THE WHY SERIES
By
Robert Kittrell

A Nation Divided; Why?
Essay #1
Not since the Civil War has this nation been so divided. It is puzzling but there’s a fairly cogent explanation. Basically the difference is between the two schools of thought, one old the other new.
` The Founding Fathers were reading about a new form of government, democracy and republicanism. It was a shocking concept that a nation could be ruled by a consortium of men rather than a king and his nobility. The idea was not exactly new but the French philosophers of the time gave it a polishing and updating. Some small places like Switzerland were in the process of trying it. The original thirteen colonies in North America from their start in 1607 to about 1770 had increased considerably in the size of its population. Divided from the mother country by an ocean, each colony had its own government presided over by a royal governor selected by the King or the English parliament.
At first, the English parliament was established as an advisory body of noblemen to the king. But when the Elector of Hanover was selected to be the new King, George I, he didn’t even speak English. Neither did George II. The English Parliament assumed more and more of the governing duties formerly in the hands of the king. By the time George III assumed the throne, the English Parliament controlled a major role, ruling England. So all of these circumstances converged on the place and time of theses colonists who felt that Parliament was not treating them fairly.
After 170 years the colonies had developed the attitude they didn’t need the King or the Parliament. When a list of grievances compiled by the colonies was ignored the colonists decided to rebel. They thought that the English government would quickly comply and things would return to normal. But they reckoned without the pride of the British Empire. They defied the might of the strongest nation with the biggest army and navy in the world, they needed to be taught a lesson. Somehow these puny little colonies managed to get France, a major European nation, who didn’t like the British much anyway to help with the rebellion. You know the result. The colonists won the war and set in motion a nation destined to become the greatest and strongest the world had ever known.
The founding fathers and most of the population believed in absolutes based on the teachings of the Christian Bible. What is an absolute? It is the belief that there are certain truths and standards of behavior that regulate human behavior that never change. Customs and cultures may change but people don’t change. People are the same now as they were 2000 years ago and will be the same two thousand years hence.
So what happened that brought into question the beliefs in absolutes? Science. This school of thought started way back in the days when philosophers were trying to turn lead into gold. Slowly, over the centuries, the creepy little study of natural philosophy grew and branched and branched again. Natural philosophy has mutated into science which has now become a vast array with many subjects, levels and sub parts. It has been many centuries since any person claimed to know all knowledge. Science has contributed more to explaining the universe, to adding to knowledge and to man’s comfort, and making food and water safe to eat and drink. The science list of contributions to human well-being is extremely long. What is the difference between traditional thought and scientific thought?
Relativity. It is the belief that everything in the universe is relative. What is a long marriage in the mind of a Kansas wheat farmer is different from that of a Hollywood actress.
Since 1900 the scientific method or school of thought has attempted to formulated itself into a formulized form known as secular humanism. Secular humanism tries to be a philosophical expression of scientific belief. It is difficult to define. Perhaps it is easier to say what it isn’t. It does not believe in absolutes. It believes that all things are relative. To the five year old boy his mother’s new hat is beautiful. To his father it may look slightly ridiculous. The nature and experience of the observer determines the truth of the matter. When we speak of secular humanism we are not talking about a body of well-defined principles, we are mainly talking about a loose collection of disbelieves.
There have been several attempts to combine science with religion. Christian Science and Scientology, to name a couple. Neither have a very large following. Some scientific types and academic types have been able to comfortably keep a foot in both camps
In Europe most people seem to follow the science school of thought,. The United States has a large followings in both camps plus another large group who basically follow neither camp. Interestingly enough the majority of U.S. people profess a belief in God.
To put the division in the simplest terms possible, The traditionalists are mostly conservative, church attending, folks who believe we should adher strictly to our Constitution. The Secular Humanists are liberal folks who are ardent environmentalists, conservationists who see the war as wasteful and unproductive. The traditionalists are usually Republicans, the Secular Humanists are usually Democrats. There are a large group of people who are mostly confused.