minds are made, God.

Sharon Dirckx. (2019). Am I just my brain? The Good Book Company.

Wisdom in God’s Ways

Good living looks good. When you see successful living, you want to know how they do it don’t you?

There is a passage in the Bible recording Moses’ words to his people just before they enter into the Promised Land, very near the inception of their nationhood. It reads,

“See, I have taught you decrees and laws as the LORD my God commanded me, so that you may follow them in the land you are entering to take possession of it. Observe them carefully, for this will show your wisdom and understanding to the nations, who will hear about all these decrees and say, “Surely this great nation is a wise and understanding people.” What other nation is so great as to have their gods near them the way the LORD our God is near us whenever we pray to him? And what other nation is so great as to have such righteous decrees and laws as this body of laws I am setting before you today?” (Deut. 4:5–8)

In many ways this passage is alien to our ears. First of all, we are not Israel. Specifically, as God’s people, we are not a nation. Christians are brought together from many nations and united through Christ, not land. We inherit the promises of God in Jesus, which are spiritual blessings and not necessarily physical blessings. Also, the “nearness” of God is again more spiritual (through his Holy Spirit indwelling us) as opposed to the tangible pillar of cloud and fire.

Those differences aside, the underlying principle of this passage is still very true in our day and age. The word of God, particularly the ways of God for his people as expounded in his word, brings wisdom – is wisdom. There is a success to life when living in accord to the way we were made to live.

However, this acknowledgement of God’s ways as wise is not always the case. In our secular age where multiculturalism is one of the principles for our democracy, the ways of God (according to the Bible) is just one way among many equally viable alternatives. To measure these alternatives and determine their relative merit for a society undercuts the principle of multiculturalism (for surely the wisest way of living ought to be the way the laws of the land guide us – and one can’t be better than the other in our system, just… different).

On a related note (and pardon me for contradicting myself, but our society is itself a contradiction on this matter), our secular age is in fact built on the foundations of the Christian ethic. So it just so happens that our society is living (to a degree) according to the wisdom of God but they do not even realise it. Such arguments are made by the likes of Tom Holland in ‘Dominion’. But remember we are not a ‘Christian nation’ necessarily because God’s people are not a nation. So it’s not as if ‘Christian West’ outshines Buddhist, Communist, Atheist, Socialist East. Although the Christian ethic that underpins western society does outshine its counterparts in other countries. I think there are many who can see this and maybe many more who see and don’t speak of it (because that’s not in accord with our modern propriety).

So in a sense, this Bible passage has been fulfilled in front of our very eyes. Society has so imbibed the Christian ethic that they think it is foundational to reality (which in God’s wisdom is true). But at the same time it is slowly drifting away. In light of this drift, there is an opportunity for Christians to live according to their Christian convictions and in so doing they will look very different to the society around them. To some this will be the aroma of death in a sense. But to others, it will be a testimony to the wisdom of God’s ways.

Video Games – The Level 50 Quest for Moderation.

In the last two posts, we have thought about video games and how they are not (strictly speaking) inherently wrong as a medium – they can be a joy and a pleasure as we explore the mind’s creations come to virtual life.

But hopefully we all know video games are also a bane on the human condition because they magnify the human condition – they can bring out some pretty ugly things stored within us. Our chasing after pleasure finds a never-ending pit in the video game world. Games are designed with addictive elements at the very foundations. Screen time and hours played are the metrics of success in the market of gaming.

So although I’ve argued that there is no inherent issue with the medium (much like books, movies, TV, and social media) the medium is still the vector for a vast array of unhelpful content. There is a certain kind of formula used by video game designers; small incremental rewards to keep you engaged as you progress step by step, little deposits of potentially special loot to give a sense of luck and the thrill of gambling mixed in, grinding missions that are pointless but essential to attain the required weapon to proceed (or make it easier to). These are some pretty standard engagement methods.

Moderation is the friend of the gamer. But as we can see, moderation is the enemy of the creator. That’s not to say there are no real gems on the video game market. Games driven by a sense of story and adventure, with profound messages and creative designs or problems that can exhilarate at times do exist. But it is much more akin to a ‘needle in a haystack’ situation than otherwise. So even when we as a gamer want to engage responsibly with the medium, the odds are stacked against us. We would be naïve to think otherwise. In the modern climate of media consumption there is a sense of honour at the hours we sink into consuming media, which I would say is particularly the case in video gaming (this shows up in reviews and is one of the first metrics you will see on your console or gaming client).

In the end, although I have stated in the two prior posts that there is not necessarily anything wrong with the medium of video games (again, strictly speaking), I’m also not going to endorse them because of the amount of power that video games can hold over the mind and body. Even though there is nothing inherent in the medium that makes it wrong, the current culture of video gaming is worth warning against. I think it’s too easy to say that moderation is the answer. Although moderation is the answer, that answer is rather quixotic. Like saying peace is the answer to war.

In my opinion, it takes great wisdom, willpower and discipline to engage in video games. I also think that there are few of us who play video games who have the necessary wisdom, willpower and discipline to do so well.

This leads me to one other thought: if the medium of video games is not inherently wrong yet it’s worth warning against the consumption of video games, how do we talk/advise/counsel each other about video games? We love giving black-and-white answers to each other, or black-and-white opinions, but in the case of video games I think it’s hard to state a black-and-white stance. To give one side without the other is to misrepresent either side. Often video gamers are on the defensive without taking seriously the issues presented by video gaming. On the other side, those who condemn video games do so from a place that leaves them open to hypocrisy or legalism.

I’m not sure what the middle ground is. I’d say moderation, but as I’ve said already, moderation in the current media environment is elusive and even burdensome to chase. I might suggest that one disengage from video games as a general rule, but that might verge upon legalistic.

Really, much prayer is needed. Accountability is needed, self-reflection and honesty. But what is also needed is for the videogame market to reform. But you can’t change the world. Worldliness will always exist on this side of heaven (the good and the bad of it). But hopefully this post helps us think about how we engage with each other and with this particular kind of worldliness, with wisdom.

Video games and Escapism.

Is ‘escapism’ a fictional charge against video games?

It certainly is a charge raised against video games. That they are an escape into unreality, an active attempt to run away from the real and lived experience of the world. Perhaps you’ve heard it said or said yourself, “nothing but fantasy worlds”. So is the exploration of a fantasy world, engagement in the fictional and unreal programming of video games, an unhelpful escape from the world?

I think this depends on the motivation behind escapism. Thus it would come down to the particular case. Are we seeking an escape from reality because we don’t want to face it, because we think there is something better than reality, or because we are unknowingly deceived about reality? Those are problematic motivations for escapism.

However, escapism into another world can be more about enjoying a thought experiment, an experience of immersion and exploration, even a break for the mind from serious matters in the world – like a rest.

This kind of escapism is also not a denial of reality and can ironically be a great experience of reality in a sense. For the experience of escapism, or exploring fictional ideas in games, is a real experience anyone can have. But this comes with other issues. To trip on LSD is an actual experience but what you experience in the hallucinations are not themselves real no matter how real the experience of drug-induced hallucinations feel. We might say the physiological event of a hallucination is real, however, the content of the hallucination is not real. We might say it is the real experience of encountering the unreal.

So it is that engaging in the fantasy world of games is a real experience of the unreal. In this regard, I don’t think escapism holds up as an argument against video games necessarily. There is a joy in being spellbound as you are taken on a cerebral journey without ever journeying from the spot you are in, similar to a book of fiction, a movie, or a story told by another. In the exploration of imagination, there can be a wonder and awe of the God-given mind and its intangible creations.

Like most good things, the problem is in excessive escapism. Most people who take issue with video games apply a blanket criticism to the outcomes of excessive and ungodly actions. I am sympathetic to this because you need a broad canvas to capture the many many millions who are enthralled with the products of this medium. For this reason, it’s hard to see the medium as separate from the outcome. I might even have double standards. I don’t like social media for all the negative consequences, but those consequences are not essential to the medium. We are certainly responsible for our actions in this field as much as in video games.

But much like the last post, the indulgence in excessive escapism afforded through video games is like an explosive display of the human condition as opposed to the cause of the human condition.

Why is it millions seek to drown out the reality of the world in endless fantasy exploration that purposefully leads nowhere? Could it be that we are seeking to escape this world because we know there is truly something terrible about this world?

We endlessly fight make-believe battles on screen because there are real battles to be fought in the world which we feel powerless over, but desperately want justice. The stories are often also good vs bad, light vs dark. More than that though, we seek endless progression and enjoyment because there is true beauty we are seeking in the world.

Our desire to escape might very well point to a problem deeper within ourselves and a beauty beyond our grasp.

The world is broken, we want to escape. We are broken, we want to escape. There is beauty we wish to see and enjoyment we long for that the world provides in drips and drabs, we wish to attain the sublime beyond the tangible.

What we are really longing for is God’s redemption – an escape from the brokenness of the world – and an experience of his beauty, the enjoyment of the sublime. In a sense, video games and the escapism they provide is just another taste of the true experience we seek. At its best, it is a medium of art which is just another expression of our chase for God. 

Video games – Asking the Right Questions.

If I could, would I simply stop playing games altogether? This direct line of interrogation stirs up my innards. It feels like it gets right to the heart of the matter because it evinces a visceral response. But actually it doesn’t illuminate much. It’s too simplistic a question. You see,the question you ask determines (in part) the kind of answer you will get. So perhaps I’m asking myself the wrong questions. Like asking, are video games good or bad?

We often want to put things in 1 of 2 boxes, good or bad. Fat, bad. Sugar, bad. Vitamin C, good. But for those of us who have spent just a little time looking at these components in consumables, we know it’s not so simple. There are bad Fats and there are good fats (or better fats), there are good sugars, sugars from fruit for example. And Vitamin C, well, too much and you get diarrhoea. So unless you think that’s a good idea then perhaps our boxes are not doing a great job of containing the distinctions.

But I love boxing things.

Video games. Good or bad? Wrong question I think. So what is the right question(s) to ask of video games? Let’s consider some and see what kind of question(s) we arrive at.

To start, ‘Is the medium of video gaming inherently bad?”

This question is looking broadly at the medium and asking if there are intrinsic qualities to the medium that are worthy of disapprobation. Without a doubt, people have said ‘yes’ to this. Lots of people take issue with the medium of video games, applying wholesale disapproval. This occurs generally for one of two reasons. Firstly, it’s viewed as a waste of time. Secondly, it is seen as a promotion of reprehensible content (especially violence).

The latter argument has some validity to it. However it is addressing the content and not the medium itself. This fuddle between medium and message is a classic muddle. If the message is a promotion of unethical glorified criminality delivered through the medium of interactive programed pixels, then take offense at the right aspect of the problem – the message. The medium is not responsible for producing the message. The same promotion of unethical glorified criminality may be delivered through a TV show, or through a book. Nothing inherently wrong with books or TV shows. Likewise, I think there is not an inherent issue with the medium of games.

How about the former issue, time wasting? Again, in my experience, people have used the ‘time waste’ argument but then straight away have promoted ‘alternatives’ or even unknowingly admitted to watching excessive TV.  The ‘waste of time’ argument can backfire in this way because anyone can waste time doing just about anything. To some folding origami could be seen as a waste of time, play sport can be seen as a waste of time, reading, TV, cooking. You get the picture. We all have leisure activities that to someone else who does not share the same interest will appear as a waste of time.

But… in both argument above, there is also truth. Through the medium of video games there has been a lot of content that is questionable, we might call it ‘bad art.’ Again, through the medium of video games, many have truly wasted time. Here technology and the market have come together in such a way that they are able to create the perfect storm that sucks you in to a gore filled, sex filled, addictive time drain. This does not have to be the case but it nevertheless is more often true than not (in my opinion). So is there something to the medium of video games that’s inherently bad after all?

Still, No. I think video games are just really good at bringing out the worst in us. People have to create and program those games filled with terrible art that’s purposely addictive (time-wasting). Yet these content creators and designers are also doing so because the market demands it (us). That’s how it works. I’d be very surprised if in heaven we are playing GTA 5. We made that here on earth and we pay good money to play it. So video games can easily bring out the evil stored up in us.

Then what questions should we ask of video games? Is the problem with the medium? No the problem is not inherent to the medium. Then we asked is the message (the content of the medium) the problem? Yes, the content is what determines a good game from a bad game. But we went one step further and looked at the one engaging with the game. How are we the problem?

I think we ought to assess the value of a game on an individual basis, much the same way we approach movies and books. There are good movies and good books, and terrible movies and terrible books. Same with video games.

But we should also go a little further in asking the right question of ourselves. Does this video game bring out the worst in me, or the bad side of me?

These are much better questions to ask of the medium, the content and ourselves.