Buddhist Catholic Contemplative Evangelical General Christian Hindu Jewish Latter-day Saint Muslim New Visions Progressive Christian

Beliefs

Topics

Columnists

Resource Library

Research Tools

Video

Podcasts

Thought Readers

Faith In Media Tracker

Newsletters

Ad-Free & Subscriber Log-In Subscription Support

Follow Patheos

Jesus Creed

Home
Evangelical
The Measures of Success (RJS)

The Measures of Success (RJS)

Last updated on: October 24, 2013 at 5:39 am by RJS

The Measures of Success (RJS) 2013-10-24T05:20:02-05:00 RJS

LOGO Patheos Explore the world's faith through different perspectives on religion and spirituality! Patheos has the views of the prevalent religions and spiritualities of the world.

Several years ago I wrote a post on ambition asking if ambition should be considered a virtue or a vice. Reflections on my series on the book of Job lead me to revisit the topic – and probably not for the last time.

The Merriam-Webster dictionary online defines ambition as (a) an ardent desire for rank, fame, or power (b) desire to achieve a particular end. This is viewed as a virtue in much of our culture – certainly in academia.

I’m skeptical however of ambition as a virtue. It seems to me that ambition is playing with fire. The first definition plays a larger role than most of us would like to admit. Of course ambition according to the second definition is not inherently negative, in fact it is good to have goals and to work for those goals with perseverance. To be ambitious for the kingdom of God is a good thing – as long as it really is for the kingdom of God. And that gets to the focus of this post. How do we know that our aims are, in fact, for God’s kingdom?

We are, I believe, fully embodied souls. Here’s the deal. Ambition according to the first definition (and we can never entirely get away from this definition) is intimately coupled with envy, pride, and perhaps greed. Sin is a product of mind and will, but it is the product of a fully embodied mind. I have begun a series of posts on Minds, Brains, Souls and Gods and other books that explore the relationship between modern psychology and neuroscience and the Christian understanding of persons. I will return to this topic often over the next many months. The embodied nature of sin is a critical idea.

We are fully embodied creatures and ambition (first definition) feeds on our chemistry and biology and it shapes our natural responses. Ambition, and the success it brings is addictive. The impulses we feed turn around and change brain chemistry in a way that impacts future response and shapes the kind of people we are and we become. Success can go to our heads in rather concrete ways for good and for ill. When measures of success are the world’s measures ambition is not really a virtue – it can use people, destroy relationships, and destroy community.

Scientific developments have impact on our understanding of human behavior and human response. A few years ago I posted on an article, Seven Deadly Sins, in the September 2009 issue of Discover Magazine that posed the question “Why does being bad feel so good?” and describes research being done these days to explore the science of sin. Scientists are using techniques such as functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) and PET (positron-emission tomography) to map the active areas of the brain as a subject responds to certain stimuli. Here I highlight just a few of the main points.

Lust is a big one – Research into brain response connected with lust indicates that (in males at least) the response is all-encompassing. “All said, the most notable thing about lust is that it sets nearly the whole brain buzzing.“ The signals are unique, distinctive, unmistakable and uncontrollable. This isn’t surprising. We know that lust is a problem, we know that behavior can shape response, that there is a biological and chemical aspect that shapes not only the present, but the future. The biochemical response can be addicting and destructive. The lure of pornography is an excellent case in point. We could go on here, but this isn’t really the point of today’s post.

Envy is interesting – in a study of envy a number of volunteers were observed using fMRI while they read one of three scenarios – the key one described a student similar to the volunteer, but better in every respect. The conflict detecting regions of the brain fired and the response was similar to that for pain. This leads to the suggestion that envy is a kind of social pain. Later, when reading about this student’s downfall, the reward and pleasure regions of the volunteer’s brain fired. Not only this but the greater the pain in reading about the student’s success, the greater the reward in reading of the student’s downfall. The reward response is along the same line as that experienced from food – or sex. It feels good.

And now the queen of vices – Pride. Gregory the Great in commenting on Job noted (p. 489-490): “For when pride, the queen of sins, has fully possessed a conquered heart, she surrenders is immediately to seven principal sins, as if to some of her generals, to lay it waste. … For pride is the root of all evil, of which it is said, as Scripture bears witness; Pride is the beginning of all sin.“

Does pride show response in brain scans? The science here is rather interesting.

For most of us, it takes less mental energy to puff ourselves up than to think critically about our own abilities. … volunteers who imagined themselves winning a prize or trouncing an opponent showed less activation in brain regions associated with introspection and self-conscious thought than people induced to feel negative emotions such as embarrassment. We accept positive feelings about ourselves readily, Takahashi says: “Compared with guilt and embarrassment, pride might be processed more automatically”. (p. 51)

In another experiment a part of the brain could be stimulated to turn off the protective influence of pride. When this happened “they saw themselves as they really were, without glossing over negative characteristics.” (p. 51)

Even more interesting, the experiments suggest that righteous humility, deliberate self depreciation, is but arrogance and pride in disguise. The brain activation is the same. “Both are forms of one-upsmanship. ‘They are in the same location and seem to serve the same purpose: putting oneself ahead in society.‘” (p. 51)

What does this mean? Self confidence, ambition, pride, envy – this is a slippery slope. It is insidious – affecting our very make-up inside out. We are wrong when we cast it “simply” as a battle of wills. And our capacity for denial, blame-shifting, and self-deception is also rooted in our make-up. It is interesting though, because studies also show that we can train our brains and influence response – especially true of sins of envy, wrath, and pride. Feeding ambition, with its corollaries of envy and pride, is like feeding lust.** It changes our very being, our function, our chemistry, our brain paths. On the other hand intentional pursuit of virtue is also self reinforcing.

So why is ambition playing with fire? … an example and an application. The feedback for ambition requires measures of success. These measures generally arise from such things as fame, adulation, deference, wealth, prestige, honor. It is incredibly tempting to focus on these measures (after all they must mean we are doing something right mustn’t they?). There is an incredible adrenaline rush that comes with success, especially success as measured by the meter sticks common in our 21st century western world. Bigger, better, faster, stronger, smarter – these all measure success, right?

I’ve been writing on Scot’s blog regularly now for over five years, more than 500 posts. Over the last couple of years I’ve had access to detailed statistics on my posts. The following graph shows the cumulative unique page views on my posts.

Unique page views on my posts. The yellow line is the median. Half of the posts have more page views, half have fewer page views. The red dots are the posts in the series on the book of Job.

By now I have a pretty good feel for posts that strike a nerve and those that receive, let us say, a more restrained response. The availability of these statistics are both a blessing and a curse. Frankly there is an urge for success that leads me to focus on the “successful” posts. There is an intoxicating aspect to knowing that “more” people read what I write and appreciate it. It is physical and chemical – not “just” emotional. As a result there is a natural embodied response to try to maximize that feeling of influence and importance.

The long hiatus in the series on Job arose from a few different factors. For one, the middle of the book is a bit boring and repetitive, yet to do justice to the series I had to slough through it before tackling the end. It didn’t seem worth posting on. But there is another reason as well. I know that posts focused on the Bible tend to get lower numbers … unless they dredge up a controversy. This reduced the motivation to persevere in the series. And this is a problem.

I could design posts and choose topics to build a large following. I could discard the subjects that fall toward the bottom and concentrate on the techniques and topics that yield the largest response. I could justify it as working for God’s kingdom. It certainly happens all the time in the creation-evolution discussion. But unless I have the right measure of success I would have only a deluded view that I was working for God’s kingdom. Personally I think the posts that got higher numbers were good posts, but I also think that the series on Job was of value, and that the insights that come from the end of the book, the speeches of God and the restoration of Job are ultimately more significant than many of the “hot” posts. But series of posts on the Bible, looking in depth, will never get big numbers … never.

This reflection leads me though, to an idea that I would like to pose for consideration. Within the American culture we view ambition as a virtue. We condone ambition, we reward ambition, we cultivate ambition, we admire ambition, we feed ambition.

Is this consistent with the kingdom of God?

How should the church be different?

As for me, I expect the distribution of views on my posts will continue on as it has for the last few years. Many of my best posts fall below the median. A focus on the kingdom of God (in community, with advice and mentors) is the only accurate measure of success. This may match up with expectations of the culture around us. More often it won’t. The measures of success in the kingdom of God are not, and never will be, the same as the expectations in our broader culture.

And if you’re wondering about the picture at the top of the post – The Big Chill at the Big House and the highest ever (yet) attendance at a hockey game – over 100,000. A measure of success?

If you wish to contact me directly you may do so at rjs4mail [at] att.net.

If interested you can subscribe to a full text feed of my posts at Musings on Science and Theology.

Uncategorized

Previous Post

October 24, 2013

NTWright, Paul, the Law and Jesus

Next Post

October 24, 2013 Why Do Teachers Quit?

Browse Our Archives

Select a Category Acts of the Apostles Adam Advent Anabaptism Angels Anglican Apologetics Atonement Baptism BCP Prayers Bible Biblical Studies Birds Blogging Bloglossary Bonhoeffer Books Calvinism Christianity Church Church History Coffee Colossians Commentary Recs Conversion Creation Creeds Culture Death Ecclesiastes Economics Education Embracing Grace Emergent Emerging Movement Eschatology Essays Ethics Eucharist Evangelicalism Family Fasting Fathers Fellowship of Differents Footsteps Tour Fun and Whimsical Gospel Grace Happiness Heaven Hell Holy Spirit Irenaeus James Jesus Jesus Creed Job Justification Kingdom of God Law Lectures Lent Liberalism Love and Marriage Mabanteneni Manhood Mary Miracles Missio Alliance MissioLife Missional Missional Jesus Movies and Film New Perspective Northern Seminary OneLife Origins Project Orthodox Parables Pastor's Spouse Pastoring and Leading Pastoring and Preaching Patristics Paul Paul-John Tour Pharisees Pietism Political Theology Prayer and Formation Preaching Problems for Faith Psalm 119 Psalms Public Issues Purgatory Religions Resurrection Revelation Romans Rule of JCreed Science and Faith Sermon on the Mount Sports Ten Commandments Theology Third Way Top Ten Lists Translations Uncategorized Universalism University Ministry Way Out Weekly Meanderings Wisdom Women and Ministry Work Worship Writing & Blogging Youth Ministry

Select a Month July 2021 January 2020 December 2019 November 2019 October 2019 September 2019 August 2019 July 2019 June 2019 May 2019 April 2019 March 2019 February 2019 January 2019 December 2018 November 2018 October 2018 September 2018 August 2018 July 2018 June 2018 May 2018 April 2018 March 2018 February 2018 January 2018 December 2017 November 2017 October 2017 September 2017 August 2017 July 2017 June 2017 May 2017 April 2017 March 2017 February 2017 January 2017 December 2016 November 2016 October 2016 September 2016 August 2016 July 2016 June 2016 May 2016 April 2016 March 2016 February 2016 January 2016 December 2015 November 2015 October 2015 September 2015 August 2015 July 2015 June 2015 May 2015 April 2015 March 2015 February 2015 January 2015 December 2014 November 2014 October 2014 September 2014 August 2014 July 2014 June 2014 May 2014 April 2014 March 2014 February 2014 January 2014 December 2013 November 2013 October 2013 September 2013 August 2013 July 2013 June 2013 May 2013 April 2013 March 2013 February 2013 January 2013 December 2012 November 2012 October 2012 September 2012 August 2012 July 2012 June 2012 May 2012 April 2012 March 2012 February 2012 January 2012 December 2011 November 2011 October 2011 September 2011 August 2011 July 2011 June 2011 May 2011 April 2011 March 2011 February 2011 January 2011 December 2010 November 2010 October 2010 September 2010 August 2010 July 2010 June 2010 May 2010 April 2010 March 2010 February 2010 January 2010 December 2009 November 2009 October 2009 September 2009 August 2009 July 2009 June 2009 May 2009 April 2009 March 2009 February 2009 January 2009 December 2008 November 2008 October 2008 September 2008 August 2008 July 2008 June 2008 May 2008 April 2008 March 2008 February 2008 January 2008 December 2007 November 2007 October 2007 September 2007 August 2007 July 2007 June 2007 May 2007 April 2007 March 2007 February 2007 January 2007 December 2006 November 2006 October 2006 September 2006 August 2006 July 2006 June 2006 May 2006 April 2006 March 2006 February 2006 January 2006 December 2005 November 2005 October 2005 September 2005 August 2005 July 2005 June 2005 May 2005 April 2005 0000

TAKE THE

Religious Wisdom Quiz

What kind of bird did Noah send out second from the ark?

Select your answer to see how you score.

Owl Dove Eagle Pidgeon