Essay Writing and Answering Exam Questions

ESSAY WRITING – ANSWERING QUESTIONS
Explanatory Notes for Isaac Field (by C. Field 19/4/2013)

While writing essays and answering exam questions appears to a student to be merely a process of evaluation imposed by the school system it is much more than that. Essay writing and written answers to questions rely upon skills that are highly valuable in life and career.

These explanatory notes will explain some of the key issues related to essay writing and written answers to questions, hopefully prompting intelligent development and application of the appropriate skills, not just in the school context but into adult life and career.

1.         Core Skills.

The core skills relied upon in writing essays and exam answers, and throughout the rest of your life, are:
a) Observation, comprehension, understanding and memory of the source content under investigation (book, movie, article) and the exam question or essay topic, including ability to make relevant quotations.
b) Analysis, reflection, interpretation, evaluation and re-expression of the ideas conveyed or prompted by the source content under investigation and also in the exam question or essay topic.
c) Comparison of ideas or expressions, which shows that you have observed and comprehended and also interpreted and analysed what you have observed, seeing the distinctions between the elements being compared.
d) Communication, organisation of thought, clear expression and convincing argument.
e) Extent of ideas, including originality and insight, arguments for and against a point, ability to accommodate various and divergent perceptions and keep them in balance and how widely read and rich the student’s information is.
f) Underlying language tools, such as spelling, grammar, vocabulary, technical terminology, clarity (without ambiguity or vagueness) and presentation skills.

2.         Presentation.

While this may seem a lesser consideration it is true that clarity of presentation requires clarity of thought and so it is always a good starting point.

Note that this article starts with a Heading, followed by a sub-heading, and includes identification of the author and date. The opening sentences explain the subject matter of the article and its purpose. A reader will quickly know whether they wish to read this article or if it is the one they were seeking.

Poorly identified documents can be overlooked or lost or fail to get the attention they deserve.

This is not an exam skill, but a requisite life skill, to clearly and accurately identify documents and the content therein. Get into the habit of doing this automatically whether required or not. If it is inappropriate make the exception for that answer.

At the top of your essay or assignment put the relevant information of Subject, Class, Topic, your name, date and so on.

Eg: SOCIAL SCIENCE, Yr 10, Mid Term Exam, Cultural Diversity, May 5, 2014, Billy Smith Class 10J.
Question 1: Primary Culture in Australia.
While cultural diversity exists within communities and even within each cultural group there is usually a primary culture overriding all other cultural elements. In Australia that primary culture can be seen …….

3.         Clarity.

The first sentence or two in an essay or exam answer should (unless a very short answer is required) restate the topic or question in some way, so the reader or examiner can be confident you are answering the right question.

This is also a checkpoint for yourself, to ensure you are doing the right thing. There is no prize for writing an exam question where you wrongly understood the question.

4.         Interpret the Question or Topic.

If you get the question wrong or do not fully answer it you are throwing points away and wasting your time.

Observe what the question or topic asks, interpret it, keep all the parts in mind and in their place, organise your thoughts and then express them effectively.

Eg: Assignment Question – Using Examples from the Source Material (Text / Article / Chapter) Describe two different processes that produce the result.
Note that this question asks for EXAMPLES and DESCRIPTION of TWO things that are DIFFERENT. You must provide all those elements or you cannot expect your optimum score.

If you are struggling to answer a question, at least show the examiner that you UNDERSTAND the question. Refer to the elements mentioned in the question (examples, description, 2, different).

5.         Do what is Required. Follow Instructions.

Most essay and exam questions will ask for a specific performance from the student.

One level of question simply asks you to Describe or Give Examples. This checks that you know the material. Quotations, summary statements and listing the core elements of the material will be helpful here, to show that you do know the material.

Another level of question asks you to Discuss, Address, Analyse, Compare or Explain something. This type of question checks your ability to analyse, comprehend, see the implications, make assessments, filter the material through some kind of lens or otherwise interpret the material.
In most classes teachers tend to feed students sufficient examples of what is required such that an astute student can usually pass an exam by re-presenting those thoughts already presented in class.

Higher level students will have taken the teacher’s observations and promptings as a springboard for their own insights and analysis, and their essay or answer to a question will include original thought, and/or more widely read understanding, likely gaining them higher marks.

Be sure you keep an eye on the question and do what it asks. If you must give 2 examples, then do so. If you must present your own thoughts or impressions then do so.

Eg: Exam Question: 10 Second Dash.
“You have 10 seconds only to answer this question.
Read the whole question before answering.
State Your First Name: ________________.
Year you started at this school: __________________.
Current Class: ______________________.
Favourite Sport: _________________.
Mother’s maiden name: ________________.
Father’s Occupation: _______________________.
Names of Siblings: ________________________________________________.
Hair Colour: _______________________.
Do not write anything on this page.”

Modern Day Slavery

How is it we are trapped in a web of fines, threats, debts, notices, by-laws and the like?

How is it the police are our enemy when they are supposed to bless us by protecting us?

What has been done to justice when the Justice Department spends so much of its time harassing us, entrapping us, making strange and unfounded judgments against us and upholding all manner of silly claims against us?

Do you really want to know?

Common Law Obligations

Under Common Law you can be held guilty for various things. But apart from a few responsibilities toward others you are blessed with abundant rights that can’t be taken from you (inalienable) because they were given to you by God when you were created.

Despite your rights and freedoms you are obligated not to harm others, or to harm their property, and also to keep your word.

Your Common Law obligations are toward others: not to harm them; not to harm their property; and not to break your word to them.

Keeping Your Word

The reason keeping your word is a Common Law obligation is because you can hurt others by breaking your word.

If you promise to do something and others rely on you they are vulnerable to harm if you don’t keep your word. If you don’t buy what you promised to buy the seller may miss a genuine sale to another customer. If you don’t marry the girl you promised to marry you may cause her a life of heartbreak. If you don’t deliver the medicine you promised the patient may die.

So your word is a potential source of “harm” to others, just as your fist, or your unchained bull may be. If you cause injury then you have broken a Common Law obligation.

Making a Slave of You

Centuries ago certain men who were looking only for their own interests realised they could use your obligation to keep your word to enslave you and make you pass your wealth to them.

They could do it by trapping you into a contract that was in their favour. If they could induce you into a commercial contract where you gave your word, and then get you in default, having broken your promise, then they could drag you before the courts and force you to pay what they claimed.

This is a perversion of the Common Law obligation to keep your word. It is also evil and wrong, despite the fact that a good case may be presented in court.

Intention

What makes the evil commercial contract so wrong is that its intention was never to create a positive, mutually acceptable contract for mutual benefit, but to entrap, enslave and destroy one party for the benefit of another.

Thus commercial law emerged as a powerful element of law over recent centuries. Terms like ‘law merchant’ reflect that body of law based around commercial contracts.

Before God, who is Chief Justice over all justice, the heart is under observation. God looks on the heart. God deems a contract to be evil if the heart of the one creating it is to exploit or harm another. The prophets of old and the Son of God Himself warned us that God looks on the heart.

Presumption of Contract

The evil of commercial law enslaving others has developed further in today’s western world to the Presumption of Contract. Rather than trap people in a fraudulent contract we are today trapped by contracts we didn’t even know we entered.

In order to exploit you other parties, including our governments and government agencies, induce us into presumed contracts and then respond as if we knowingly entered into bondage to them. When those parties deem us to be in default they then drag us before the courts and we are somehow found guilty of things we did not know we were bound to.

What is more, we are not given much chance if any to defend ourselves because we are deemed to be guilty from the moment someone points their finger at us and declares us guilty, such as a traffic cop, parking attendant, local council employee. or similar.

No Escape

We are no longer presumed innocent until proven guilty, but we are guilty the moment someone accuses us. That’s how it is with police traffic offences, parking tickets and so on.

We may well get an unsolicited letter in the mail declaring that we have been found guilty of this or that and the fine is such and such. When we write back or phone to find out what it is about we discover that the only options we are given relate to how we will pay, not how the other party will prove their claim. The claim is taken to be true, without proper judicial process and thus trampling on our common law rights and natural justice.

We are treated like slaves who have to obey our masters, rather than people with God-given freedom who are immune from false and evil claims, protected by justice and the guarantee of our rights (such as our monarch is bound to give through Magna Carta and other ancient promises).

Contract Wins

One reason things go like that is because it has been declared that Contracts are higher in standing than our common law rights.

It is possible for you to contract to give up your common law rights. So Contract stands higher than those rights. Or, to put it more correctly, your will stands higher than your rights. You have the right to choose by your own will to give up your rights.

You can choose to be a slave, or to pay for someone else’s crime (as in Tale of Two Cities, or the sacrificial death of Jesus Christ). Your freedom is so powerful it includes the right to give up freedom itself.

And by extension of that, if you enter a contract by your own free will, that contract stands higher than any rights you may have given up.

Pretended Contracts

If someone can trick you into a contract, or bluff you that you are bound by a contract you didn’t knowingly enter and didn’t know the full terms and conditions of, then you can be made an absolute slave, based on the idea that contract is supreme.

So governments and corporations, police forces, local councils, and all manner of other regulators are busy as all get-out tangling you into their contracts. When you respond to their absurd letter of demand or their unexpected and unjust charges and fines, they will tell you that you are bound by this or that rule to do what they demand. No matter how much you huff and puff you seem to get nowhere. If you stall and delay you find that unexpected additional penalties have been imposed. When you object you are told that your complaint has been reviewed and refused.

And you just don’t seem to be able to break this nexus. You find yourself enslaved by all manner of constrictions which your parents and grandparents never thought of, and you are at the mercy of pen-pushers and self-interested parties who seem to have the right to dictate your fate.

It’s Presumption

The whole house of cards is built on Presumption. They presume to have power over you. They presume that you are in contract with them. They presume that you are bound by their decision, no matter how one-sider or evil, or how filled with self-interest it may be.

They presume you have voluntarily given up your rights and freedoms to them, and they intimidate you if you don’t comply with their presumption.

You are Presumed Dead. And they treat you like a corpse.

Most people simply give up and play dead, because they fear the consequences of challenging what seems to be evil.

Dead in the Head

Your problem is that they are not so far wrong. If you are dead in the head, if you are willing to lie down and let them trample on you, then they have every right to treat you like a carcase at their disposal.

If you let them make contract with you, presume that you are their slave, and walk all over you, then that’s probably OK. I mean, if you choose to accept that contract then you can accept it. You can’t exactly argue against it if you accept the terms and conditions and allow them to bind you into an evil contract.

It’s your life, and it’s your will. If you WILL for it to be so, by lying down and letting them enslave you, then I guess that’s the CONTRACT you have entered into. It’s the terms you have accepted.

As someone once put it, what you suffer is what you want. If you didn’t want it you would not suffer it. So if you accept others treating your like a slave, then you must actually want to be a slave deep on the inside. It would be wrong for me to deny you what you want.

Or Stand Up

The alternative is to wake up to what is going on and to stand up and say, “No”.

You can challenge the presumed contract and demand that they prove it. You can reserve your rights rather than letting them trample all over you.

You can declare that there is no contract and that you don’t consent, and they must prove that you knowingly entered into contract with them and accepted the terms. You can demand that they give you full disclosure of the contract they are offering and allow you to modify the terms to suit you, rather than the terms that suit them.

But don’t expect that they will give up their slave easily. There may well be a fight about their right to hold you to their will.

And then you must decide whether you really believe you are free, or if you are just looking for some easy way out of some bills and obligations.

That’s the deal. The rest is up to you.

Any Good Men?

The way evil prevails is if good men do nothing.

Are there any good men out there?

Technology Idols

This week Samsung CEO Mr JK Shin presented what some consider the most impressive technology launch event of all time, introducing Samsung’s S4 phone.

Significant in this launch were interesting claims made by Mr Shin early in his speech. His words, albeit muddied by his Korean accent, bring to mind parallel ideas presented in the Bible. And through his comments we are presented with the idea of Technology as an Idol in today’s world.

The worship of technology is not a new theme. The late Apple guru Steve Jobs, himself a master of marketing hype, gave today’s generation a sense for the mystique and fervor created by technology. But in generations past technology had earlier showmen and its showcase moments where eager consumers salivated over the promise of new qualities of life made possible by new technology, or “applied science” as they knew it then.

The great Fairs and Expo events of past centuries put on display amazing technological tools that were to transform day to day life. Car shows, computer shows, electrical appliance shows and all manner of other such events are and have always been energized by display of the latest and greatest.

And with each new technology comes the embedded promise of a better life, more efficient processes, more free time, greater productivity and so on.

Through that cavalcade of promise upon promise, breakthrough upon breakthrough, technology upon technology, innovation upon innovation, technology itself has been paraded before us as an Idol.

Technology has become to the secular culture the tool of man’s salvation. Technology is the key to longer, happier life. Technology is the answer to man’s problems.

Early last century Aldus Huxley even extolled technology as the deliverer of the Brave New World where moral constraint, unhappiness, unwanted impositions and human limitation would be thrown aside by ‘applied science’, aka technology.

So we should not be surprised to hear technology described in the most glowing terms and attributed with qualities previously reserved for the divine. And that’s what we do hear in Mr Chin’s ululations.

When Mr Chin took to the stage at New York’s Radio City Music Hall before an adoring crowd of smartphone devotees he prefaced the introduction of the S4 with words of significant tenor.

He explained that Samsung has brought together innovation with the wishes of the public to create something that was now at a new level as applied technology.

“We have taken technology and innovation to help us get closer to what matters in life. To help us live a richer, simpler and more full life.”

“It is the innovation that improves the way people truly live every day and helps them live in the way they aspire to.”

“A device that enables us to do more. A companion that helps us to experience life to the fullest. A life companion for a richer, simpler life.”

These are heady claims, but they may actually prove true within the limits of what inanimate technology can provide. That will be judged by users over time.

But these claims resonate with meaning attributed thousands of years ago to divine experience.

Jesus Christ made the claim, “I am come to give life and life that is more abundant”.

Jesus also claimed that He would send to His followers the divine person of the Holy Spirit who would reside inside their lives and be to each of them a personal support agent, called a parakletos in the Greek language of the day.

Jesus also promised that He would give His followers divine peace that would not be given on the same terms as the world gives things.

So Mr Chin’s glowing accolades showered upon his company’s machine echoes the more profound spiritual promises made by the Son of God.

Is technology therefore not an idol? Is it not a substitute for the more powerful and more valuable experience available through spiritual technology?

Has the world lost sight of that which is real and replaced it with that which is an illusion of substance?

Can a smartphone provide for us lifestyle support that in any way matches the life-changing impact of Jesus Christ as Saviour, Almighty God as Heavenly Father and the Holy Spirit as resident comforter?

Is the world being sold a bogus bill of goods by fawning over mere devices, while failing to seek the far more powerful and truly life-changing impact of eternal life?

What does it say about us that we exult in a new technology, while abandoning the power and presence of Almighty God in our lives and culture?

Is it that we have erected new temples and that we fall down before new idols, invoking their powers to alleviate our ills and confer blessings in ways that only God can truly do?

Have we made technology an idol?

And if so, how do we get God back on the throne in each of our hearts?

Humanist Hope

Humanism for the greater part of last century was fused with hopeful anticipation of creating a world in which self-serving, hedonistic lifestyles could be pursued with impunity.

Blocking man’s freedom to indulge at will his base passions, for sex, self-gratification, self-will, independence, irresponsibility and the like, were impositions that came from God, family, society and nature.

God, as the Bible reveals Him, is a perfect moral being who created man and thus to whom man is morally accountable. Every act, thought and word of man is therefore brought under moral constraint, frustrating selfish desire and irresponsible and immoral pursuit of self-will.

Family, as child and sibling in our parental home and then as spouse and parent in our own home, causes us to be imposed upon by the expectations, demands, personality and responses of our family members. Selfish actions cause us to come into conflict with those closest to us and to receive disapproval from and cause hurt to those we are most closely bonded to emotionally. We also suffer the indignity of being judged, accused and otherwise imposed upon by parent, sibling, spouse and child.

Society at large also has its order, which in the western world has been built upon Christian principles of morality. Society demands that we act responsibly and it acts as an extension of God’s authority over our lives, penalising us for certain actions that are deemed criminal.

Nature also provides cruel punishments for various indulgences, such as addiction to the drugs men use and sexually transmitted diseases which blight free sexual activity. Sexuality is also blighted by unwanted pregnancies. Overeating results in obesity. Over-indulgence in alcohol results in drunkenness and addiction. Indulging laziness results in loss of income. And so it goes.

Science to the Rescue

By midway through the twentieth century science had emerged as the hopeful saviour of humanism’s frustrated desire. Science offered both philosophical and practical solutions to humanism’s obstacles.

From the 1880’s publication and propagation of Darwin’s version of the Theory of Evolution promised a scientific explanation for the origins of man, and therefore allowed the god-rejecting conscience to reject fear of God’s moral judgment for man’s immoral selfishness.

Advances in hygiene and medicine progressively promised cures for mankind’s ills, and gave rise to the hope that those dreaded consequences of sexual exploits would also be conquered by medical science.

Education had proved itself able to elevate primitive and seemingly backward people into modern living standards and to embrace modern educated values. Thus education and enlightenment promised to be the source of continued elevation of mankind into an even more idealised state.

Psychological ideas promised power to alter man’s thinking and alleviate such things as guilt, shame, conscience and so on.

Marxist ideas of revolutionary overthrow of what exists to make way for what is better were widely disseminated.

Social and religious ideas, including the concept of marriage, were progressively accused of being mere products of primitive thinking in an evolutionary setting. The educated classes began to see that god, family, society and nature could be tamed and thus man liberated to indulge previously sinful and criminal behaviour.

It is interesting, then, to see that the Sexual Revolution of the 1960’s was the humanist ‘love-child’, expressing the revolutionary spirit of Marx, disregard for God, family and societal standards, and unbridled indulgence of desire, especially for sex, drugs and irresponsible living.

However the humanist hope was soon to crumble.

Crumbled Hope

Darwinian ideas of evolution continued to prove unsubstantiated and eventually unscientific, and were abandoned in pursuit of better hopeful explanations for man’s arrival without a Creator God.

Medical science has not continued to deliver great leaps in human health, and old, once-conquered diseases still hover on the edges of society, with newer, terrifying pandemic possibilities popping up from time to time.

Education has staggered to a halt. All of the pursuit of knowledge has done nothing to alleviate human suffering, social pain, depression, hopelessness, suicide and the many other social ills that enlightenment should have done away with. The educated are no happier nor more free and liberated than the ignorant.

Psychology failed to provide the keys to unlocking human happiness or removing human pain. Instead a plethora of unproven psychological ideas has swamped western society and myriad gurus of the mind have competed for their share of the market. Meanwhile a greater percentage of the population resorts to medication than ever before.

As for revolution it has proven powerless. Those who dived into liberation gained nothing but temporary indulgence, which they have to live with for the rest of their lives. The moral, emotional, relational and personal entanglements, pains, frustrations, regrets and bitterness are the same as ever, and those who were part of the revolution carry the greater pain and suffering in consequence.

What a Waste of Time

God was not dethroned by man’s defiance. Nature was not disempowered by man’s confidence. Morality was not remoulded by man’s insistence. Nothing has changed.

Man is inherently selfish and inclined to rebel against his Creator. That is as it has always been. God has placed us in a moral universe and that has not changed. Man’s mind is puny and vain, and that has not changed. Humility before God is wonderful, liberating and empowering, and that has not changed.

The humanist hope has crumbled.
But man’s hope in God is as strong and wonderful as ever.
Hope in God. That is the end of the matter.

Brave New World

Aldus Huxley’s Brave New World – Blueprint for Humanist Utopia

The following notes were written for the benefit of students given Brave New World as a study text. They are provided here for anyone who may be interested.

While Aldus Huxley claims to have written Brave New World in reaction to the direction he saw American society and technology taking the whole world in the “roaring” 1920’s, as if Huxley himself did not subscribe to the values exposed in that Brave New World, it is clear that many readers see Huxley’s book as defining the parameters of an ideal humanist utopia which they subscribe to.

Evidence the work of David Pearce who created the Huxley.net website which focuses specifically on Brave New World. Pearce anticipates achievement of the Brave New World and has his own suggestions as to the appropriate drugs to replace Huxley’s ‘soma’ while he also keeps track of genetic manipulation capable of enabling man to be free from various ills. Pearce speaks of “paradise-engineering” to bring about a world where physical and mental pain are removed and new levels of ecstasy can be achieved.

Huxley’s Brave New World proves to be not a mere mockery of American social direction, but the clearest articulation of the humanist ideal.

With that in mind a review Huxley’s paradise gives many insights into the humanist imperative and the moral framework that inspires many in today’s society.

The Humanist Utopia

BRAVE NEW WORLD represents the cry of the humanist heart to escape from morality.

Utopia, as seen through the eyes of Huxley, involves total sexual liberation from the earliest age, total liberation from the consequence of sexual activity (through contraception and abortion), escape from morality, indulgence of every impulse quickly and completely, and removal of family, God and Christianity, in order to remove remorse, fear, guilt, shame, condemnation, and so on.

But this utopia has not been achieved.

The Judeo-Christian ethic which stands in contrast to humanism is that this is a MORAL UNIVERSE and all attempts to pretend otherwise will fail.

Humanist Heroes

Huxley invokes the prophets of his age who he sees as affirming the humanist myth of escape from morality.

They include: Freud’s insights that sexual repression (moral responsibility) spawns human ills; Haekel’s already debunked fraud about human development in the womb; Pavlov’s ideas of conditioning; ideas of programming of the human mind (believing that mind is the centre of the matter); chemical reductionism (all human behaviour is nothing more than a response to chemical or other stimuli within the biology); etc.

Huxley also, we must assume, holds to the Darwinian beliefs his own grandfather so virulently asserted.

So what of Huxley’s heroes? Darwin shrinks devoid of any of the evidence he expected and shrivelled by the unveiling of life’s complexities. Freud shrinks to just one of many competing voices crying in the psychological wilderness, with little currency in today’s eclectic world of psycho-babble. Haekel’s drawings were already exposed as fraud but have since been roundly exposed and deliberate deception. Pavlov’s salivating dogs have been displaced by all manner of psychological oddities and assumptions. Chemical reductionism has failed to stand as a credible explanation for human free will.

Comparing Humanist Artefacts in Huxley and Greene

Similarly to Richard Greene’s The Quiet American a humanist worldview is clearly evident in Brave New World, exposing the prevailing thought of the educated elite in the early part of last century. (Richard Greene’s The Quiet American is another literature text given to students to review.)

Huxley wrote Brave New World in 1931 and through it, and through Huxley’s comments 15 years later in his 1946 Foreword, we are given insight into the ideas that influenced the cadre of writers, philosophers and world influencers of the first half of the twentieth century. Huxley saw himself as a member of the ‘intellectual class’ (Foreword 1946) and is hailed as writing one of the most significant texts of his day. So we can be justified in performing an autopsy on Huxley’s ideas and the thinking of that past era.
By such process we shall likely see insights into the value of those ideas and also possibly see how those ideas have morphed into ideas held by today’s educated elite.

While Huxley revolts at the direction Americanisation was relentlessly taking the rest of the world and the ultimate tyranny of his suggested outcome, he also holds to the humanist values that underpin that inherent direction of applied science as he prophetically saw it heading. Huxley’s prophetic insight was based on interpretation of the popular notions shared among the intellectual class of his day. Brave New World was nonetheless the utopia envisaged by the educated elite of Huxley’s day.

It is interesting to note parallels between Huxley’s bold suggestions of 1931 and the values expressed by Greene in his 1952 book, The Quiet American.
Two decades had not changed the prevailing ideas but had seen them become more ubiquitously and more a natural aspiration of the average educated man (represented by Greene’s characters).

To clarify an obvious connection note that Huxley’s utopia centred on sex and drugs and man’s ability to abandon responsibility.
The life of Greene’s main character, Thomas Fowler, is also centred on sex, drugs and exemption from past commitments.
Both Huxley and Greene see the need to address and dispense with the place and presence of the divine and both present an ideal of life free from the imposition of an external moral being.

Sex, drugs and irresponsibility found wider expression in the second half of last century with the explosion of the Sex, Drugs and Rock and Roll Sexual Revolution of the 1960’s.
The humanistic, self-indulgent rejection of morals that Huxley and Greene each presented and which were at one time the preserve of those pursuing a bohemian lifestyle, became a widespread cultural revolution that morphed into the many cultural and social issues of today.

In the 8 decades since Huxley’s expose of the humanist ideal we have seen progressive abandonment of the traditional Christian values promoted and upheld in the western world for centuries, and in consequence we have seen drug addiction, family breakdown, domestic violence, youth suicide, depression and other signs of social decline swell in significance and that humanist ideal become much more widely pursued.

What we see in the writings of Huxley and Greene and their peers is the rise of the religion of humanism in the west, swamping the values of Christianity which had undergirded western society for centuries.
To members of the ‘intellectual class’, defiance of God through reliance on scientific breakthrough would relieve them of moral responsibility and allow them to indulge their human passions readily and with impunity.
These intellectuals could have no higher existence than serving their own wishes and making contribution to the anti-God campaign.

The Huxley Calling

Aldus Huxley’s grandfather, Thomas Huxley, was so virulent a force in promoting evolution he was dubbed “Darwin’s Bulldog”.
Thus ‘defying God’ was a family tradition for the Huxley’s. Aldus knew that he too was to play his part.

Yet for all his bravado and evangelistic effectiveness, Darwin’s Bulldog is now exposed as selling an empty box.
None of Darwin’s concepts or expectations stood up to scientific scrutiny.
So much so that today’s evolutionists seek completely different possibilities for evolution than Darwin proposed.
The evidences promulgated so effectively by the elder Huxley have therefore clearly proven faulty.
Today’s evolutionists cannot yet provide any convincing proofs for their theory despite those proofs being sought in earnest for more than a century.

The elder Huxley spoke as an evangelistic voice selling a bag of goods that proved to be spurious.
We need not, thus, be squeamish about inspecting the younger Huxley’s bag of goods and testing the true nature of what he dished up to his audience educated in humanist thought and eager to have formal permission for their longed for self-serving lifestyle.

Applied Science

Huxley’s humanist world is anchored in what he calls ‘applied science’, which we would today simply call technology.
The Brave New World utopia could only come into existence through applied science empowering man to transcend such horrors as the fear of death, the aging process, family relationships, unwanted pregnancy, frustration of personal will, and addiction and other side effects of drug use.

Huxley’s fiction starts by first introducing us to the use of applied science to create man in the image of man’s choosing.
The Hatching and Conditioning factory involves a completely controlled artificial womb created by applied science, where temperature, chemical exposure and other stimuli are used to control the ultimate ‘human’ (or maybe subhuman) output.

More on the Humanist Heroes

In Huxley’s establishing scenes of man creating man to serve man’s will we gain insight into identity of the luminaries Huxley saw bringing applied science to the fore.

To the intellectual elite no greater honour can be conferred than to be acknowledged by peers, quoted by them, and even to have some process or truth named after you.
So in the humanist world of applied science the ‘prophets’ are not Confucius, Buddha, Moses or Paul, but such names as Marx, Freud, Kinsey and Pavlov.
That these names are still honoured today speaks to their status as primary voices or significant contributors to the humanist cause.
Such men are the gurus or holy men of humanism.

Huxley reflects the formula of giving honour to the humanist scientist by building their names into the key processes by which they made his utopia possible. We find reference to a Bokanovski’s Process and Podsnap’s Technique and respect for a Pilkington at Mombasa. Enshrining the name of men who are revered is automatic to Huxley.

Apart from fictitious names for processes not yet invented, Huxley exposes his own reverence for men who have advanced the humanist utopian ideal.

Haekel

In chapter 1 we find reference to Haekel’s ‘embryonic recapitulation’ pseudo-science.
Without mentioning Haekel that man’s myth is keenly affirmed:
“The embryos still have gills. We immunize the fish against the future man’s diseases.”
Haekel’s fraud was exposed in the 1890’s but still promoted in “science” (?) textbooks since that time, including being attested to as fact by the NSW education system in 2012.
Haekel’s deliberately deceptive drawings were further exposed at the end of last century when correct embryo images were collated to show the degree of gross misrepresentation engaged in by this fraudster.

In Brave New World not only is Haekel’s fraud presented confidently but its logical deception is also stated in the words “future man’s diseases”, as if the embryo is not yet “man” but something sub-human.

One of the pivotal platforms for humanist thought is that man is not truly man in the sense taught by Christianity, but a mere accident of chance and even in the womb is nothing more than an animal that can be tamed or manipulated into whatever others choose it to be, or even destroyed without thought. Huxley’s utopia is built soundly upon that premise.

Mass Production

Also looming large in Huxley’s view of the world, as a luminary who will usher in the Brave New World, is Henry Ford, the champion of mass production. To Huxley the application of production line process, as Ford famously achieved, signalled much more than efficient manufacture, but the prospect of just about anything being controlled by man’s technology.
Thus Huxley evokes the image of human embryos relentlessly subjected to production line process.

Today ‘Who is Ford?’ While production line ingenuity seemed to be a compelling breakthrough to Huxley in 1930 no-one today is at all likely to deify, or even give too much thought to “Fordism”.
We are much more enamoured with the innovations that gave us Microsoft, Apple and Khan Academy. Technology has given us much more than Henry Ford’s clunky Model T, and remote third world countries now produce for us base model vehicles that make Ford’s efforts look archaic.
Production line processes pale into insignificance compared with the transistor and microchip and the benefits of the world-wide-web.

Despite such incredible advance in technology, production processes, robotics, miniaturisation, and so on since 1931 we are not any closer to Huxley’s utopian artificial womb. Henry Ford did not offer us anything more than mass produced goods. And since Ford’s day we have become much better at mass production of identical manufactured items. Ford is forgotten and mankind, family, happiness and pain continue as ever before.

Pavlov

In Chapter 2 we find another of Huxley’s luminaries in Pavlov, with his name enshrined in the ‘Neo-Pavlovian Conditioning Rooms’. The Brave New World has supposedly refined the science of conditioning to train children to react as per the programming. It seems that Pavlov’s admirers once salivated in anticipation of a Brave New World.

But did the great Pavlov give us anything any granny with a cat did not already know? Pavlov conditioned dogs to salivate at the sound of a bell, in anticipation of the meal that normally accompanied that sound. For this he is a humanist hero, having unlocked the human psyche (or the dog psyche anyway).
Yet when a cat owner opens the refrigerator, starts to open a tin of cat food, or taps the can the pet will come running and licking its lips. And if the stooped old widow is opening the fridge for herself or just opening a can of baked beans the preconditioned cat response is elicited as reliably as in Pavlov’s laboratory.

Wow! The great Pavlov stands beside the stooped granny feeding her cat. And the control of man is no closer than it was when cats first domesticated us.
Why then is Pavlov adored? He was part of the educated elite, not a stooped old granny. And he provided a cogent promise that by discovering what was already known for past millennia he was unlocking new horizons for the future.

I am reminded of the 2,000 year old warning that “professing themselves to be wise they became fools” (Paul the student of Gamaliel).

Note that in the application of Pavlovian conditioning Huxley has no qualms about inflicting pain and denying people their god-given right to choose freely. Cruelty to infants, which would be condemned if it was in the form of parental discipline of the child, is seen as noble when inflicted painfully and repeatedly upon an entire generation in order to make them become something they may not want to be.
All hail humanism. It stands against the cruelty of punishment for crime as a means of raising moral character and advocates far greater cruelty (even torture) to enslave the minds of people so they don’t get in the way of others who want to have their fun without moral responsibility.
And Pavlov, not the granny with her cat, can be hailed as the scientific luminary who legitimises this cruelty. I suspect Granny is perfectly happy for that.

This Pavlovian conditioning process is consistent with Huxley’s persistent idea that man is the end of the matter and that man can be freely tampered with by man.

Getting Rid of God

In his 1946 Foreword Huxley exposes his humanist religious commitment through his definition of ‘religion’.
“Religion would be the conscious and intelligent pursuit of man’s Final End”.
This definition is man centric, thus humanist. It is in effect a pursuit of transcendence, arriving at the idealised state represented by the humanist notion of “Tao or Logos, the transcendent Godhead or Brahman”.
This humanist pursuit is to become an enlightened being, to so find oneself and so effectively pursue self-help personal development principles, as to have arrived at a higher state of consciousness where man has risen above the mundane and become a higher being.
This is thus a religion in which one saves oneself. Human saving human. This is the religion of Humanism, not the fear of God.

Interestingly in Greene’s The Quiet American, his American character, Alden Pyle, holds to the religious beliefs of Unitarianism and Christian Science, both which compromise the core values of traditional Christianity and accommodate the humanist idea of man’s effective effort to save self.

Rather than recognising an eternal, self-existent being who exists separate from and as creator and lord over all we know, and to whom we therefore owe allegiance and by whom we will be measured in comparison with his holy standards, Huxley (and Greene) project man as the ultimate being, in pursuit of his own happiness and not accountable to any external, holy being.
Thus in both cases man can do what is convenient or whatever he chooses, with his only challenge being to use applied science to overcome any negative effects which may occur (such as unwanted pregnancy).

In Huxley’s mind, representative of the humanist belief system, there is no greater morality than man. Technology is progressively liberating man from the consequences of actions otherwise seen as immoral (unwanted pregnancy, conflict with others, personal hurt and pain) and removing the obstacles to man’s pursuit of happiness.
Education and science are man’s greatest assets and those who find the keys to greater release from consequences or who can prop up man’s rejection of God automatically become heroes of the faith and prophets to be revered.

Educating and Deceiving

Huxley’s humanist ideas of man elevating himself are further disclosed in the process by which the Savage achieves higher levels of civility and awareness. The operative elevating agency is study, and specifically the study of Shakespeare.

This fits the ‘educated elite’ notion that education is a means of salvation.
If Shakespeare can ennoble the Savage, then those and other worthy writings of the masters can ennoble anyone. If one can be elevated to civility by study of good literature then what are the ultimate limits of such elevation? Cannot man continue to ennoble himself, lifting self higher and higher out of the morass of ideas and experience that bring pain? Thus the humanist ululation when one of their own provides a new insight that promises to advance the cause, such as a Pavlov giving scientific credence to a common observation.

Sadly we see abundant evidence that the educated elite and others held by the humanist ideology have no qualms about propagating fraud as fact and holding to outdated ideas that have lost their credibility, as we saw with Huxley’s propagation of Haekel’s fraudulent work. To admit that man cannot save himself and that the case against God has no witnesses is to cut the very ground from under the feet of those who have committed their whole life to the humanist belief system and a morality that has clearly put them in the anti-God camp. Human pride and self-will must clutch at straws rather than admit error and moral responsibility.

Note that for all the ennobling power of education and fine literature touching the soul, Huxley recognised the limits of this force. Education can ennoble, but it cannot save. It can improve life, but it cannot provide power over broader forces. We see this enacted in the ultimate suicide of the ennobled savage. For all his ability to see better and realise ‘self’ more fully, the savage ultimately succumbed to despair in the futility of his situation.

Sadly we see a history of similar defeat among humanist intellectuals who find that all their pursuits leave them without the ultimate freedom and power they hoped for.

Feminism

Feminist elements of humanism are also encapsulated in Huxley’s expose. While man and woman are indulged with unlimited ‘Free Sex’ (as DH Lawrence referred to it in Sons and Lovers) without the entanglements of relationships that may sour over time or emotional holds that may not be wanted, womankind is released from the impost of pregnancy. Contraception and Abortion are everyday resources of women in the Brave New World, and viviparous mothering is a shocking thought. (Viviparous: “Giving birth to living offspring that develop within the mother’s body.”)

For the feminist hedonist the impositions of motherhood, impacting the body during pregnancy and challenging the body’s natural youthful state in consequence of pregnancy and breast-feeding a baby, and the continued impositions of child raising, denying the carefree options available to a non-parent, and tying the mother into an ongoing connection with the child and the child’s father are anathema and must be removed by applied science.

In Huxley’s Brave New Society these womanly impositions are completely removed and woman is as free as a single male, unafraid of the impact of motherhood, and thus viviparous motherhood is an obscene prospect. And the imposition of child raising is also removed by children being raised by the state, without consciousness of mother and father or other family connections.

In the 8 decades since Huxley’s writing we see the efforts of technologists and policy makers to push the envelope in regard to these humanist and feminist ideals, with the 1960’s introduction of the contraceptive pill, 1970’s no-fault divorce, abortion on demand, expanded child care, extended institutionalised education, more working women, greater legal recognition of de-facto relationships and so on.

The Greater Good

Explicit in Brave New World is gross social engineering, manipulating life as one might prune a tree or treat an animal. Justification for such blatant enslavement and torture is achievement of a better equilibrium for all.

The greater good imposed on all is of man’s making and allows certain individuals, ‘controllers’, to dictate the fate of entire generations. The problem emerges, however, that if there are no external moral absolutes by which goodness can be defined, then the greater good is an empty notion, where the will of one is forced upon another.

The Savage and those others who had achieved self identity and did not want to live within the confines of the Brave New World tyranny suffered under the weight of the greater good. The greater good cannot exist without identification of the greatest good. And the greatest good invokes the present and person of one who is ultimately holy and good, against whose standards all of man’s thought and action are measured.

Noble Savage

It is interesting that Huxley’s counterpoint to the Brave New World is represented through an educated savage. The title “savage” is repeatedly assigned this individual from the native reservation. This suggests an intention to tease at the notion of the Noble Savage, “an idealized concept of uncivilized man, who symbolizes the innate goodness of one not exposed to the corrupting influences of civilization.”

It seems that in Huxley’s expose of the Brave New World we are meant to identify with the concerns of the savage and to see in him the better way than a technologically manipulated society. The savage embraced learning, by reading Shakespeare, and is thus ennobled. He seeks an independent lifestyle, of his own making, not controlled by the society at large.

Sadly for the savage he is unable to escape the impost of that other society which does not share his values and which continually interferes with his highest ideals. Thus the savage takes his life.

That act of suicide is a pessimistic recognition that the ubiquitous forces of American cultural projection cannot be stopped and will eventually destroy all vestiges of independent thought and life.
Hail the Brave New World!

Comparing Humanism and Christianity

Comparing the humanist Utopian ideal presented in Brave New World with the prevailing Christian beliefs that the Brave New World stood against the three most obvious pillars of that world stand in stark contrast to the classical Christian values upon which the ancient Monarchy and English culture stand.

Those three most obvious pillars in Brave New World are:
Man’s power over life, as evidenced in the incubator, conditioning facilities, contraception and abortion processes;
Self-indulgent living, with freedom from consequences, as evidenced in the free sex and addiction free drug usage; and
Freedom from moral accountability, as seen in the removal of family ties, committed relationships and consciousness of an external moral Creator God.

In contrast, traditional Biblical Christianity teaches that:
Life is created by God and thus man can only have power over life within the confines of God’s moral precepts;
Man is to live according to the will and pleasure of God, and must deny selfish impulses and form godly character in so doing; and
Man is fully morally accountable to God for every word, thought and act, and must also accommodate himself to the demands of family and social relationships.

Thus the values of the Brave New World, when presented in 1931, were a bold affront to all that is Christian in the western world. Its shock value would have been much greater in its day, since the decline in consciousness of Christian teaching and the loosening of morals has been significant in the past eighty years.