Dear Russell & Friends,
Good morning. I’ve missed you and thought often of you as I fire up the Charity Miles app. Our RussellandPascal team has 6 members now with a total of 169 miles. If my math is correct, that is over $41 donated to various charities that move us. If my musing is correct, that is new money that we had perhaps intended to give but had not acted on. Please join our team if you are able. We would like to see half the blog followers join in the next one year and our goal for mileage is >10,000 (time to goal uncertain).
Russell and I had breakfast a week ago and after two hours we agreed upon nothing. Don’t despair. The reason I led with the Charity Miles collaboration is to remind you of how much we do agree on. And, one cup of coffee in, it is quite possible that my insistence we agree upon nothing is a double entendre. We talked about this book that I lent to Russell over Christmas break – –
I loved the book and further thought that it might help me to understand my friend. It did. Here is another book that I’m reading with an extended quote below.
Love is not an easy thing; it is not just an emotional urge, but an attempt to move over and sit in the other person’s place and see how his problems look to him. Love is a genuine concern for the individual. As Jesus Christ reminds us, we are to love that individual “as ourselves.” This is the place to begin. Therefore, to be engaged in personal “witness” as a duty or because our Christian circle exerts a social pressure on us, is to miss the whole point. The reason to do it is that the person before us is an image-bearer of God, and he is an individual who is unique in the world. This kind of communication is not cheap. To understand and speak to sincere but utterly confused twentieth-century people is costly. It is tiring; it will open you to temptations and pressures. Genuine love, in the last analysis, means a willingness to be entirely exposed to the person to whom we are talking. — Francis Schaeffer, The God Who Is There
How did these two books relate? Gleick, in The Information, helped me to love my friend Russell. I read the book with fascination and took notes in the cover. I think I took notes – – Russell still has the book. I read it around the same time that Russell introduced me to Sean Carroll and Howie and began to think – – why don’t I think this way? It is quite a beautiful way to think.
Information theory then has become an area of interest for me and obsession for Russell (I’ll ask him to correct me if I overstate; I frequently do for effect). Information theory found its way into our taco breakfast last week and helped us to agree on nothing. Please accept a brief paraphrase.
R: Even in the outer boundary of the known universe there is information.
P: I don’t see it. Quantum fluctuation maybe . . .
R: But, that is information.
P: I’m tracking – – I just didn’t consider that useful information. So you’ll accept the noise and not just the signal?
P: Remember how we’ve had a hard time agreeing about the definition of nothing? How I insist that the Universe can’t naturally be made from nothing?
R: Yes, but that has never bothered me.
P: You know it bothers me?
R: I do.
P: So would you accept the complete lack of information as nothing?
R: I would.
There are not many readers of this blog who will recognize the milestone that this represents in Russell’s and my communication. We have gone to great lengths to understand each other, deconstruct straw men and yes – – to love each other. As Schaeffer says, it has not been easy. But this agreement, on nothing, meant the world to me.
Where will it lead? Do I jump directly to an apologetic based on ex nihilo nilo fit? Absolutely not. I finish the post and prepare to run a 10K trail with two of my sons, thankful that I’ll log 6.2 more miles for water. On that run I’ll thank my God for my friend and thank him for the love that lets us to talk to not past each other.
Pascal – – 1:16