Nicolaus Anderson
Intro to Psych
Prof Sarah Kranz
12/02/2010
The Box
Most of us have heard the expression, “think outside the box.” The general implication is that the person being told to “think outside the box” needs to look beyond what is in front of them. “The 'box', with its implication of rigidity and squareness, symbolises [sic] constrained and unimaginative thinking.” (Phrases.org) Not surprisingly, the phrase, now a cliché business statement, has its origins in psychology. But what is of interest with this topic is its application to the nature and practical capability of God.
Edward de Bono, a Maltese physician and inventor, formulated the phrase as he seeks to inspired people to learn to be creative. The statement “think outside the box” is itself a work of creativity since it is both very descriptive and still analogous. As Bono said, “It may not be possible to train genius - but there is an awful lot of useful creativity that takes place without genius.” (Bono, “Serious Creativity”) Evidently, everyone should be capable of obtaining the ability to “think outside the box”, though, as Bono admits, some are more capable than others. It should be noted that there are the skeptics. For example, “invesigator” on Youtube, commented on a video sporting Bono’s creativity theories, saying, “IF creative thinking is a skill that can be learned, then why has Mr. de Bono produced nothing else besides books about it? If creative thinking was learnable, as he says, wouldn't he himself also be an artist, engineer or inventor?” (investigator, comments, “on creative thinking”) To that, Bono replies, “We do not give up teaching people to play the piano or violin because we cannot guarantee a Liszt or Paderewski from every pupil… There are very useful levels of mathematical ability, piano playing, violin playing, and tennis playing, even when these fall short of genius.” (Bono, “Serious Creativity”)
As much as the world may propagate Bono’s utterances, they are seldom applied, and possibly rarely to the issue of God. The imagination of people seems seems to instantaneously become limited the moment you mention the word “God”, for it conjures up in people’s minds preconceived notions about who God has to be as well as their personal opinions formulated over lifetimes. There are two common ways in which this creative or imaginative view of God is limited. The first is God’s existence, and the second is what God will do, but the former will be discussed here.
When people speak of God’s existence, the first thing that is brought up in debate is scientific evidence. Not that there is a problem with people desiring reason to believe in God; the real issue may be the desire for physical evidence in order to confirm the existence of a being that is spiritual. People who find no physical reason for believing in God refuse to do so. “I just see no reason to believe in things there is no evidence for.” (bttrflykiss7701, comments, “Ben Stein vs Richard Dawkins”) Francis Collins, Christian scientist and former leader of the Human Genome Project, expressed his doubts in God prior to entering med school, saying, “In my view at that point, the only thing that really mattered was the scientific approach to understand how the universe worked; everything else was superstition.” (“Can Science and Religion Coexist”)
The second part of the problem of God’s existence is the preconceived notions that people have developed concerning God over time. One of the best examples comes straight from the horse’s mouth: the famous atheist Richard Dawkins was interviewed by Jewish actor and theist Ben Stein concerning the issue of God. The interview was most revealing as to what most atheists probably do think. When the conversation about God began, the subject immediately turned to the preconceived notions about the God of the Hebrews, from Biblical stories. Dawkins read his opinion from his book “the God Delusion”, saying, “The God of the Old Testament is arguably the most unpleasant character in all fiction, jealous and proud of it, a petty, unjust, unforgiving control freak…” (“Ben Stein vs Richard Dawkins”) Many people feel the same way, and it doesn’t take long hours of research to find them.
The question of creativity comes into play in both cases whether what is being questioned is the evidence for God’s existence or the presumptions people have concerning God. Like Stein, we have to ask, “How ‘bout if people believe in a God of infinite lovingness and kindness and forgiveness and generosity, sort of like a modern-day god?” (“Ben Stein vs Richard Dawkins”) In response to the former issue: Simply put, if we refrain from restricting our idea of God to the understandable, the predictable, and the measurable, that is to say, we stop considering God as a being we can fully comprehend, whose actions must correspond with our personal sense of morality, and whose proof of existence is dependent on whether He can be detected with physical instruments, then we will be ready to speak about God. Your perception of God can be as broad as your imagination, or you can believe that it is greater. St. Anselm stated that one proof of God’s existence was the fact that He is the apex of the imagination – nothing greater can be conceived. Although this is a poor philosophical argument, it nevertheless points out that our imagination is the only thing that should limit our perception of God. Simply put, one must learn to create before they can understand God.
What about the evidence in favor of God? Once again, the limiting factor is simply our creativity. Francis Collins points out, “One obvious [piece of evidence for God], although maybe it's not so obvious, is that there is something instead of nothing. There's no reason there should be anything at all.” (“Can Science and Religion Coexist”) The follow-up question might be, “How can God create from nothing”; the better question would be “Why CAN’T God create from nothing?” It is reasonable to doubt that something can come from nothing, “Since we have not observed nature to create itself, where did this come from?” (“Can Science and Religion Coexist”) Even Dawkins isn’t willing to throw out garbled science: Ben Stein questioned him as to where the first bit of matter came from, and Dawkins admitted, “We don’t know.” (“Ben Stein vs Richard Dawkins”) Apparently, no one has been creative enough to develop a rational alternative solution to God.
Concerning the lack of physical evidence for God: God is at the root of things, so why would He be manifest at some higher level? The Institute for Creation Research noted, “Bernard d’Espagnat, a French physicist at the University of Paris-Sud, will receive the [Templeton Prize]… for his work using theoretical physics to predict the reality of a hypercosmic god, who exists outside of the physical universe.” The article elaborates a little on the details, summarizing the results of research by saying, “In [d’Espagnat’s] model, there is no way to know this divine being or connect with him in a meaningful way.” (ICR)
The human mind has placed within itself restrictions. The formulation of limitations is natural to the human mind because it allows for understanding of the world, the forms and properties of objects, and allows for categorization. However, it restricts the mind to knowledge gained from experience and formulated assumptions based on those experiences. The result is that people have great difficulty believing in physically impossible things, and many find themselves (for this reason as well as reasons of spiritual warfare not herein discussed) unable to imagine God as the perfect being. In order to better understand God, one not only has to “think outside the box”, but realize that God is mostly outside of it.
Sources of Information
Phrases.org, by Gary Martin. Accessed: 12/01/10.
"Serious Creativity," by Edward de Bono. ISBN 0006379583 Copyright © Mc Quaig Group Inc., 1992. Read online. Accessed 12/01/10.
Youtube:
Comments section of video “Edward de Bono on creative thinking”. Viewed: 12/01/2010.
Video and comments section of video “Ben Stein vs Richard Dawkins Interview”. Viewed: 12/01/2010.
“Can Science and Religion Coexist in Harmony” - May 2009 Pew Forum on Religion & Public Life's Faith Angle Conference on religion, politics and public life. Hosted by Pew Forums. Article from Pew Forums website:
ICR: Institute for Creation Reseach. “Physicist Receives Million-Pound Prize for Predicting ‘Hypercosmic God’”, by Jeffrey Tomkins, Ph.D. Accessed: 12/01/2010.
