22 Humor: How to Live

of Campus, on Campus
Danielle Shillingstad explains
how to capture the essence
of of-campus living from the
comfort of your dorm.
Brett Wierenga and Martha
Ekdahl explain the pros and
cons to both sides of the
question.
14 Ring by Spring 7 The Four Loves in
Harry Potter
the hillsdale
Forum
Should Christians be afraid of
Harry Potter? Micah Meadowcroft
says no.
{EDITORIAL}
EDITOR-IN-CHIEF Chris McCafery
MANAGING EDITOR Chelsey Schmid
EDITOR-AT-LARGE Wes Wright
CONTENT EDITOR Matthew OSullivan, Luke
Adams
FEATURED WRITERS Nathan Brand, Micah
Meadowcrof, John Taylor, Garrett West
STAFF WRITERS Sarah Albers, Devon Izmirian,
Andrew Egger, Danielle Shillingstad
{DESIGN}
HEAD DESIGNER Meg Prom
DESIGN EDITOR Lauren Wierenga
PHOTOGRAPHER Nathaniel Meadowcroft
{SPONSORS}
BUSINESS MANAGER Ryne Bessmer
FACULTY ADVISOR Dr. John Somerville
Intercollegiate Studies Institutes Collegiate
Network
CONSERVATIVE FEATURES
4 Letters: Politics Majors
Devin Creed responds to Luke Adams In Defense of Politics
(March 2014), and Adams defends his position.
7 The Four Loves of Harry Potter Micah Meadowcroft
Should Christians be afraid of Harry Potter? Micah Meadowcrof says no.
8 The Fight for Food and Freedom Nathan Brand
Recently students have called into question the quality and necessity of Hills-
dales meal plans. YAF president Nathan Brand outlines the argument for meal
plan reform.
10 Interview with Dr. Nathan Schlueter
Te Hillsdale Forum talks with Dr. Schlueter about moral ecology.
ESSAYS
16 Mans Place in the Cosmos John Taylor
In his work, Walker Percy criticized the growing scientism he saw in the 20th
century and defended an anthropocentric view of the Cosmos.
17 What is Metaphysics? Garrett West
Garrett West draws on Martin Heidegger, Aristotle, St. Thomas Aquinas,
and Emmanuel Levinas to explore historical conceptions of Being.
CAMPUS FEATURES
12 Spotlight on Triple Majors Andrew Egger
Te Forum looks at three overachievers who couldnt choose just one.
14 Campus Smackdown: Ring by Spring Devon Izmirian
Brett Wierenga and Martha Ekdahl explain the pros and cons to both sides of
the question.
22 Humor: How to Live of Campus, on Campus
Danielle Shillingstad
Danielle Shillingstad explains how to capture the essence of of-campus living
from the comfort of your dorm.
23 Tragically Hip Sarah Albers
Albers has found something on the Internet, and she wants to share it with you.
Contents
Mission Statement:
Te Hillsdale Forum is the independent, student-
run conservative magazine at Hillsdale College.
Te Forum, in support of the mission statement
of Hillsdale College, exists to promote a return to
limited government as outlined in the Declaration
of Independence and the Constitution. We publish
conservative opinion, editorials, and campus
features. Te Forum is a vehicle to bring the
discussion and thought of the intelligent students
and professors at the heart of the conservative
movement beyond the classroom.
02
Follow us on Twitter
@hillsdaleforum and like
us on Facebook!
Anyone whos seen Te Pape in the Grewcock Student
Union on Sunday afernoons knows that its campus least-re-
liable news source. Its written in a terribly transcribed New
Yawhk accent and details the adventahs and interests of
Jack Kelly and his staf of newsies. But as anyone who has
taken the time to get to know it will attest, Te Pape is one of
the best things about Hillsdale College. It serves no purpose
except the obvious enjoyment and love that goes into creating
it, and that shines through in every sensational headline and
misspelled word. Weve paid some homage to the newsies
here before, to their great amusement, but now its time to
say goodbye to the campus publication that has a stronger
social media presence than us and the Collegian combined.
When seniors Katie Annett, Emilie Moore, and Ariel
Torres sat down with me for my spotlight on Te Pape in last
weeks Collegian, it was immediately obvious what Hillsdales
most sensationalist paper has been for them. Moore said it
best: Its a record of our college experience. She describes
herself as the metaphorical brains of the publication, to
Annetts heart and soul.
Te Pape is written by and for people who are very
comfortable not taking themselves too seriously, and thats
something more students at Hillsdale need. As senior
columnist Erin Mundahl noted in her insightful column in
the April 3 Collegian, Its a sorry thing to take a curious,
hardworking student and push her to the point where all
she can say is Im tired. Our education can take everything
out of us. Reading and writing and studying and all that all
over again the next day, schoolnight or weekend or federal
holiday, coursework piles up and can bury us under a churn
of papers and tests and reading until our eyes glaze over and
the only response to Whats up? is Im tired, if not a slow
groan and a thousand-yard stare.
Mundahl is right: Properly understood, a Hillsdale educa-
tion must include an ample amount of silliness, of wonder, of
unexpected moments. Without a sense of leisure, we could
become too tired to live out the education we have worked
so hard to gain.
If all your days are spent studying, youll have a great
GPA, but you wont have anything good or true (improved
or otherwise) in your life. Te only thing your education will
have really given you is the creeping suspicion that Macbeth
might have been exactly right about life, Told by an idiot,
full of sound and fury, signifying nothing. Studying the
humanities is useless if youre the only human you know, and
if youre the only human you know, youre a poor one at that.
Tis is something the women behind Te Pape have under-
stood. Teyve taken their scant leisure time and made it into
a whole world of headlines and dime novels and adventures.
Over 36 issues, theyve built a loyal following and put the
improved truth in newsprint. Te Pape staf knows that
its essential to take a break from the swirl of Spinoza and
Hayek and Aristotle so many students never stop spinning
from. Te Pape is a celebration of taking the time, of doing
something silly and extraneous and poorly-spelled. Teyve
taken their adventuresthe story of their friendship
and made it into something that can leaven anyones day, if
theyre open to it.
Te last issue of Te Pape is a love letter to four years at
Hillsdale, to friends and studies and the fctionalized diary
of seven girls who have learned that the greatest advice is to
Stay out all night lookin at da stars, talkin, dancin, and etc.
on the cross country felds, and then just to top it of, get a
warm breakfast at the Finish Line and crash...hopefully afer
makin it back to your room, and to leave the weather in
Santa Fe as Everything you hoped itd be.
College is a strange, ephemeral time. Tere can be a strug-
gle to fnd something lasting in the constantly-changing
community we move throughI hear ofen that its best not
to bother. Tis carries no water for me. Cling to things here,
because theyre good. You, Forum reader, are young. Look
for the grace to accept the youth of others and take your own
for what it is. Never allow whatever you think is important
even if its for Dr. Jacksonget in the way of loving someone
next to you, or allowing them to love you. Souls unleavened
become bitter, and people learn to spit them out.
Have a great summer! Te Forum will see you frst thing
next semester. Tanks to our fabulous design editor Lauren
Wierengaher work is all around this letterand to Ryne
Bessmer, who helps us to pay for these nice glossy magazines.
We wish you all the best in graduation. F
Chris McCaffery is a sophomore studying history.
He is a member of the Dow Journalism Program.
Letter from the Editor
Well leave all [sic]s understood here
April 28, 2014 The Forum LFE 03
In reply to Luke Adams In Defense of Politics
Devin Creed
Adams begins his essay by positing that Hillsdale is
famous for politics, and he goes on to imply that Hills-
dales mission somehow relates to politics. While Hills-
dale may have gotten signifcant press for the decision
not to accept federal funding, this does not mean that the
schools mission in any way relates to the political sphere.
Te colleges mission statement states in part that:
It pursues the stated object of the founders: to
furnish all persons who wish, irrespective of na-
tion, color, or sex, a literary and scientifc educa-
tion outstanding among American colleges and
to combine with this such moral and social in-
struction as will best develop the minds and im-
prove the hearts of its pupils.
It then goes on to note briefy that the college is a trustee
of the JudeoChristian and GrecoRoman heritage
(which is most clearly expressed in the American exper-
iment), and that the college wants to train its students to
be defenders of that Western legacy.
Te stated mission of the college is focused on an
education that develops both mind and soul and teaches
students to preserve the legacies we have inherited. Tere
is no mention of infuencing the political sphere, or
attempting to efect broad institutional change. Rather,
the college is focused on its students as individuals, striv-
ing to cultivate them in multiple ways and teaching them
to value the past.
Russell Kirk drafed a statement of academic freedom
for the faculty which was adopted in 1995, and it states
that:
Hillsdale College afrms that all these freedoms
are dependent upon the maintenance of a moral
order; and that academic freedom in particular
requires attachment to a body of truth, made
known through the order and integration of
knowledge. Of such truths the College is the con-
servator and renewer, and the primary function
of the college is to transmit, through these truths,
some measure of wisdom and virtue.
Tis statement also pushes political concerns to the
periphery, for the college is frst and foremost interested
in conserving the truths passed down to us through the
Western heritage and transmitting them to the students
who attend the college. Te college does not ascribe to
any particular political philosophy in this statement, and
neither does it note any desire to implement the Good
in society, but rather to foster wisdom and virtue by the
conversation of the truths of the past.
An example of Adams misunderstanding of the college
comes in his throw-away comment concerning Rush
Limbaughs advertising for the school. Limbaugh lacks a
college education, which was made apparent in his 2011
radio rant against classical education. He encouraged
students to stay far away from classical studies because
they were subjective and a tool of the lef meant to trick
students into paying for worthless degrees. Hillsdale is
frmly rooted in the classical style of learning, however,
requiring its students to take multiple courses in the
classics (Great Books, Western Heritage) and ofering
majors in Latin, Greek, and Classical Studies. Tough
Limbaugh advertises for the school, he is clearly ignorant
of what takes place in the classroom, so his misguided
musings on Hillsdale and politics are very suspect. Tey
illustrate a broader misunderstanding of the mission and
purpose of the school.
Adams then makes the claim that politics students are
well-equipped because they have to take political philoso-
A
p
r
i
l

2
8
,

2
0
1
4




T
h
e

F
o
r
u
m

|

C
o
n
s
e
r
v
a
t
i
v
e

|

0
4

Creed vs. Adams
While
not devoid
of valid
points,
Luke
Adams
article In
Defense
of Politics
(Forum,
March
2014) misses
the mark
and demonstrates a
fundamental misunderstanding of the
liberal arts and Hillsdale College. He is probably correct
in thinking that politics majors are not sell-outs and that
they should not be unduly criticized for their choice of
major, but the faw in his argument lies in his treatment
of the purpose of the college and the purpose of liberal
learning.
A
p
r
i
l

2
8
,

2
0
1
4




T
h
e

F
o
r
u
m

|

C
o
n
s
e
r
v
a
t
i
v
e

|

0
5

Creed vs. Adams
phy classes. Tese political philosophy classes mostly focus
on philosophy, so politics majors gain an excellent under-
standing of the human soul. Te philosophy taught in the
politics department, however, is a far cry from the philoso-
phy in the philosophy department. Te politics department
employs an esoteric Straussian reading of classical politi-
cal and philosophical texts. Strauss thought that political
theorists masked their true ideas because of government
censure. Terefore, treatises of political philosophy have a
surface level meaning along with a deeper, esoteric reading
only accessible to the intellectual elite. Esoteric readings
are ahistorical because
they are usually devoid
of context. Tey are
used in a circular
fashion to impose
modern ideas on old
texts and then to claim
that the modern ideas
came to us from the
past. Eric Voegelin
identifes this kind of
faulty hermeneutic as
modern-day gnosti-
cism. When a politics
student (or any student
for that matter) claims
to have discerned the
path of history and where it is tending, they assume the
role of Voegelins gnostic prophet.
I have experienced this gnosticism frsthand in a Consti-
tution class where the professor told us that Abraham
Lincoln cannot be called a racist (in the modern sense of the
word). Tis professor argued that Lincoln used a laughing
or joking tone in a speech in which he claimed that blacks
had less rights than whites. How the professor discerned
tone from a speech in which we only have a transcript is
beyond me. I would like to stress that this instance did not
make the class illegitimate, and I have the utmost respect
for the professor who was teaching it. Nevertheless, it is
important to realize that many of the readings done in
the politics department lack any historical context and are
ofentimes gross misinterpretations.
Finally, and most distressing, Adams claim that politics
majors seek to achieve the Good on a government scale
articulates a mission of the most extreme hubris. He
assumes that an education through the Hillsdale politics
department gives students such an extensive idea of the
Good that they can go out and implement it in the politi-
cal sphere. I contend that the Good and other such senti-
ments require a lifetime of study to comprehend even in
part. Te hubristic project of seeking to bring about the
Good through government falls prey to Voegelins concept
of immanentizing the eschaton, of trying to bring about the
heavenly in the present
world. Te Good
cannot be brought
about on this earth,
and it is misguided
for anyone to think
that it can be efected
through the govern-
ment. In addition, this
kind of goal fies in the
face of liberal educa-
tion at Hillsdale, which
we see manifested in
the individual rising
to self-government
through a cultivation
of the mind, soul, and
body. Tis missionthe very mission of our college and
liberal education in generalpresupposes that the way
to infuence others is through personal relationships, or
as Martin Buber posits, humans fnd their meaning in I
Tou relationships. Terefore, broad institutional change
through legislation misses the aim of liberal education and
the purpose of Hillsdale College since it does away with
personal relationships in lieu of trying to efect change
quickly and by the force of the laws.
While this essay was specifcally a response to Adams
article, I believe that several of these arguments apply to
the politics department as a whole. I dont want to be seen
as simply bashing a group of my peers and professors,
however. Rather, I would like to encourage a continuing
dialogue on the subject.
The stated mission of the college
is focused on an education that
develops both mind and soul and
teaches students to preserve the
legacies we have inherited. There
is no mention of infuencing the
political sphere, or attempting to
efect broad institutional change.
In reply to Devin Creed
Luke Adams
Im happy that someone disagreed strongly enough
with my piece to write a rebuttal. Im also happy that this
conversation remains just that and that we are not devolv-
ing into BurrHamilton-level debateat least not yet.
Also, thank you for your excellent outline of the defni-
tion and purpose of the liberal arts, as well as their specif-
ic application to Hillsdale College. I have two comments
on your line of argumentation here. First, in reference
to the mission of the college, you stated, Tere is no
mention of infuencing the political sphere, or attempt-
ing to enact broad institutional change. I grant this as a
valid, but signifcantly misleading, sentence. As you point
out earlier in the piece, the education we receive here is
meant to develop the mind and the soul. My question,
then, is why would this growth of the soul and mind not
apply to those operating in the political sphere?
While the college obviously does not make political
change part of its explicit mission (which, by the way, I
never stated or implied anywhere in my piece, contrary to
your claims), it would make sense that one who received
this type of education would be able to practice it in
whatever feld he fnds himself. Tis is the purpose of the
politics program.
Next, your argument regarding my Rush Limbaugh
comment could only have been inspired by a serious
misreading of my piece. While I wholeheartedly agree
that Limbaugh clearly does not understand at all the
mission of Hillsdale College, I was illustrating the
connection between the college and politically concerned
students. For example, during the last election cycle
Hillsdale students did more campaigning for conserva-
tive candidates than any other college in the state, includ-
ing Michigan State and even the University of Michigan.
Like it or not, Hillsdale has a relationship with conserva-
tism, and it is ofen expressed through the political side
of that philosophy. It is simply inconsistent for a school
of this character to be so acrimonious towards a group of
students who merely want to further their interests in this
feld in an academic or professional manner.
You state that the political philosophy taught at Hills-
dale College is misleadingly taught due to a Straussian
method of ignoring historical context. Your main source
against Strauss is Eric Voegelin. Voegelin wrote almost
exclusively against major schools of historical revisionism
such as Nazism and Communism, both of whom inten-
tionally read history with a specifc lens that changes facts
and inserts a specifc narrative where no particular one
exists. I have never come across this level of revisionism in
the politics department. Te political philosophy classes
are philosophy classes frst, without any kind of slant, and
then politics classes seeking only to understand if any
applications to politics exist in the texts. Strauss was, afer
all, the frst American political philosopher in the 20th
century to place any kind of serious trust in the American
Revolution.
Wi t h o u t
him, its
fairly safe
to say
that most
cons er va-
tives would
land in the
neocon catego-
ry.
Finally, you
attacked the idea of
Hillsdale students pursuing
the Good in government by saying that once again it
contradicts Mr. Voegelins admonishment not to attempt
to immanentize the eschaton. Also, you once again
misread my original argument. I did not say that Hillsdale
politics majors were to seek to implement the Good on a
societal scale. I said that they try to implement the Good
in the governmental sphere. Teres a big diference. As to
Voegelin, I think everyone here realizes that true perfec-
tion can never be reached while on Earth. Yet, at the same
time, it would be absolutely ridiculous and fatalistic to say
that we must not do our best. Te liberal arts education
is meant to equip students to be the best people they can
be, always striving to better themselves and their work,
no matter their feld. All the politics major does is show
students how to do this best in regards to statesmanship
and public service.

Adams vs. Creed
We welcome letters to the editor. Letters
appear in the issue afer the article to
which they are responding. Letters under
400 words are preferred, and they may be
edited for length and clarity.
Please send them to:
hillsdaleforum@gmail.com

LETTERS
A
p
r
i
l

2
8
,

2
0
1
4




T
h
e

F
o
r
u
m

|

C
o
n
s
e
r
v
a
t
i
v
e

|

0
6
A
p
r
i
l

2
8
,

2
0
1
4




T
h
e

F
o
r
u
m

|

C
o
n
s
e
r
v
a
t
i
v
e

|

0
7
The Four Loves
in Harry Potter
Christians should read
Harry Potter, not fear it.
BY MICAH MEADOWCROFT
T
hroughout its publication history
Harry Potter, as a series, has been one
of the most challenged and banned
books in America. While it has received less
and less attention in recent years due to its
completion, both as books and movies, and
its loss of global phenomenon status, it is
still approached with caution and hostility
in many conservative religious commu-
nities. While the Harry Potter generation
grew up reading the books as they came
out, maturing with the characters, the books
were most ofen banned or challenged for
various anti-religious themes and material.
Tat remains the primary reason for families
and communities to oppose the reading of
the series. Tose families and communities
generally cite the Bible and their Christian
faith as their motivation for challenging the
series.
Harry Potter is a series all about love and,
as such, is profoundly Biblical. By borrow-
ing conceptions of agape, philia, storge, and
eros from C.S. Lewis short treatise, Te
Four Loves, we can examine Harry Potter
as an exploration of love in all of its myriad
expressions. Tis article also reveals spoil-
ersbeware.
Agape, unconditional love, powers the
whole series. It is primarily expressed in
three characters: Lily Potter, Severus Snape,
and Albus Dumbledore. It is Lily Potters
unconditional love of Harry that makes
him the boy who lived in the face of her
death. Her sacrifce protects him when he
has no other defenses. Lily Potters death is
also the crisis in Severus Snapes life, when
his romantic love for her becomes an uncon-
ditional devotion to her and a promise to
protect what she loves, Harry. Every single
major action Snape takes in the entire series
is motivated by his love for Lily. He expects
no reward, and none is coming, as he risks
everything for who she was. Albus Dumble-
dore devotes his whole life to loving and
protecting that which is good. He sacrifces
private happiness for public good and leads
through selfess service. His love brings
him meek as a lamb to the slaughter as he
prepares the way for goods triumph. Tese
fgures and their sacrifce are the examples
that lead Harry to his own agapehis willing
death for the foolish wizards of the world
as he fulflls his call to be the Chosen One,
a Christ-type who lived and lives, who
was loved and loves, defeating death, and
death-eaters, in death.
Agape may have propelled the plot of
Harry Potter as a series, but philia, friend-
ship, made each book a delight. Harry, Ron,
and Hermione show close friendship, true
appreciation of the other person, and delight
in who they are, far more clearly than most
literary heroes. Harry, Ron, and Hermione
are a triune Jonathan and David, a relation-
al union harmonized by their love for one
another. Confusion from readers about the
lack of sexual tension between them as a
trio evidences the whole-souled compan-
ionship their friendship demonstrates. Tey
fght, sure, but they value one another, have
committed to one another. Teir friendship
is not natural. Tey are heart, mind, and soul
brought together by choosing one another.
Storge is the afection of family. Everyone
wants to go to Hogwarts, not just because
it is magical, but because of the communi-
ty there. House rivalries may get nasty, but
Hogwarts is a big family. Te Weasleys are
the uproarious family ideal. Tey love each
other with a deep and abiding fondness and
acceptance everyone seeks. No matter how
dark the world of Harry Potter gets, it glows
with friends and families honest afection
for one another. Sirius Black loves Harry not
only because Harry is his fathers son
and Blacks godson, but also because
they are truly fond of each other,
truly kindred.
Any coming of age novel
wouldnt be complete
without the early explora-
tions of eros. But roman-
tic love is never limited
in Harry Potter to the
awkward snogging of
hormonal teenagers. Of
course Rowling spends
plenty of pages illustrat-
ing both the positive and
negative possibilities of
being in love and exploring
burgeoning sexuality, but she also
illustrates mature romance in the
vivacious love of Tonks and Lupin. In
the fashback accounts of the life of James
and Lily Potter, immature teenage mutual
narcissism transforms into sacrifcial love.
But best of all, and despite Rowlings recent
regrets, Hermione and Rons relationship is a
beautiful picture of growth and forgiveness.
Harry Potter is about love. So is the Bible.
One can apologize for the series to concerned
conservative Christians by emphasizing
Harry as a Christ fgure, or Dumbledore as
a prophet, or Lily as a Marian fgure. One
can point to the series as a war between clear
good and clear evil, with a community of
faithful against whom the gates of hell will
not prevail. One can see it as a story about
death and life, the fear of death and lust for
life, or the love of life that leads to welcoming
death. Hell, Lily and James grave quotes 1
Corinthians 15:26 with Te last enemy that
shall be destroyed is death carved in stone
for all time, looking forward to eternity.
It is, however, above all, an exploration
of love, an examination of its forms and
nature. Harry Potter is a story of magic and
the mundane, darkness and light, joy and
pain, the human experience of love. As such,
it is profoundly beautiful and profoundly
Biblical. It is not high art. Te writing is not
groundbreakingit will not be added to the
canon of great books. But the story is a story
that touches the story. To fear it is to fear the
life we are living. Christians, anyone who is
hesitant, should read Harry Potter. F
Micah Meadowcrof is a sophomore
studyng history. He is a member of the
Dow Journalism Program.
T
oo ofen, students roam around
the dining area looking for
something to eat and end up with
an unhealthy slice of pizza or a fatty bagel.
Tey start their stroll at the Hilltop Bistro
to see what the main course is for that
meal. If it doesnt look appealing, they
may venture to the salad bar or the grill
repetitive afer a while. So if you are at all
like me, you fnd yourself heading over
to the bread and bagel shelf or the cereal
section and walking away with just a bowl
of sugar-flled cereal.
Tat bowl of cereal costs students
anywhere from $8.53 to
$15.00 a meal, depending on their meal
plan.
Because of outlandish prices, limited
options, and ofen-poor food quality,
Hillsdale College needs to reconsider how
it does food service.
Tis is the most important issue facing
students. Besides student housing and the
core curriculum, this is the one area of
campus life that all students share in. And
it is in need of much improvement.
Tis is the most private of private insti-
tutions. President Dr. Larry Arnn and
the schools administration do not take
marching orders from anyone, so they
are free to operate the food service at the
college in any way they please. But this
should not stop students from voicing
their concerns and ideas.
Students are more than welcome to
have discussions
about how the
founding fathers
would approach
the confict in
the Ukraine or
Aristotles take
on immigration
reform, but none
of it matters. To quote one of our favorites,
Hillary Clinton, What diference does it
make?
No one with authority is going
to be reading your opinion on
these topics. No one of us
is an expert on national
issues.
So it is important
to act and seek
reforms in areas
where students
can be efec-
tive. Hills-
dale College
prides itself
on the
community
that it fosters,
and we
should look to
improve it.
Students have
been creative
when coming up
with reform ideas,
and the administration
should take note. Reforms
such as allowing students to
opt-out of having a meal plan or pay
for only what they are going to eat, ofer-
ing more meal plan size options, or hiring
a diferent food provider should all be
considered.
Hillsdales Young Americans for
Freedom chapter began a petition this
month asking the administration to
consider the opt-out option of reform.
Te student group stands for many of the
same ideals as Hillsdale and believes the
colleges administration should live up to
the standard it holds the government to.
Te colleges widely read publication,
Imprimis, defends free markets and
limited government issue afer issue.
President Arnn and the college have gone
afer the progressive government policies,
like Obamacare, more than Wile E.
Coyote goes afer the Road Runner. Tese
institutions force everyone to pay for
substandard goods
and services they
dont need, while
the guaranteed
monopoly makes
high prices
and ever-lower
standards the
norm. Fortunately,
Hillsdale College knew these problems
would arise when government involved
itself in health care policy.
Yet students are forced to buy into a
meal plan policy that creates many of the
same problems.
Tey are faced with the same restricted
choice, high prices, and a school-sanc-
tioned monopolyresulting in low
quality, high costs, and an absence of
freedom and competition.
Te college refuses to allow a free
market inside campus, and this violates
the aims and the principles that Hillsdale
publically stands for.
Before outlining reform, it is import-
ant to remember that this a private insti-
tution that we agree to attend. Nor does
the college market itself as a place that
practices these political and economical
principles internally. But these principles
of freedom, and choice and competition,
are the best way of organizing ourselves,
and students should not be prevented
from speaking out on an issue that will
improve the quality of life on campus.
Practical change starts with allowing
students to opt-out of having a meal plan.
Tis will allow students choice and force
the current monopoly to compete for
The Fight for
Food and
Freedom
Students deserve
more food options
BY NATHAN BRAND
Hillsdale College prides
itself for the community
that it fosters, and we
should look to improve it.
08
A
p
r
i
l

2
8
,

2
0
1
4




T
h
e

F
o
r
u
m

|

C
o
n
s
e
r
v
a
t
i
v
e

|

0
8
their dining business, hopefully improv-
ing quality.
Tere are dozens of local business-
es that would love to have Hillsdale
students spending their money in their
establishments. Imagine having that $15
the college charges you per meal back
in your pocket, and having the freedom
and money to go buy a BBQ special from
the Filling Station Deli, for a third of the
price. Better yet, make a nutritious meal
for yourself in your own kitchen.
Another practical option is to expand
Charger Change. Instead of swiping into
the dining area and using one of your
meals, walk in, grab what you want to eat
and then pay for only what youre going
to eat. For example, a bagel and cream
cheese and a glass of chocolate milk make
for decent breakfast. Dont charge $15,
charge $3 for the bagel and $2 for the glass
of chocolate milk. Instead of Saga Steve
Casai swiping you in, he would check you
out.
Tis alternative would allow students to
speak with their dollars, and would create
the opportunity for real choices.
If the college is resistant to these
avenues of reform, maintain the current
meal plan system, but ofer to buy back
students unused meals at the end of the
semester. Even if it is a partial buy-back,
students will still have incentive to eat in
the Knorr Dining Room, but will have
more freedom over their own money.
Te ideas students have come up with
are not limited to these listed above. Te
Hillsdale administration has concerns
with these alternatives.
In my meetings with the presidents
ofce, they made the point that an
opt-out reform may result in a reduction
of the proft the school makes from the
food service on campus. Once students
are allowed to opt-out of a meal plan, if
the food quality does not improve, many
students are going to quit paying into the
system.
President Arnns primary concern is
the loss of community if students opt out
of buying a meal plan. If the food quality
improves, though, students will be more
inclined to eat in a convenient location
with their friends. So community will
thrive and the college will make money,
assuming the food improves.
As much as this has been a call to
action for administrators to reform the
meal plan policies at the school, they have
been very receptive of students thoughts
and concerns. Students should continue
to meet with administrators to add their
input as to how the school could improve
their meal plan policy. Te administration
prides themselves on their willingness to
schedule time to meet with any student
and hear their ideas and concerns.
Students are the ones eating the food,
students should be encouraged to voice
their opinions about the food.
Whatever the administration chooses
to do in the future with food service at
the college, they must take into account
the principles of the free market. If they
need a refresher as to what those princi-
ples entail, Hillsdale Colleges free online
Economics 101 course is now enrolling. F
Nathan Brand is a junior studying
economics and minoring in mathematics.
He is the president of Hillsdales chapter of
Young Americans for Freedom.
A
p
r
i
l

2
8
,

2
0
1
4




T
h
e

F
o
r
u
m

|

C
o
n
s
e
r
v
a
t
i
v
e

|

0
9
Dr. Nathan Schlueter is an associate professor of philosophy
and religon. Te Hillsdale Forum recently sat down with him
to discuss the idea of moral ecology.
HF: In a number of your classes and public lectures, weve
heard you mention moral ecology. Could you talk to us
about that idea?
NS: Sure. Te basic idea here is that human behavior does
not occur in a vacuum. Human beings never exist prior to
and independent of their social order. Teir whole develop-
ment (intellectual, moral, and physical) is profoundly shaped
by their culture. Culture is not merely a sum or aggregate of
individual behaviors, as the individualist model would have
it; it is a dominant pattern of social expectations, judgments,
and moral norms that either enable or inhibit human devel-
opment and fourishing. Just as human beings have an
obligation in justice to avoid behavior that causes physi-
cal harm to others, such as emitting toxic chemicals into
a common water source, so human beings have an obliga-
tion in justice to avoid behavior that causes moral harm to
others, by undermining the cultural conditions for authentic
freedom. Tis is an old idea, recognized in the common law
and in the laws of every state as public morality.
HF: How would you respond to the claim that this idea
of public morality involves people imposing their private
preferences on others?
NS: Tis claim refects the kind of confusion C.S. Lewis
identifes in Te Abolition of Man between subjective values
and objective goods. Not all evaluative statements are merely
subjective preferences. Chocolate ice cream is good is a
subjective preference. It can easily be translated without loss
into I like chocolate ice cream (though others may not).
Everyone immediately recognizes that it would be absurd
for someone to attempt to ban vanilla ice cream based
upon his preference for chocolate. But rape is bad cannot
be translated into I dont like rape (but others might)
without serious violence to natural language and intentional
meaning, and every intelligent person can acknowledge why
the legal prohibition of rape is reasonable and justifed.
HF: Whats the intellectual history of public morality?
NS: Public morality has deep roots in the Western tradi-
tion, back to at least Plato and Aristotle. But it takes on a
liberal meaning in the modern era. Put most simply, whereas
many classical thinkers argued that the law should make
men moral, the modern defenders of public morality argued
that only men can make themselves moral through their
own self-constituting choices. But the law can assist men in
making themselves moral by protecting the cultural condi-
tions for authentic freedom, as noted above. According to
the modern idea of public morality, the law does not attempt
to make all human beings conform to a single idea of human
fourishing (such as participation in politics or contempla-
tion), but recognizes the vast diversity of ways in which
human beings can fourish (through work, art, marriage,
love, music, etc.). Te modern idea of public morality, there-
fore, is more about preventing harmful action than promot-
ing good action. It is worth pointing out that not a single
one of the classical liberals (Smith, Hume, Ferguson, Burke,
etc.) advocated for the abolition of laws on public morality.
Te frst philosopher to do this was John Stuart Mill, who, as
Hayek and others point out, was not particularly friendly to
the free market.
HF: You mentioned moral harm above. What does that
entail?
NS: Good character is the source of personal integrity
and the frm basis on which free moral choices are made.
Character is built upon the accumulation of small and ofen
difcult choices over time. It is a wrong of injustice, there-
hepurposeof thelawis not to prohibit all immorality,
but to promotehuman flourishing.
T
A
p
r
i
l

2
8
,

2
0
1
4




T
h
e

F
o
r
u
m

|

I
n
t
e
r
v
i
e
w

|

1
0
Faculty Interview:
Dr. Nathan Schlueter
Public morality and the
social order
COMPILED BY WES WRIGHT
fore, to present human beings with powerful temptations to
actions that contradict the order of objective goods. In the
worst case, human beings seek to exploit such temptations
in others for personal proft, as with drug pushers, prosti-
tutes, and pimps. Such activity is a source of moral harm
to the character and integrity of other persons, and thus an
injustice which might be prohibited by law. For a particular-
ly illuminating study of this, read up on the Opium Wars.
HF: I hope most of our readers arent drug addicts or
dealers. What might be a more common example?
NS: Well, we might start with the seven deadly sins: pride,
envy, anger, acedia, prodigality, gluttony, lust. All of these
provide an opportunity for some persons to proft at the
expense of others. If you dont notice the pervasiveness of
this in todays culture, youre not paying much attention.
HF: So should all of these things be outlawed?
NS: No. Im with St. Tomas Aquinas on this. Te purpose
of the law is not to prohibit all immorality, but to promote
human fourishing. Legal prohibition, therefore, is subject
to three conditions: First, the action itself must be immoral
(no prohibiting acts which are not themselves immoral).
Second, the action must cause moral harm to others (no
prohibiting acts that are purely private, and have no efect
on public morality). Tird, legal prohibition of the action
must not result in worse harms than toleration (e.g. public
expense, corruption of authority, corruption of persons
through black market, etc.).
HF: Can you draw a specifc line?
NS: We cant know without deliberation. We need data
and a pragmatic approach. Some things are obvious enough;
murder (including abortion), for example, is a grave evil that
should always be prohibited. Other actions depend upon a
careful assessment of empirical data. Both Augustine and
Aquinas asserted that prostitution should be tolerated, not
because it is moral, but lest the world be convulsed with
lust. Tis strikes me as a rather bad argument, but I am
open to better ones.
HF: How has the U.S. moved away from protecting our
moral ecology?
NS: Tis is a complex story. As I suggest above, John
Stuart Mill
was the frst
philosopher to
argue that government should be neutral with respect to
competing conceptions of the good (to use the phrase of
John Rawls). But Mill relied for his argument on utilitari-
an premises, which were notoriously weak. It is only when
Mills doctrine is combined with Kants notion of individ-
ual moral autonomy that the idea starts to take hold. Tis
attack on the traditional understanding of public morality
was not part of the progressive movement. It is a late arrival
to America, and involves an interesting alliance of progres-
sivism and libertarianism that is given its most infuen-
tial expression in the writings of John Rawls. Notably,
whereas the goals of progressivism (i.e. the administrative
welfare state) were largely achieved through the democratic
process, the abolition of laws protecting public morality was
almost entirely imposed on unwilling democratic majorities
by unelected judges, from the contraception and obscenity
cases in the 1960s, to the abortion cases in the 1970s, to the
sodomy cases in the 1980s and 90s, to the marriage cases
in our time. Euthanasia and transgender equality are the
next frontier. F
Wes Wright is a junior studying political economy and
speech with a minor in classical education.
11
hepurposeof thelawis not to prohibit all immorality,
but to promotehuman flourishing.
A
p
r
i
l

2
8
,

2
0
1
4




T
h
e

F
o
r
u
m

|

I
n
t
e
r
v
i
e
w

|

1
1
when I got here I took one of the health and wellness classes just out of pure
interest and ended up enjoying it so much that I took other classes in that as well.
I ended up with an English major and a couple other areas of study that I was
focusing on, and when I became interested in becoming a teacher I added the
classical education minor because I would be teaching in classical schools. And
then when I started looking at the interview process I started realizing I wanted
to teach history as well. And to do that I would need context knowledge which
would require at least a minor, and when I really thought about it, if I want to
really be competitive for a teaching position in history I need a major. So when I
had planned all that out this past summer, I realized I needed a ffh year to fnish,
and then I realized that the gaps that I had in my schedule were perfect for fnish-
ing out the exercise science major. And so that one came along out of surprise; Id
been taking those classes out of pure interest.
Chelsea Kilgore
What have been some of the challenges of
trying to juggle these three majors with a minor?
Academics isnt the only thing Ive been involved in,
so its kind of hard to say: Ive been involved in music
ensembles, cross-country, and track my entire time
here. Without these, I would have so much more time.
It probably would have felt easy. One of my frst lessons
I learned was time management. So if you get to a class
early, do a little bit of your reading as you wait for the
professor to come in. Probably one of the hardest
lessons has been saying no to things. One
of the reasons Im a triple major is that
Im interested in so many things,
which extends to clubs and
other things I want to get
involved in, so you
have to be careful to
know where your
limits are and not to
overstep those.
What were the
circumstances that
led you to pursue
these majors?
Well, Ive always
been interested in
English, because it was
my favorite subject in
high schoolEnglish
and history both,
really. In high school,
I became a runner, so
Chelsea will be graduating in May 2015 with
majors in English, history, and exercise science, with
a classical education minor.
Kokko graduated in May 2013 and majored in
history, latin, and music.
Did you come in intending to pursue those
particular majors?
No, not at all. I came in recruited for the
orchestraIm a violinist. I came in and told
Professor Holleman I did not want to major in music.
I wasnt really sure what I wanted to do, but I was
interested in American history, and was considering
an American studies major for a little bit of time. So I
didnt come in with any intention to triple major.
Are you glad that is where you ended up,
or was it unduly burdensome?
Im not sure. Ive had a couple students ask me,
Youve triple majored, would you have done it any
diferently? Im not sure I would have done it any
diferently, but Im not sure I could recommend it
either. One of the things thats very difcult as a triple
major is making sure all the core requirements are in
place, and not being able to take classes outside those
disciplines because of time constraints. I would have
liked to take more English classes, for instance. So
there are many downsides to triple-majoring. Teres
time constraints and the stress of trying to juggle
everything. Im not sure I would have done anything
diferentI probably would be the same idiot again
Kokko Tso
as I was back then. But having three very difer-
ent disciplines and enjoying all three of themI
used to say that music kept me sane, latin was the
steadying infuence on my life, and history was
the love. Looking back, theres so many pieces to a
college education, and you should get that liberal
arts experience. I would probably encourage
students to fnd out what they really like and throw
themselves fully into that.
So how did that develop?
With music, mostly by accident. I started taking
music classes because we have a unique music
program here. If youre a music student at most
other colleges you have to be fully committed; you
cant do anything but music, and thats what I didnt
want. When I found out here that you can take
music classes as well as other classes and experience
the full liberal arts without being pigeonholed in
Dr. Kalthof graduated in 1984 and majored in
mathematics, biology, and history.
What led you to choose those particular majors?
I did not come to Hillsdale College intending to triple
major. I didnt know for sure what Id major in, but I was inter-
ested in math and science. I was kind of one of those guys
who hung out over in Strosacker. I was interested in biology,
because I love the outdoorsplants, animals, backpacking,
things like thatand I thought, well, lets do some biology. I
didnt really think career path, I was just fascinated by the glory
of Gods creation. But I had to take classes in the core curricu-
lum, and I was in the Honors Program. My junior year I took a
course in the history of science. It was really fascinating. Math
and science ask a really big question: How do human beings
think about the world and how everything in it works? And
Mark Kalthof
S
p
o
t
l
i
g
h
t
:

Triple Majors
14
C
o
m
p
i
l
e
d

b
y

A
n
d
r
e
w

E
g
g
e
r
Will you be involved with all
three of your majors after
college?
In addition to teaching, I could
use my exercise science major
to teach PE I plan to become a
cross-country and track coach, so
it will help for that as well. Having
all of these subjects prepares me
very well to ft into any niche a school
might need me in, which is nice.
Would you have done
anything diferently?
Most certainly Im grate-
ful to be graduating with
what I have. I guess my
only regret is that I cant
be here more years and
pursue more subjects. I
would warn people if they
want to try for a triple major:
dont do it for the triple majors
sake, do it because you love
the subjects.
music, I said, Oh, well Ill take a couple, and
never stopped taking music. Still didnt think
Id major for the longest time, but I ended up
taking enough classes that it seemed natural. I
decided to take latin my freshman year, partly
because I was afraid of doing oral exams,
so I thought, Hey, Ill take latin, its a dead
language. So I took three semesters for the
core and really just fell in love with it. I thought
it was a really neat language, and I had a really
great prof too, Eric Hutchinson. Seeing his
love for the language I just decided Id consider
a latin minor, and kind of like music I never
stopped taking latin classes. History was the
one where I made a conscientious decision to
major in history. I liked reading through all
the great works and especially American history
interested me. I really liked the way the history
department approached history
as one of the humanities
instead of as a social
science. Of course
they all disagreed
on how to inter-
pret history,
but it all was
fascinating to
me. I was very
interested in
American intel-
lectual history
its just so much
crammed into two
hundred years. Its also
easier to keep track of than
European historytoo many
kings dying, things like that. But
since I was thinking about
doing American studies,
but decided English
wasnt something that
interested me very
much, I decided
my sophomore
year that Id do
history and spend
a lot of time doing
American history
classes. Tey say
the more you learn
the more you learn you
dont know, and thats one
of the biggest things history
did for me.
Mark Kalthof
history of science, I found out, asked an
even bigger question: How has man
ever thought about the world and how
everything in it works? And in order to
answer that question I came to realize that
matters of philosophy and economics and
politics and religion all brought to bear on
the kinds of questions a scientist asks and
the way they sought to answer them.
Well, by that point I was far enough
along with my math [and biology majors],
so it didnt make sense to stop either of
those. I was thinking what to do was to
pursue graduate work in the history of
biology or the history of science, and it
made sense therefore to have an under-
graduate major in it, so I added a history
major and ended up graduating with
three majors.
I didnt come in with the idea of doing
it. I would never advise anyone to plan
to do three majors, the only reason I did
that was because I knew I was going on
to graduate school to study history. So
I declared that and it worked. I got into
every grad program I applied to, so I got
my masters and Ph.D. in the history and
philosophy of science. . . . But majors
really arent that important. Most people
who go to a college like Hillsdale, when
they graduate, prospective employers or
opportunities are going to look and say,
Oh, you have a degree from a liberal arts
college. Most of what you studied is the
core curriculum and your electives. If you
put those together, its much more than
a major. Majors are a modern invention,
and theyre a modern invention that
came about through a quirky set of
circumstances. But we live in a world
that demands that we have
them. So I just took all
the courses I was
interested in along
the way, and by
the time I was
done it looked
like I was
pretty close to
three majors,
so I graduated
with three. But
I didnt come
in planning to
major in three
things, and I would
never advise a student to
do that.
April 28, 2014 The Forum | Spotlight | 15
SMACKDOWN
Ring
By
Do you think college students are too young to get
married? How would you respond to people who
say that they are?
I think the age at which people are ready to get married varies
widely on a case by case basis, depending on background, maturity,
etc. Ive known high-schoolers who could be married. Ive known
grandparents who probably shouldnt be. People who say that college
students are too young to get married are ofen right, since I think
that the current culture has pushed back expectations of maturity to
later ages, but Im not sure this is a good thing.
As a man, getting married shows that you are
able to make a long-term commitment and that
you desire to care for and provide for your spouse
and put her life before your own. That said, is it
possible to reach the pinnacle of manhood without
marriage?
Absolutely. I could draw anecdotes from my own
experience, but it might be better to point
to more commonly known
Biblical fgures, such as
Paul, Jesus, or any one
of his Apostles. Tere
is a reason many
churches require
celibacy from
their priests.
Did you ever feel pressured into getting married, or
ever feel infuenced by the Hillsdale ring by spring
mentality?
I dont think ring by spring is a uniquely Hillsdalian expression;
many college students decide to get married afer they graduate, and I
think a lot of it has to do with the obvious changes in living situation
and occupation. Tat said, Im not sure I have ever felt particular
pressure from Hillsdales culture. If I had to speculate, I would say that
women on campus would be more likely to experience such pressure.
Did you ever feel the overwhelming desire, or ever
feel some sort of societal pressure to fnd the one
to complete you?
Actually, one of my pastors favorite things to say is, If youre
discontent now, marriage sure isnt going to help. Im not sure its
good to think about marriage in terms of completion, because that
seems to imply unmarried people are incomplete, which is clearly not
true. But I do think there are certain realms of experience that only
marriage afords, and I have long hoped to someday be married.
Do you think that the post-college real world is
going to be more, or less difcult with a spouse?
Probably both. It certainly makes the future more complicated, but
I cant really imagine a happier thing than a permanent best friend,
someone with whom I can share everything, from faith to love to
disagreements.
Were you desperately unhappy being single? Do
you feel like youve fnally just now started living
since youve become engaged?
Sorry, can you repeat that? Its difcult to hear you over the
Hallelujah Chorus sweeping through my soul. Everything has
changed. Te grass is greener on both sides, and the birds are
singing harmony with the ice cream trucks. Did I just see a certain
Southern California girl walk by in a blue foral dress? Be still my
beating heart! (Tat last comment being completely serious.)
SPEAKING FOR THE RINGS: BRETT WIERENGA
April 28, 2014 The Forum | Smackdown | 12
SMACKDOWN
Spring
Do you think its a good idea to get married in
college?
Its diferent for everyone, obviously, but theres a lot to be said
for waiting until youre about 25 and have developed fully, both
biologically and mentally. Its not impossible to fnd the one,
but its alarming the number of couples here who feel like theyre
already at that point.
Do you feel pressured to get married or fnd your
soul mate in college?
Not really. My parents defnitely want me to fnd someone I can
share the rest of my life with. Tey got married at 23, but it was a
diferent time. Tey also didnt go to college and had jobs. As far as
Hillsdale goes, I never thought Id fnd someone to marry here. I still
dont. Hes not just going to show up. So I havent felt pressured, but
its more just . . . it can be too much. As confdent of where I am
in life, when you see so many couples all the timeas happy as you
are for themit makes you think. Why dont I have that, what is it
Ive done that I dont have that? It doesnt elicit feelings of envy, just
confusion. I know thats not where I want to be right now. Everyones
path is diferent. We wont all do the same things at the same time.
Why is single life superior? What are the benefts?
Im going to have the rest of my life to worry about someone
elses thought and feelings, and I dont want to do that if I dont
have a good grasp on myself. Knowing myself and Gods will for
me will make me an even better person for the one I marry.
Surface level reasons are: going to bars and firting is a great
confdence boost. You meet so many people that way. Its import-
ant to meet people just for the sake of meeting people. Itll help you
in the real world. It doesnt matter what vocation you havethe
more experience you have, the more outgoing you are, the better.
As a single person you tend to go out more. If a couple is super
outgoing theyll do that, but its so easy to just stay home with the
person you love instead of getting out to see the world. Also, I can
tell the companies I work for that I can go anywhere.
Ive felt separation anxiety even just with friends. Its not going
to be like Hilldale where everyones on the same page and you can
instantly make 10 friends. Youll have to work for it, but itll make
you a stronger person. Youll get to travel . . . it just gets much
harder with another person involved, much less kids. Being able
to pick up and leave is one of the best things about it.
Cats can only be lef alone about two or three days before they
get a little nutty.
Which is better: Husbands or Cats? Why?
Cats dont help with the bills, so probably husband. I have
loved cats for a long time, but its not like I got to college, couldnt
fnd a man, and decided cats were the answer. As a baby, I slept
with cats in my cradle. Ive loved cats for a long time, but Im a
red-blooded American female. Id rather have a husband in my
bed than a cat.
Compiled by Devon Izmirian and Lauren Weirenga
SPEAKING FOR THE SINGLES: MARTHA EKDAHL
April 28, 2014 The Forum | Smackdown | 13
T
he southern novelist Walker Percy
attempted to decipher the nature
of man in the Cosmos, critiquing
modern sciences reductionist and natural-
istic false anthropology of man, instead
demonstrating the non-contradictory
relationship between science and faith.
In his college years, the wandering Walker
Percy looked to science for the truth of the
universe. While maintaining his great love
of literature, he trained to be a physician,
specializing in pathology. Percy eventually
became disenfranchised with his days perva-
sive, hubristic scientism, the belief that only
the proper use of the scientifc method can
bring one to knowable truths. Percy discov-
ered that scientism fails to ofer a consis-
tent defnition of man as man, a conviction
which ultimately led to his own conversion
to Roman Catholicism on St. Lucys Day,
1947. Finding his calling as a novelist and
semiotic philosopher, Percy diagnosed
the ailments of 20th-century modernity,
replacing his stethoscope with a typewriter.
Te writer lef his career in medicine and
published Te Moviegoer at the age of 45 and
continued drafing novels and essays until
his death in 1990. A signifcant amount of his
intellectual pursuits responded to and criti-
cised the rampant 20th-century scientism,
emphasizing its failure to honestly account
for human consciousness and existence in
the Cosmos, particularly in light of religious
faith. His biographer notes, As Percy would
insist, science properly understood was not
a contradiction of faith. Percy never turned
a hostile eye toward science and technolo-
gy...But he would use his understanding to
resist the view that science could account for
everything, including everything about the
human creature. Tis was Walker Percys
Christian Humanism.
Walker Percy ofered a congruent under-
standing and sound critique of scientifc
objectivism throughout his literary output.
He found its project insufcient in its
attempt to explain away mankind by means
of methodological empiricism. Tis trium-
phalist spirit of modern science lords over
laymen, writes Percy, the argument that
only science can utter a true word about
anything. Such scientists, according to Percy,
with all their understanding of interactions,
energy exchanges, stimuli, and responses,
could not seem to utter a single word about
what man did and what they themselves were
doing. Although they theoretically uphold a
pure rationale in pursuing truth, the pursuit
dislocates the person of the scientist from his
picture of the Cosmos.
Since objectivism requires a specifably
functioning mindless knower, the individ-
uals personal acts of knowing become both
meaningless and nonexistent. Tis action
removes man from the very universe he wills
to understand. Towards the end of his satiri-
cal self-help book, Lost in the Cosmos, Walker
Percy writes:
Te earth-self observing the Cos-
mos and trying to understand the
Cosmos by scientifc principles
from which its self is excluded is,
beyond doubt, the strangest phe-
nomenon in all of the Cosmos, far
stranger than the Ring Nebula in
Lyra. It, the self, is in fact the only
alien in the entire Cosmos. Te
Modern objective consciousness
will go to any length to prove that
it is not unique in the Cosmos,
and by this very efort establishes
its own uniqueness. Name an-
other entity in the Cosmos which
tries to prove it is not unique. Te
earth-self seeks to understand
the Cosmos overtly according to
scientifc principles
while covertly ex-
empting itself from
the same understand-
ing. Te end of the
enterprise is that the
self understands the
mechanism of the
Cosmos but by the
same motion plac-
es itself outside the Cosmos, an
alien, a ghost, a vast machinery
to which it is denied entry.
Here Percy shows the absurdity of objec-
tivist science demonstrating the insignif-
cance of and superiority over man. Walker
Percy demands consistency in the sciences;
scientists should not claim total access to all
knowledge and truth, for science can never
ofer defnitive conclusions. Very many
things cannot be accounted for by the empir-
ical method. Claiming the opposite brings
forth grave consequences. Percy expressly
critiques the deconstructive tendencies of
scientifc objectivism, writing, Te scien-
tist...has abstracted from his own predic-
ament in order to achieve objectivity. His
objectivity is indeed nothing else than his
removal from his own concrete situation.
No sentence can be received by him as a
piece of news, therefore, because he does not
stand in the way of hearing news. Modern
scientism claims the capacity to objectively
analyse and understand rationally all truth
within the universe through its empirical
methodologies. But when it accounts for
the incommensurable, mystical, mysteri-
ous, and metaphysical entities like God,
self, consciousness, language, and signs,
its project fails, becoming reductionistic
dead ends. Regarding the idea of God and
its relationship to science, Percy explains,
[W]hile the scientifc method may be
ofcially neutral toward God, scientism,
an attitude which extrapolates from the
objectivity of the scientifc method, cannot
be neutral. Te modern scientifc outlook
demands visible and quantifable proofs.
Walker Percy critiques this popular notion,
for not everything can be accounted for
through visible and quantifable proofs.
Since scientism supplants the anthro-
pocentric vision of the cosmos, specifcally
regarding mans unique and inexplicable
consciousness and rationality, man fnds
himself void of meaning and purpose. Percy
writes, [S]cientists fnd it natural to deal
with matter in interaction and with energy
exchanges and dont know what to make
of such things as consciousness, self, and
symbols and even sometimes deny that
there are such things, even though they,
the scientists, act for all the world as if they
were conscious selves... Te laws of physics
and chemistry do not and can not account
for this obvious fact. Tus the positivistic
Mans Place in
the Cosmos
Walker Percys
Critique of
Ideological
Scientism
BY JOHN TAYLOR
Modern scientism claims
the capacity to understand
rationally all truth through
its empirical methodologies.
A
p
r
i
l

2
8
,

2
0
1
4




T
h
e

F
o
r
u
m

|

C
o
n
s
e
r
v
a
t
i
v
e

|

1
6
scientifc project misunderstands person-
hood and what determines man qua man as
opposed to beasts, and improperly theorizes
concerning it. Percy links the projects failure
to adequately place man within contempo-
rary cosmology to the heightened alienation
of man in the 20th century, a time when
science supposedly should (or eventually
will) grasp all truth and when man concur-
rently fnds himself lost, with no place in the
Cosmos. According to Percy, the growing
scientism of the last 300 years led to the
puncturing of mans infated claims to
uniqueness in the Cosmos. For it proves man
to be beyond doubt an organism among
other organisms, a species in continuity with
other species, a creature existing in interac-
tion with an imminent Cosmos like all other
creatures, like all other elements, molecules,
gaseous clouds, novas, galaxies. If all things,
including scientists, in the universe can be
objectively accounted for solely through
physical and chemical interactions, science
places man within a hemisphere void of
purpose. He must create his own purpose.
For man has no signifcant character when
the material reactions of his brain are treated
and insignifcant and scientifcally under-
standable. Percy deems this event the loss
of the creature. He fnds the account of
both mans existence and behavior in the
universe insufcient and incoherent. Walker
Percy contends that more pragmatic and
realistic scientists must understand that total
empiricism cannot account for the fact
that with the appearance of man there also
appeared for the frst time in the Cosmos...
language, mind, self, and consciousness.
Darwinian evolutionary science cannot
account for the appearance in the Cosmos
of a triumphant, godlike, murderous alien,
the only alien in the Cosmos, Homo sapiens
sapiens, e.g., the scientist himself. When
the individual persons unique existence,
behavior, and consciousness is accounted for
solely through physics, chemistry, material-
ist Darwinism, Freudian psychology, and
materialist utilitarianism, humanity itself
disappears. Humans lose humanity. We
must recognize man, according to Percy, as
more than the mysterious but insignifcant
creature of the pale blue dot and thus forgo
scientisms errors.
Critiquing the modern ages rampant and
ideological scientism, Percy
found the vacuum of modern
science incapable of providing
a sufcient account of mans
place in the world, particular-
ly concerning his relation to
God, his consciousness, and
his existence. He insists that we
instead fnd and promulgate a
truly humanistic and consistent
anthropology, and shy away
from the naturalistic reductiv-
ism which leaves man lost in
the cosmos. F
John Taylor is a junior studying
history.
Why are there beings at all,
and why not rather nothing?
H
eidegger asks this question through-
out his oeuvre. Tis questioning does
not allow the simple answers God
or necessity. In fact, it is unclear whether
we ought to fnd an answer. Instead, to situate
oneself in such a questioning is to open
oneself up to radical fnitude. Te questioner
rejects the world as given and puts it to the
test, and in so doing, he puts himself to the
test. In the entire course of Western civiliza-
tion, according to Heidegger, man has ceased
to question. Man has taken on this or that
question about this or that being, but forgot-
ten the question of Being as such. In taking
up beings in the inquiry, humanity is turned
away from the mystery. Heidegger gives
himself a particular task: He wants to reawak-
en man to the question of Being. In this paper,
I will attempt to briefy recreate the attune-
ment and the mood that one must have
before truly doing metaphysics. Tis will be
propaedeutic. It will introduce certain neces-
sary aspects of Heideggers philosophy. Ten,
the paper will become more discursive.
I will begin with the ancient Greeks and
their understanding of phusis (nature) as
discussed by Heidegger. Next, I will engage
with Aristotle and the narrowing of phusis
that occurs there. Ten, I will turn to Tomas
Aquinas, who implicitly introduces Heideg-
gers fundamental question of metaphysics;
yet, he asks it only superfciallyas a man
of faith. Tis question of the possibility of a
Christian philosopher will, in turn, open
up Heidegger to the criticism that he remains
staunchly within the Western philosophical
tradition that had supposedly reached its
end; Levinas will levy this critique. I under-
stand the breadth of this paper; I under-
stand that I will not do justice to the topic.
Nonetheless, I have here the opportunity to
craf a grand narrativebear with me. So, we
begin: Why are there beings at all, and why
not rather nothing?
I dont quite know how to proceed with the
questioning; it seems too general for me to
hold it all together. Ill start with this book in
my hand, Introduction to Metaphysics. What
is this being? Its made from paper, which
comes from trees cut down and turned to
pulp. Tere is ink here, too. When I drop it,
it makes a thud, and I feel its weight in my
hand and the breeze on my face as I turn the
pages. But this seems superfcial. It is a book.
A man thought, and judged his thoughts
meaningful, and so he wrote them down,
and they found their way to me. Tis book
could potentiallyah, theres something.
Te book has possibilities. I can read it or
burn it or let it rot through the ages. It is not
just a brute fact out there in the world. In
fact, I cannot think of it except in terms of
its possibilities. As something I can speak of,
I always reference the possibilities of what it
is; as something I can hold and feel. When I
look at it, I already think of it as a thing that
can be read. I recognize that the manipulat-
ing makes it be diferentlyfor me. Yet, I do
not think Ive answered the question. Why is
this being? Well, Ive explained why it is; it
was thought, and written down, and printed
for someones beneft. More than that, this
being persists as a possibility. It has a past and
a future that already imbue it with meaning.
Still, Ive not answered the question. Ive
taken the book for granted, as already here
According to Percy, the
growing scientism of
the last 300 years led
to the puncturing of
mans infated claims to
uniqueness in the Cosmos.
What is
Metaphysics?
An inquiry into the
history and nature
of Being
BY GARRETT WEST
A
p
r
i
l

2
8
,

2
0
1
4




T
h
e

F
o
r
u
m

|

C
o
n
s
e
r
v
a
t
i
v
e

|

1
7
What is Metaphysics?
with me. Ive talked about it only afer its
appearance on the scene has happened. Here,
I recognize the importance of the whole
question that Heidegger asks: Why are there
beings? is a diferent question if we add
and why not rather nothing? If I ask this
of the book in this way, I question it more
fundamentally. Why is this book here, and
why does it continue to exist for me? Well, it
wouldnt make sense for it to just disappear
in front of my eyes. Its here and wont not-be
until it rots away or is stolen or given away
but these only exercise potencies. I cannot
make this not be for me without recourse
toWait: It is sustained by the context. It
cannot fade into nothing because it is held
up by the beings that surround iteven the
time-space-continuum-being that surrounds
it. No, I must release the whole context. Every
being must be allowed to fade away into the
Nothing. So, I will let them fadebut I cant.
Why wont they fade?
Te context sustains itself, somehow. Te
beings, the sum total of all beings in my
world, sustain themselves in a web of intel-
ligibility and meaning. Yet, I want them to
fade into the Nothing. How does the Nothing
appear to me? Heidegger claims that the
Nothing itself reveals itself to man in particu-
lar moods, particular attunements. In partic-
ular, the Nothing reveals itself rarely enough
and only for a moment in the fundamental
mood of anxiety. Tis still doesnt help me.
What the hell does that mean, Heidegger?
When I experience anxiety, Im
anxious for something. In anxiety, I
commit the same intentionality that
I did when I questioned the books
not-being. Indeed, I felt anxiety
just yesterday when I was running
late for class, but that anxiety was
a specifc one: that the particular
possibility of being-late would be
realized instead of the particular
possibility of being-on-time. No,
that anxiety does not put me face-to-face
with the Nothing. Yet, I remember once,
as a child of fve or six, I went stargazing
with my cousins. Out there in the darkness,
we lay on our backs and stared of into the
stars, and my cousin said: You know, earth
is going around the sun at a billion miles an
hour. And I thought about that, and I stared
of into the depths of space, and I realized
just how small I was. Ten, right there, I felt
fear forwhat? I fearedI do not know.
I felt the radical contingency of the earths
existence, and therefore the contingency of
my existence on it. Ten, the Nothing itself
was present before me. Ah, now that I have
remembered this mood towards existence,
I canperhapsbetter do metaphysics. I
knew contingency because it implicated me
in it. Te beings that I took for granted in my
average-everydayness lost that indisputable
purposefulness. Tey became susceptible to
interrogation in a way that they never had
been before. Heidegger afrms this thought:
Human existence can relate
to beings only if it holds itself
out into the nothing. Going
beyond beings occurs in the es-
sence of Dasein. But this going
beyond is metaphysics itself.
Tis implies that metaphysics
belongs to the nature of man.
It is neither a division of aca-
demic philosophy nor a feld of
arbitrary notions. Metaphysics
is the basic occurrence of Das-
ein. It is Dasein itself. Because
the truth of metaphysics dwells
in this groundless ground it
stands in closest proximity to
the constantly lurking possi-
bility of deepest error. For this
reason no amount of scientifc
rigor attains to the seriousness
of metaphysics. Philosophy
can never be measured by the
standard of the idea of science.
In the above quote, Heidegger discuss-
es both what metaphysics is and what it is
not. It is not a science, not a strenge Wissen-
schaf. It cannot be achieved with exacting
rigor and methodological orthodoxy. Yet, it
is a part of my nature. It is a fundamentally
human endeavorand a distinctly person-
al one. Te investigation of Being demands
that I take hold of myself as radically contin-
gent. Ten, the meaning of Being bursts onto
the scene in its most robust sense. I have,
perhaps, prepared myself to do metaphys-
ics in my encounter with the Nothing that
undermines, and at the same time grounds,
any totality. Now, I will begin my real interro-
gation of Being. Historically, when and how
did Being reveal itself to Dasein?
Te ancient Greeks had insight into Being
that has long since been covered over, even
in Aristotle. Teir understanding of phusis
(translated too narrowly as nature) origi-
nally captured the depth of the human
experience of Being in beings:
Phusis as emergence can be
experienced everywhere: for
example, in celestial process-
es (the rising of the sun), in
the surging of the sea, in the
growth of plants, in the com-
ing forth of animals and hu-
man beings from the womb.
But phusis, the emerging sway,
is not synonymous with these
processes, which we still today
count as a part of nature.
Tis emerging and standing-
out-in-itself-from-itself may
not be taken as just one pro-
cess among others that we ob-
serve in beings. Phusis is Being
itself, by virtue of which beings
fst become and remain ob-
servable.
Phusis, frst and foremost, is experienced.
It is not something that we analyze and
pinpoint, as that would do violence to it.
Instead, it happens in our experience of the
worldofen in our experience of nature.
Yet, it is not just another happening in
nature, but it happens beyond nature. It
simultaneously transcends and grounds
beings. Because it only ever happens in
and through beings, it is never perfectly
self-identical. It is never just something
out there that we study. It is a stand-
ing-out-in-itself-from-itself because it
simultaneously emerges in beings and
conceals itself in beings, but it nonethe-
less brings beings to light as intelligi-
ble. A deep understanding of phusis would
indeed depend upon a certain attunement to
beings that catches the happening that under-
girds them in that moment that it emerges.
Te ancient Greeks frst experienced phusis
on the basis of a fundamental experience of
Being in poetry and thought. In this abiding
comportment towards Being, the Greeks
were free, historical, and authentic men; the
Greeks were great men. Heidegger reveals
his romanticism. Do you hear Nietzsches
lament? What happened to this attunement?
It came to an end in greatness with Aristot-
le, Heidegger writes. Te meaning of phusis
began to narrow immediately. It began to
The book has possibilities.
I can read it or burn it or let
it rot through the ages. It
is not just a brute fact out
there in the world.
T
h
e

F
o
r
u
m

|

1
8

1
Heidegger writes, Te possibility of being
drawn along the blackboard and used up is not
something that we merely add onto the thing
with our thought. Te chalk itself, as this being,
is in this possibility; otherwise it would not be
chalk as a writing implement. Every being, in
turn, has this Possible in it, in a diferent way
in each case (Introduction to Metaphysics 32).
Beings must be understood in terms of their
possibilities; they persist as beings in their
particular possibilities.
2
Heidegger writes of the scope of interro-
gation: We are not interrogating this being or
that being, nor all beings, each in turn; instead,
we are asking from the start about the whole of
what is, or as we say for reasons to be discussed
later: beings as a whole and as such (Intro-
duction to Metaphysics 2-3). Te questioning
necessarily implicates the totality of beings.
3
I cannot vouch for the veracity of this claim.
4
Heidegger writes: Te great begins great,
sustains itself only through the free recurrence
of greatness, and if it is great, also comes to an
end in greatness. So it is with the philosophy
of the Greeks; also, As a counterphenomenon
[to phusis] there arose what the Greeks call
thesis, positing, ordinance, or nomos, law, rule
in the sense of mores. But this is not what is
moral but instead what concerns mores, that
which rests on the commitment of freedom
and the assignment of tradition; it is that which
concerns a free comportment and attitude, the
shaping of the historical Being of humanity,
thos, which under the infuence of morality
was then degraded to the ethical.
5
Heidegger suggests that Aristotles work,
in a sense, reverberates with the deep sense of
phusis: An echo of knowledge about the origi-
nary meaning still survives in Aristotle, when
he speaks of the grounds of beings as such
(Introduction to Metaphysics, 17).
6
In Heideggers texts, he ofen suggests that
his work is written for the moderns, written
for his present day. Te Germans are caught
between the twin pincers of the Russians and
the Americans, and they must re-discover their
historical rootedness.
7
In this way, Aquinas philosophy picks
up on the distinction that was covered over in
Aristotle. Heidegger discusses the ambiguity
in the Greek language that, perhaps, contrib-
utes to Aristotles obfuscation of the question
of Being: Heidegger discusses this ambiguity
in the Greek language: In this way, Aquinas
philosophy picks up on the distinction that was
covered over in Aristotle. Heidegger discuss-
es the ambiguity in the Greek language that,
perhaps, contributes to Aristotles obfuscation
of the question of Being: Heidegger discusses
this ambiguity in the Greek language: What,
for example, is the being in this piece of chalk?
Already this question is ambiguous, because
the word being can be understood in two
ways, as can the Greek to on. On the one hand,
being means what at any time is in being, in
particular this grayish-white, light, breakable
mass, formed in such and such a way. On the
other hand, being means that which, as it were,
makes this be a being instead of nonbeing, that
which makes up the Being in the being, if it is a
being. In accordance with this twofold meaning
of the word being, the Greek to on ofen desig-
nates the second meaning, that is, not the being
Footnotes
refer to nature, to beings, not Being. It referred
to the surging sea and the birth of animals
not the Being that gave itself to man in these
things. Yet, even in this narrowing, an echo of
the originary knowledge survived in Aristotle.
So, how was this meaning obscured? Let
us turn to his Metaphysics. His project seeks
to study being qua beingi.e, the causes and
principles that belong to being as such. In
particular, the project seeks to elaborate the
nature of substance: Obviously that which
is primarily is the what, which indicates
the substance of the thing. Here we have
nothing that directly undermines the origi-
nary meaning of phusis, but we should notice
that the emphasis is on whatness. Aristotles
Metaphysics is a study of beings, and it seeks
to examine the causes of beings, not Being. An
examination of substance does not necessarily
undermine a questioning of Being, but Aristo-
tle treats the issue of substance as the funda-
mental questionindeed, as the only question
really worthy of asking: Since we must
have the existence of the thing as something
given, clearly the question is why the matter
is some defnite thing. Here, for Aristotle, the
question of whatness does not only take on
a reserved priority over Being, as a biologist
might bracket certain chemical questions in
the study of life. Instead, if the study of beings
is to proceed at all, the existence of the thing
must be taken for granted. We must pass over
the mystery of Being. In this way, Aristot-
le never asks the fundamental question of
metaphysics. Why is there something rather
than nothing? must be lef unasked so that
science can proceed. Now, to temper the criti-
cism, perhaps Aristotle meant the question
to remain unasked to protect the mystery, in
a sense. If Aristotle was aware of the origi-
nal Greek meaning of phusis, then perhaps
he ignored that questioning as something
obvious. Nevertheless, the questioning of
beings that discloses Being does not explic-
itly appear here in Aristotle. His questioning
is not the questioning of Heidegger, even if
Aristotles Greek comportment made such
questioning superfuous. Historically, he lef
us his text and not his attunement, and so we
can see the way in which the narrowing scope
of phusis obfuscates Being.
We have briefy discussed Aristotle. His
metaphysics covers over the originary concept
of phusis. He never asks the question of Being;
he takes existence for granted. Let us turn to
Tomas Aquinas. Tough he is ofen painted
as nothing more than a somewhat-Chris-
tianized version of Aristotle, it becomes clear
that Aquinas largely reinterprets Aristotle; he
brings in new terminology to the Aristotelian
framework, and he subtly shifs the meaning
of old terms. While Aristotle privileged form
as the best candidate for substance (that
which is primarily), Aquinas unequivocally
claimed that substance is a being. Further,
according to him, material substances are
composed of matter and form: We use the
term a being absolutely and primarily of
substances; form and matter are found in
composite substances. Immediately, Aquinas
deepens Aristotles account. Tat which is
primarily is no longer the form of the matter,
but rather the thing, the being-in-the-world,
ens. In order to accommodate such a change,
Aquinas makes a distinction between essence
and existence. When we examine a thing, we
can ask two sorts of questions about it: What
is it, and is it? What is its essence, and has it
received esse (Being)? For Aquinas, when
we know a thing, we know it by means of its
whatness, its essence. Yet, the essence itself
does not account for the Being of the thing.
Te essence of a natural thing cannot cause it
to exist, and so if it is to exist it must receive
Being. Tus, in experiencing ens in the world,
it is not only something instead of something
else: It is also something rather than nothing.
Unlike with Aristotle, who primarily inquired
about whatness, Aquinas allows us to discuss
whatness and thatness. Even further, Aquinas
account of creation discusses beings in similar
language to the way in which Heidegger does.
He writes in De Aeternitate Mundi:
But a creature does not have
existence except from another;
regarded as lef simply to itself,
it is nothing; prior to its exis-
tence, therefore, nothingness is
its natural lot. Nor, just because
nothingness does not precede
being in duration, does a thing
have to be nothing and being at
the same time. For our position
is not that, if the creature has
always existed, it was nothing
at some time. We maintain that
its nature is such that it would
be nothing if it were lef to itself.
Te lot of creation, then, is to be nothing.
Aquinas suggests that the nothingness is
somehow fundamental to things. It undergirds
them, and they continue to persist as potential-
ly Nothing. For Aquinas, one can ask why there
are beings, and why not rather nothingat least
superfcially.
Yet, Aquinas account also implicates a creator,
something that Heidegger would think problem-
atic. For Heidegger, to answer in such a way is
T
h
e

F
o
r
u
m

|

1
9
What is Metaphysics?
to answer cheaply and to avoid the legitimate
questioning of Being and the Nothing:
On the other hand, Chris-
tian dogma denies the truth
of the proposition ex nihilo
nihil ft and thereby bestows
on the nothing a transformed
signifcance, the sense of the
complete absence of beings
apart from God: ex nihilo ft
ens creatum [From nothing
comescreated being]. Now
the nothing becomes the coun-
terconcept to being proper, the
summum ens, God as ens in-
creatum. Here too the inter-
pretation of the nothing des-
ignates the basic conception of
beings. But the metaphysical
discussion of beings stays on
the same level as the question
of the nothing. Te questions
of Being and of the nothing as
such are not posed.
Te Christian doctrine of ex nihilo creation
does not properly understand the Nothing.
Instead, it understands it as the counter-
concept to being, as not-being. When God
creates, it is not that He has somehow crafed
beings from the Nothing; the Nothing does
not belong to beings. Rather, in the Chris-
tian account, the nothing is excluded from
God and therefore never fully involved in
the act of creation. Te creation ex nihilo
refers rather to the not-being of beings and
the coming-to-be of beings. If the nothing
is nothing more than the logical negation
of beings, the not-being of beings, then we
have not truly confronted the Nothing as
such. Tus, Heidegger claims. We are not
saying that citing the words of the Bible,
In the beginning God created heaven and
earth, etc., represents an answer to our
question. Quite aside from whether this
sentence of the Bible is true or untrue for
faith, it can represent no answer at all to our
question, because it has no relation to this
question. Te concept of creation excludes
the Nothing from the constitution of beings,
and so it never truly questions them. Te
question of why is there something rather
than nothing? is answered, but it is never
asked. Te why? loses its signifcance in the
cheapness of the answer of faith. God and
beings are made wholly present and intelligi-
ble in their absolute explicability.
Is this claim fair? Is a Christian philosophy
a round square and a misunderstanding, or
has Heidegger somehow misconstrued the
religious dimension of the human being?
In an interview with Richard Kearney,
Levinas responds directly to Heideggers
claim that the man of faith cannot do philos-
ophy. He seems to question the hard-and-fast
break that Heidegger makes between doing
philosophy and being a man of faith. He
agrees that philosophy does assume, for the
most part, a specifcally Greek way of think-
ing. Western philosophy is shot through
with Greek conceptssuch as morph, ousia,
nous, logos, or telos. But although philoso-
phy is essentially Greek, it is not exclusively
so, he writes. Aspects of the Judeo-Christian
tradition have been incorporated into the
predominately Greek philosophical tradi-
tion, and in the same way, Greek tendencies
have infuenced the religious tradition. Tis
seems quite obviously true. So what is the
specifcally Greek tendency? Levinas clari-
fes:
Perhaps the most essential
distinguishing feature of the
language of Greek philosophy
was its equation of truth with
an intelligibility of presence.
By this I mean an intelligibil-
ity which considers truth to
be that which is present or
copresent, that which can be
gathered or synchronized into
a totality which we would call
the world or cosmos.
Tis makes sense in terms of what we saw
in Aristotle. Tat which is most primarily is
the form, which is the substance of the thing.
Te form, as actuality, is supremely intelligi-
ble, and it explains the whatness of the things
in the world. Further, Aristotles Metaphysics
is the study of being qua being, wherein we
fnd the highest principles of beings. Tat
which is primarily is substance, which is
knowable in the utmost. It can be made
present to us. Even the substance that is the
unmoved mover can be understood as the
cherry on top of our metaphysical sundae.
Levinas claims that Heidegger, though
critical of much of (read: all of) Western
metaphysics, fts within this tradition. Along
with the distinctly Greek way of thinking,
Heidegger continues to think of Being as
presence. Levinas characterizes this irony
in Heideggers project: Tus, while Heide-
gger heralds the end of the metaphysics of
presence, he continues to think of Being as
a coming-into-presence; he seems unable to
break away from the hegemony of presence
which he denounces. We can, perhaps, see
this metaphysics of presence in Heideg-
gers discussion of phusis. He writes: Phusis
means the emerging sway, and the endur-
ing over which it thoroughly holds sway.
Tis emerging, abiding sway includes both
becoming as well as Being in the narrow-
er sense of fxed continuity. For Heidegger,
man experiences phusis, and he incorporates
this experience into his historical Dasein.
He experiences the coming-into-presence of
beings by virtue of the primordial encounter
with Being. In the surging sea and the birth
of animals, Being presents itself and disclos-
es itself to the totality that Dasein constitutes
for itself. No matter how primordial and
originary my experiences of beings, beings
are always for me.
What is the alternative? If the Greek
philosophy of presence excludes something,
then what does it exclude? Levinas suggests
that there is a double axis in the human
experience of the world that consists in the
juxtaposition of phenomenological intelligi-
bility and ethical responsibility. Tis double
axis is formed by the horizontal totality that
is human experience and the radical inter-
ruption of the Other. Indeed, this juxtaposi-
tion can be understood as analogous to the
earlier-referenced tension between Greek
and Judeo-Christian thought:
Te interhuman realm can
thus be construed as a part of
the disclosure of the world as
presence. But it can also be
considered from another per-
spectivethe ethical or bib-
lical perspective which tran-
scends the Greek language of
intelligibilityas a theme of
justice and concern for the
other as other, as a theme of
love and desire which carries
us beyond the fnite Being of
the world as presence.
For Levinas, this interruption of the Other
can only be understood in terms of an ethical
mandate. Te Other cannot be brought
into my totality, and so my world ceases
to be absolutely present to me. Te Other
as a vertical infnity incises my experience
within its horizons such that beings cease
to be beings for me; they become beings for
the Others in my world. It is just this ethical
dimension that Levinas accuses Heidegger
of failing to recognize. Indeed, his philos-
ophy tends to exclude the ethical, biblical
perspective in his claim that there can be no
T
h
e

F
o
r
u
m

|

2
0
such thing as a truly Christian philosophy. For
Levinas, these two ways of approaching and
interpreting experience are not mutually exclu-
sive. Indeed, they are more than compatible;
experience demands both approaches.
Yet, Levinas reserves the experience of what
is not of the world qua ethical responsibility
to the experience of the Other. Responsibil-
ity arises not in the experience of beings, not
in ontology, but rather in the radical alterity of
the trace of the Other. For Levinas, there is an
incommensurability between ethics
and metaphysics (or ontolo-
gy): So I would maintain,
against, Heidegger, that
philosophy can be
ethical as well as
ontological, can
be at once Greek
and non-Greek
in its inspira-
tion. Tese two
sources of inspi-
ration coexist
as two diferent
tendencies in
modern philos-
ophy (emphasis
added). Philosophy
happens in two diferent
ways, in a sense, and the study
of Being becomes somehow second-
ary to the way in which we exist in the world.
Repeatedly, Levinas insists that ethics is against
metaphysics, against nature, against the way in
which we typically understand the world as intel-
ligible. It seems as if this would create something
of a rif deep within the human person. How
can the ethical mandate of the Other enter into
my being-in-the-world? Responsibility makes
demands of me in the way that it irrupts my
world, but to me, it seems unclear how that
irruption could ever translate into a mandate
of action in the world. In short, Levinas radical
separation of ethics and metaphysics seems to
violently separate the human person from his
own embodiment.
Do ethics and metaphysics have to be in
tension with one another? Is there a way in
which metaphysics can be fundamentally
ethical? I do not know Levinas or Heideg-
ger well at all, but it seems that they reach two
diferent extremes. Heidegger does metaphys-
ics at the expense of the ethical, and Levinas
does ethics at the expense of metaphysics. Te
formers tendency occurs because he attempts
to minimize the damage from previous philos-
ophy, and the latter responds to the former. I
want to turn back to Heideggers critique of
the Christian philosopher. For Heidegger, the
Christian philosopher cannot wholly put beings
to the test; in the questioning, he already holds
in his mind the answer to the question. Why
are there beings and why not rather nothing?
Because God has created them. Yet, a more
fundamental question presents itself. First, like
Aristotle, we can ask what a being is. Ten, like
Aquinas, we can ask is it?has it received Being.
Finally, and this is the important question, we can
ask why it has received Being? Why has this being
been made to be instead of not? Tis question
can never be answeredeven if we
have a creator in the metaphys-
ical system. Its existence
is not just radically
contingent, but it is
most fundamen-
tally a gif. Tere
can be no reason
for Being except
that it has been
given, and the
answer that it
has been given
never satisfes
the questioning,
but rather deepens
it and draws the
questioner towards
it. Creation as radically
contingent, radically gratu-
itous, allows the Christian to experi-
ence beings as a theme of love and desire which
carries us beyond the fnite Being of the world as
presence. In the fniteness of beings (all beings,
not just the Other), we realize that the love that
ultimately constitutes Being for us can never be
made present; its infnity breaks through the
totality that is my world.
Indeed, in light of this infnity, the frst question of
metaphysics takes on a deeper meaning. For Heide-
gger, we legitimately begin to question being in the
fundamental mood of anxiety. In the overwhelming
gratuity of beings, however, man ought not experi-
ence anxiety, but rather love, joy, wonder, or the
likeI have no particular name for it. Further, this
attunement of joy seems to be even more primordi-
al than that of anxiety. Te latter only occurs afer I
have grown accustomed to beings, grown calloused
of their meaning; they have always been for me,
and so the sudden retreat of meaning leaves me
paralyzed and reveals the Nothing. On the contrary,
joy refuses to take beings for granted. When do we
most experience this mood? It awakens, usually, in
the freshness of experience. I think of the frst days
of spring afer winter. It has been cold; the days have
been short and dark. Te cold has crept deep into
my demeanor. I rush from place to place, hunched
over, bundled up, closed of to the world. Ten,
one morning, I walk outsidethe sun shines on
itself, what is in being, but rather the in-being,
beingness, to be in being, Being. . . . Te frst
meaning of to on designates ta onto (entia), the
second meaning to einai (esse) (Introduction to
Metaphysics 33).
9
I understand that here that the two think-
ers mean nothing in signifcantly diferent
ways. I mean this statement as a frst approx-
imation that will be, at least partially, clarifed
later in the paper.
10
Te interviewer asks Levinas: Would you
go so far as to endorse Heideggers argument
that genuine philosophical questioning requires
one to suspend or bracket ones religious faith? I
am thinking in particular of Heideggers state-
ment in his Introduction of Metaphysics that
a religious thinker cannot ask the philosoph-
ical question, Why is there something rather
than nothing? since he already possesses the
answer: Because God created the world. Hence
Heideggers conclusion that a religious (in a
sense of Christian or Jewish) philosophy is a
square circle, a contradiction in terms.
11
Ibid., 71. Here, Levinas responds to this
questioner from the interviewer: Would you
agree then with Heideggers critique of Western
metaphysics as a philosophy of presence?
12
I recognize that I have not done justice
to Levinas account of the Other. As this paper
progresses, we will see why Levinas ethical
account of the Other is not crucial; rather, his
critique is what matters here.
13
He writes, among other things: Ethics is,
therefore, against nature because it forbids the
murderousness of the my natural will to put
my own existence frst; God speaks through
the glory of the face and calls for an ethical
conversion or reversal of our nature; Ethics
is not derived from an ontology of nature; it
is its opposite, a meontology which afrms
a meaning beyond Being, a primary mode of
non-Being (76).
14
Ibid., 72. I would like to add the caveat
that I do not think this recognition of being as
gratuitous is reserved only for the Christian.
Rather, he is steeped in a tradition that talks
in language such as this, so when the gratuity
presents itself to him, he can better lay hold to
that impression.
T
h
e

F
o
r
u
m

|

2
1
my face, and Im warm. Warm for the frst time
without closing myself of. Ten, the world is
more luminous. It takes on new meaning for
me; I feel that it is and is for me. Tis is joy, and it
takes nothing for granted. Heidegger even briefy
suggests that the questioning of being appears
in joy: For then all things are transformed and
surround us as if for the frst time, as if it were easier
to grasp that they were not, rather than that they
are, and are as they are. If Being is a gif, then man
must be fundamentally joyful for this gif. In joy,
perhaps, the human person adopts an empath-
ic stance towards other beings that induces the
outpouring of the self that mimics the gratuitous
character of Being. Metaphysics is fundamentally
ethical, fundamentally existential. F
Garret West is a junior studying philosopy.
His paper was originlly written for Dr. Blums
Philosophy 340 class.
How to live off campus,
on campus
As
the fnal waves of of-campus permission crash
upon the student body, there are many students,
men and women alike, lef standing on the
shores of dorm life, watching others swimming of into the seas
of of-campus freedom. As many rise into the upper classes, they
feel that theyve earned their chance to shake of the bonds of
campus housing and begin to live independent lives. Tey seek
to attain Self Government, which the college works so hard to
instill in them, by learning to live like an adult. But sadly, for
many of them, this dream has been crushed by a recent increase
of available campus housing. Rather than inefectively pleading
for mercy to the deans, I write today to you, the student body
trapped on campus for another two semesters.
Having resigned yourself to the fate of on-campus housing,
I ofer you ways to delude yourself into living the life of an
of-campus studentsome practical, some nonsensicalwith
the hope that you might be able to get a taste of life outside.
Te Guide to Living that Of-Campus Life on the Inside:
First, walking distanceLiving in a dorm, you get to be a
lot closer to your classes. So to simulate the beauty of a nice,
long morning walk from your lovely of-campus house, you
can either take a few laps around the quad each morning or
consistently wake up 10 minutes later than you should to repli-
cate the frantic madness of a commute you dont have time for.
Also, pack every book youll need. You wont be going home
until its dark.
StudyingSince most of-campus houses are unfurnished,
you need to trade your desk for something you found on the
side of the road or bought at Goodwill/Walmart. If you are
too broke, replicate of-campus living conditions by studying
exclusively at a table in Saga. Hopefully your professor likes
grease stains on homework.
Te landlordTe biggest diference between living in a
dorm and living of-campus is the landlord. To reproduce this
experience as accurately as possible, appoint a roommate or
suitemate to be the landlord. Whenever the thermostat isnt
exactly where you want it, or if one of the toilets clogs, write him
ever more urgent letters and complain about him constantly.
You can even play a game where he makes up bizarre rules for
you to follow every semester
If you happen to live neither of-campus nor in a dorm (e.g.,
the Suites, Park Place, any college owned house), here are some
extra challenges. First, get a coveted of-campus meal plan
and bicker with your housemates over who pays for random-
ly timed grocery runs. Second, intentionally break visitation
rules. Your of-campus friends dont have them, why should
you? Finally, since you have no actual landlord to appeal to,
make consistent passive aggressive remarks to your living
mates about how much noise they make. But hey, anything
beats dorm life! F
Danielle Shillingstad is a sophomore studying music.
Danielle Shillingstad
April 28, 2014 The Forum | Humor | 22
JACK WHITE
Jack White is the man who everyone who is anyone wants to be when they grow up. He has collab-
orated with the likes of Beck, Norah Jones, Bob Dylan, Brian Burton, Alicia Keys, and the Rolling
Stones. He has founded three diferent musical projectsthe White Stripes, the Dead Weather, and
the Raconteursresulting in nearly a dozen albums all told. He owns and runs his own Nashville
record label, Tird Man Records. He was almost a priest. He bears an uncanny resemblance to every
Tim Burton character known to man. Oh, and hes a Detroit native.
His latest single, High Ball Stepper, is the frst track to be released of of his second solo album,
Lazaretto. Its sharp. Its manic. Its loud. Its Jack White through and through. Te frst single, the title
track, is forthcoming. Te album in its entirety will be released June 10, 2014.
In the meantime, make sure to brush up on the highlights of Whites prolifc career:

THE DEAD WEATHER
Tis is a supergroup if there ever was one. White is on drums, Allison Mosshart from Te Kills is on
vocals, Queens of the Stone Ages Dean Fertita provides guitar and keyboard, and Jack Lawrenceon
bassis a holdover from Te Raconteurs, a past Jack White project. Te grinding, visceral energy
of the Dead Weathers strong blues-rock infuence is counterpointed by Mossharts cold, snarling
vocals. Two studio albums, Horehound and Sea of Cowards, have been released thus far and a third is
expected at some point in 2015.
COLLABORATION
WITH BECK
Jack White and Beck are both music
industry pioneers in their respective
genres: White a blues-rock genius, Beck
one of the most recognizable artists of
anti-folk. Both are also very weird. So,
when they collaborate, wonderful things
happen. Want proof? Its Not My Fault
For Being Famous, one of several White
Stripes tracks produced by Beck, serves
as a good example of the blues/
folk nexus. Te musical give
and take, while intermittent, has
been ongoing. Jack White played
bass for Go It Alone, a track
from Becks 2005 album Guero. In
return, Beck produced a few songs
here and there for the White Stripes
and recorded three tracks of of his most
recent album, Morning Phase, at Whites
record label.
TWO AGAINST ONE
No, not Tim Burton. In 2011, Italian compos-
er Daniele Luppi and American mega-produc-
er Brian Burton (Danger Mouse) collaborated to
produce a psychedelic folk rock album inspired by
spaghetti westerns. Naturally, they called it Rome.
Never a stranger to the odd and esoteric side projects of
the music industry, Jack White was asked to contribute.
Tree tracksincluding the particular standout Two
Against Onefeature Whites vocals and lyrics. Lead
single status was reserved for Black, a track featuring
Norah Jones. F
TRAGICALLY
HIP
Sarah Albers is a sophomore
studying English. She is a member
of the Dow Journalism program.
April 28, 2014 The Forum | Music | 23
The Forum needs
your submissions!
The Hillsdale Forum is an independent, student-run
magazine at Hillsdale College founded in 2003. For
11 years we have published conservative opinions,
editorials, campus features, and academic papers. If
youve written a stellar essay for class, have a strong
opinion about current events, or just want some extra
writing experience, consider submitting your work to
our magazine! We are in need of all kinds of pieces. Not
only could you be published in one of our bi-semesterly
issues, but you could also gain recognition with
employers and peers alike. Thanks for reading!