(Logic for Numskulls is a weekly discussion for people who want to become a better thinker without having to wade through the hubris (excessive pride) of uber-intellectual posturing. You don’t even need to know the definition of “epistemology” or “philology” in order to join us.)
“Do nothing from selfish ambition or conceit, but in humility count others more significant than yourselves.”
Philippians 2:3
I am convinced that Philippians 2:3 is the most pragmatically powerful verse for life-change in all of the New Testament. Rare, shockingly rare, is the person who lives by this verse and intentionally treats people better than themselves. On the contrary, before a person opens up their mouth we convince ourselves they are wrong. Guilty before proven innocent.
Oh, how I long to meet a person that actually treats me better than themselves. But instead, people everywhere seem to be fighting a desperate battle for their own personal significance and importance; and as a result, most are quick to compete and downplay anyone else’s excellence and accomplishments.
Because of our natural impulse to win, we are quick to jump to conclusions about the other so we can instantly discount anything they have to say. C. S. Lewis calls this ‘Bulverism’ and it is has reached epic proportions. In the book God in the Dock, he writes an essay concerning modern thought and Bulverism he said, “Until Bulverism is crushed, reason can play no effective part in human affairs.”
So then, what is Bulverism? Here is how he explains it:
“Someday I am going to write the biography of its imaginary inventor, Ezekiel Bulver, whose destiny was determined at the age of five when he heard his mother say to his father – who had been maintaining that two sides of a triangle were together greater than the third – ‘Oh you say that because you are a man.’ ‘At that moment’, E. Bulver assures us, ‘there flashed across my opening mind the great truth that refutation is no necessary part of argument. Assume that your opponent is wrong, and then explain his error, and the world will be at your feet.”
To make Bulverism more understandable it means before you make an argument or try to debate an issue you first decide if the person you are debating with is a fool or not. If the person is a fool than everything that comes out of his mouth must be foolish, so his argument is null and void. In C. S. Lewis’ example, the mother didn’t listen to the reasoning of the husband because in her mind, being a man was cause enough not to listen to him. Bulverism starts by believing that “all thoughts are tainted at the source.”
Even back in 1941 people were using Bulverism in their political wrangling. C. S. Lewis writes, “I see Bulverism at work in every political argument. The capitalists must be bad economists because we know why they want capitalism, and equally the Communists must be bad economists because we know why they want Communism. Thus, the Bulverists on both sides. In reality, of course, either the doctrines of the capitalists are false, or the doctrines of the Communists, or both; but you can only find out the rights and wrongs by reasoning – never by being rude about your opponent’s psychology.”
And there, at his last statement, is where the rubber of Bulverism meets the road of present-day reality. People are rude and they do not treat others better than themselves. Again, guilty before proven innocent.
Just this week my co-worker spent the last week on jury duty. It was a very important murder trial and when he went in to deliberate with the rest of the jury on the guilt or innocence of the witness, one juror didn’t like the look of the man so they instantly assumed guilt. Even without weighing the evidence, the assumption was guilt. And if a person is guilty at first blush, then the way the evidence is looked at from that point on is considered tainted. That, my friends, is Bulverism at work.
Today in our pop-politically correct culture, Bulverism is running rampant. It really doesn’t matter what party you support, your opinion of the opposition is probably already formed so that any argument that comes out of their mouth is considered tainted. It doesn’t matter anymore if their opinion is reasonable, what matters is that they are your enemy. And your enemy cannot be trusted.
But eventually, Bulverism comes back to bite you because it is not based on logic or reason so when someone who is your friend has the Bulveristic qualities of your enemy, you come to a logical impasse or mental inconsistent roadblock.
For the last two to three years the far left of the Democratic Party has attacked many on the right for being philosophically patriarchal, misogynistic and white. Simply put, the left is tired of old, rich, white men running everything. To them, people like Donald Trump and Mitt Romney are what is wrong with the world. Because they are old, rich and white they are not to be trusted. I know there are other reasons why they don’t like Donald Trump – orange skin and loudmouth to name a few – but if you listen closely to major leftist writings and media outlets, you can’t deny they are tired of the old, rich, white guy being in charge. Why? Bulverism.
But they have a problem, their number one candidate that they are hoping will win the candidacy for the Democrats is Bernie Sanders. Yes, economically and socially he is far left, but he is also old, rich and white. So what do they do? How can they honestly encourage people to vote for him when they have been slamming people like him for the last two years? Bulverism always bites back.
I have many people I talk with who distrust and heavily criticize white evangelical Christians. And when they attack evangelicals for not caring for the immigrant, or the poor, and not caring for the person who is of a different race because of white privilege, I ask them, “So you think I don’t care about the immigrant or poor, or I am racist? Do you think I am taking advantage of people because I am white? Is that why pastors spend so much time with the poor and hurting?” They then look at me and say, “Well, I am not talking about you, but most other people like you are like that.” And then I reply, “So my mom, and sisters, and brother are like that? Do you even know them? Did you know my sister helps women who are being sex-trafficked and my brother was a missionary with the poor in Bolivia for six years?” And they say, “Well no, I guess I am not talking about them.” And then I say, “So then you must be talking about the people who attend my church and give a whole lot of money to the benevolent fund, or adopt Black and Asian orphans, and who help support inner-city ministries. Are these the evangelicals you are talking about?” And they say, “Well, no, I don’t mean them.”
“SO WHO ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT THEN?” Is there a monolithic group of people who are always rotten to the core?
Bulverism kills and it cuts on both sides. White evangelical Christians do it too, we often ignore and label a person just because they have a lisp, or they wear more flamboyant colors than you do. We look to lump so we can label and then destroy.
In Lewis’ essay on Bulverism, the subtitle of the essay says, “The Foundation of 20th Century Thought.” I think we have been building on that foundation for a long, long, time now. Our guttural reaction when we meet a person for the first time is to think this way. We judge right out of the gate. Everyone does it, and that is why no one seems to be reasonable anymore.
What is the cure for Bulverism? Blindness. Listen before you assume. Hear the point before you discredit their looks. Or maybe, just maybe, “in humility count others more significant than yourselves.”
Philippians 2 is the only way to kill Bulverism before it kills you.
