Logic vs Imagination

This week's quote reads, "Logic takes you from point A to point B. Imagination takes you wherever you want."

There is a place for both, in most of our lives. Logic is needed for when we have particular tasks to do, and need to get from point A to point B. And for problem solving, and for keeping a cool head, when all around are losing theirs.

But imagination, which frees our minds from all bonds, is the richer of the two, I think. With my writer's hat on, I recall that the fantasy author, George R.R. Martin, famously divided writers into architects and gardeners - those who plan and outline their novels before writing, and those who make it up as they go along: discovery writers.

I have always considered myself to be a discovery writer, but when I was working on my fantasy trilogy, The Stones of Veylindré, I found myself falling into a third camp, which I christened "landscape gardeners". These I defined as writers who decide what to write as they go along, but also have a clear idea of what the final 'garden' will look like. I spent a good deal of time world-building - drawing a map, thinking about the history, geography, politics, culture and magic systems of my world. And had a rough idea of the journey my characters were going to go on. But as I wrote each chapter, it took unexpected turns as I 'discovered' what happened next.

I believe the same dichotomy applies to our spiritual / religious journeys. Unitarians used to be known as 'Rational Dissenters'. According to Wikipedia, "In the 18th century, one group of Dissenters became known as 'Rational Dissenters'. In many respects they were closer to the Anglicanism of their day than other Dissenting sects; however, they believed that state religions impinged on the freedom of conscience. They... desired an educated ministry and an orderly church, but they based their opinions on the Bible and on reason rather than on appeals to tradition and authority. They rejected doctrines such as original sin or Trinity, arguing that they were irrational. Rational Dissenters believed that Christianity and faith could be dissected and evaluated using the newly emerging discipline of science, and that a stronger belief in God would be the result."

This summary was generally true of Unitarianism in Britain right up to the 1960s, I think. However, since then, a more mystical strain has arrived and, while we still insist on the primacy of freedom of conscience, we have also found room for diverse spiritual paths, and are far less likely to "dissect and evaluate" our faith. We have found that there is room for imagination, for mystery, for embracing all kinds of spiritual practices from diverse faith traditions, for faith working alongside reason. And I think we are all the better for it.

Reason and Passion

I love the words of Kahlil Gibran, when he writes: "Your soul is oftentimes a battlefield, upon which your reason and your judgement wage war against your passion and your appetite." I think that this is so true of all of us - at some times we are cool and logical and reasonable, and at others we are fiery and illogical and passionate. And that is as it should be.

In their early years, one of the names that Unitarians were known by was "Rational Dissenters". I looked this term up in Wikipaedia, and was interested to find the following description: " Like moderate Anglicans, they desired an educated ministry and an orderly church, but they based their opinions on reason and the Bible rather than on appeals to tradition and authority. They rejected doctrines such as the Trinity and original sin, arguing that they were irrational. Rational Dissenters believed that Christianity and faith could be dissected and evaluated using the newly emerging discipline of science, and that a stronger belief in God would be the result."

And I absolutely agree that what we believe and how we behave should be subject to our reason and conscience. Yes. But I also believe that there is more to life than being  perfectly reasonable and logical.  Yes, the final authority for an individual's faith should be their own conscience. But I think that this involves our hearts as well as our heads. When I first became a Unitarian, over 30 years ago, I was "converted", if you like, by reading the first section of Alfred Hall's book Beliefs of a Unitarian, when he wrote:

"But above all, it must be known and understood by Unitarianism is not a system of creeds or beliefs. It is more than anything else an attitude of mind. It is a fresh way of looking at life and religion ... It lays the stress on the reliability of the human mind to judge for itself ... Its method is that of appeal to reason, conscience and experience generally, and above all to elemental principles of truth and right which are implanted in the human heart at its noblest and embedded in the universe."

 



So Hall was saying that what is in our hearts is as important as what is in our heads. Yes. I also believe that there are some things in life that are beyond reason - how we love, how we feel compassion for others, and also, to some extent, what we believe, what gives our lives meaning. I think that both reason and passion are important - I am increasingly finding that while I can reject certain beliefs on the grounds of reason, there are some aspects of "doing religion" or having faith that are beyond reason. For example, I have a growing awareness of God or the Spirit at work in the world. This is on the basis of intuition, not reason, but I believe it is real.

Head and heart together, reason and passion. May we use all our faculties to find wholeness and completion and meaning in our lives.