Five Reasons Why the Commitment Test is a Terrible Idea

Ladies, are you in a relationship and want to know how committed your guy is to you? If you see the possibility of marriage in your future, it’s a legitimate concern, considering the high divorce rate right now. So, how can you take steps to verify the strength of your relationship? Clearly, the answer is to observe how commitment has been modeled to him by looking at his friends’ relationships, the relationships of authority figures in his life, and especially how committed his parents are to each other. Then, if you think he has been implicitly taught a poor model of how relationships should work, suggest talking together to wise people you trust about the importance of commitment for your relationship completely fry your boyfriend’s confidence and break his heart by subjecting him to a test he doesn't even realize is happening.



You see it all the time in chick flicks. To see if there is really something to their relationship, the woman will walk away, only to be passionately pursued by her lover and swept off her feet. Then, assured of his undying love and commitment, she lives happily ever after. Great idea, right? Except it’s terrible. I realize that not all girls use the commitment test, so please don't think this article is meant to apply to all women. That being said, from least to most important, here are five reasons why "the test" is a terrible idea.

1. No one likes tests. Depending on how far along you are in your education, you’ve probably taken dozens or even hundreds of tests. Out of all of them, how many did you enjoy? Here’s something else to think about. What is the worst kind of test? Undoubtedly the surprise kind. Nothing is worse than taking a test you weren’t allowed to know about or study for. The commitment test is even worse than that, because the guy usually doesn’t know it’s going on until it’s over. It’s a pass/fail surprise test with no prep and he’s not even allowed to know what’s being tested.

2. Sometimes it’s not a test. Let’s say a guy has seen The Notebook and is smart enough to know that girls sometimes leave to see if their guy will come after them. What might his thought process be when his girlfriend genuinely decides to break up with him? Most likely, he’ll end up causing both her and himself a lot more pain than is necessary because he thinks he’s “passing the test.”

3. Good guys won’t pass the test. It’s completely fair, in fact it’s downright essential, for girls to expect some things from their boyfriends. Men should treat women as fellow creatures made in the image of God and deserving of the same kind of respect they would give to anyone else. Going even further, Christian men are called to love self-sacrificially, putting to death their own desires and interests and giving priority to God first, then others. The problem is that guys who know and do this don’t pass the commitment test. Part of what it means to genuinely respect another person is to let them abide by their own decisions. So then, even if a guy feels heartbroken and doesn’t want a girl to leave, if he respects her he will let her make her own decision. If he is a Christian who loves self-sacrificially, then he will feel doubly guilty if he puts his own desires ahead of those of someone he claims to love, and will let a woman walk away in order to put her interests ahead of his own. On the flip side, women should beware of men who value their own desires and pursue women who have stated they want to be left alone (whether those women meant it or not). This kind of behavior indicates that the man doesn’t really care so much about what his girlfriend wants, but is more interested in what will make he himself happiest.

4. The test depends on deceiving someone you claim to love. If the guy knows what’s going on, the commitment test won’t give a true result. Therefore, the only way it can work is through making him think something that isn’t true. Even if the guy “passes,” it’s likely that he’ll feel betrayed in some sense because of his girlfriend’s dishonesty.

5. There are better ways to find out how committed a man is likely to be. For instance, you could observe how commitment has been modeled for him by looking at his friends’ relationships, the relationships of authority figures in his life, and especially how committed his parents are to each other. Then, if you think he has been implicitly taught a poor model of how relationships should work, suggest talking together to wise people you trust about the importance of commitment for your relationship. If he’s not interested in having a conversation about it, then you’ve got a big red flag already. You are far more likely to learn what he thinks about commitment by asking him directly and by examining the kinds of relationships he has seen growing up than by any other method.

I can already hear the “but it’s so much more romantic” rebuttal brewing in the minds of female readers. My only reply is to say that maybe we need a better conception of romance; one that is rooted in honesty, openness, respect, and fairness.

What Does Meaning Mean?

     Want to know how to stop a conversation in its tracks? Tell the person you're talking with that you're a philosophy major. If the conversation continues at all, the next question will inevitably be, "What are you going to do with a philosophy degree?" If you tell them that you plan on teaching philosophy, they will reply with an, "Oh." Awkward silence follows.

     This has been the basic pattern of many of my conversations over the past couple months. It's not that I don't understand why. Philosophers have a well-earned reputation for being kind of odd. I mean, when you start questioning the meaning of meaning and study people who said that motion and time are an illusion, a few raised eyebrows are to be expected. Maybe that can be a project of mine, to bring philosophy down from the high pedestal it's usually placed on and make it less intimidating. I don't know how many people have told me they're "just not smart enough" to understand philosophy. To be perfectly honest, that's nonsense. Everyone has an idea of what it means to live a good life, what beauty is, what the basic structure and purpose of the universe is, (all questions of philosophy) or else they wouldn't be able to live their daily lives. Granted, people may not have good answers to those questions, but to say that philosophy is too high up for them is just not accurate.

     Now more than ever I'm confronted with the problem of what to do after getting my bachelor's degree. I guess I could work for another year to save up money for graduate school, or just dive right in and try to find a school that offers some kind of assistant teacher scholarship and maybe a stipend to cover most of my living expenses. I'll probably be researching all of this once summer break starts. It's kind of scary/exciting to think that about this time next year I'll probably be getting ready to move to another state (Mississippi doesn't have any PhD philosophy programs. Shocker).

     My current classes are going well. Logic and Classical Philosophy are my favorites. Logic because it's easy and useful, and Classical because the readings are really good (lots of Plato and Aristotle). One of the coolest things I've learned in Classical is that relativism (the idea that man determines his own morality) was disproved by Socrates well over 2000 years ago. So then, anyone care to tell me why this is the predominant theory of morality being taught in public schools today? Sounds like a paper to me. Anyway, thanks for checking in on me. I'll talk to you later.
SDG

Umbrellas and Philosophy

     I know, I know. The irony. I finally get a computer, and I don't write for months. Despair not, though, because I have actually been writing enough to keep you happy and informed. I've been keeping a news blog for one of my classes, called The Journalism Project. I learned a few things while keeping another blog (like how to insert links), which I'll try to use to give this one a boost.

     I also made a video while I was out, called Rain or Shine. You'll laugh, you'll cry. It's about umbrellas.

     On a different note, I've decided to use my writing abilities for a field other than journalism. I've been thinking about this for quite a while, almost the whole year. The longer I've studied journalism, the more convinced I've become that it's not the job for me. What really tipped me in this direction was the two-week trip to Summit Ministries in Tennessee. I enjoyed those two weeks more than I've enjoyed anything in a long time. I was surrounded by people who were interested in studying deep things, who weren't afraid to ask questions that would make most Christians nervous. It was a place for true seekers, people who really wanted to dig deep into Christian thought and understand the world. That said, next semester I'll be studying philosophy, with the idea of teaching in the back of my head. I can hardly think of anything I would enjoy more than teaching philosophy.

     What's surprised me most is how little this switch has interfered with my plans. I'm still going to write, it's just that now I'm going to be writing about things I really care about. I've already got an idea for a book. I'm thinking about calling it "Common Philosophy" because I want to show people that philosophy isn't just for the educated and "intellectual elite," but that everyone uses, encounters, and expresses philosophy in some way. We're all philosophers, we just need to learn how to do it right. I think that by talking about a lot of weighty questions in simple terms, people will see that philosophy is an unavoidable, yet enjoyable, part of life.
   
     Enjoy the blog and the umbrellas. I'll try to write soon.

SDG

The End of Jones

Well, summer is over, which means that I have to stop being lazy and start writing again. Yes, I could have written at any point during the last few months, but I just get this irresistible urge to sit down and do nothing but read and go on vacations when the weather turns hot. The good news is that I should be able to post much more frequently now since I have finally acquired my own laptop.

It feels like a long time since I've been at Jones, but it's really only been three months. I suppose I'll miss ol' JCJC, but at the same time I'm ready for something new, and USM is certainly that. Yes, I am officially a student at the University of Southern Mississippi. I'm continuing my study of journalism, with an emphasis on News Editorial (writing for print or online publications, basically). School started on the 22, which was a Wednesday, and my first assignment was due that Friday, my second on Tuesday. They don't mess around up here. However, school didn't meet Tuesday or Wednesday because of Tropical Storm Isaac.

How have I spent my summer? Glad you asked. After my graduation, I worked with my dad at our family's meat processing plant. That lasted until the end of June. I also helped him with a couple of construction projects that we did for his mother, who lives in a house that's over 100 years old. Seriously. In July, I went to a two-week, um, I guess you would call it a conference, but it was more like two weeks of intensely interesting college classes. Officially, it was an apologetics conference hosted by Summit Ministries. Apologetics means "a defense," and it's typically used to describe the defense of the Christian faith. You basically learn to defend Christianity as actually true, instead of just one version of the truth (which is an idea propagated by Postmodernism, the belief that there is no absolute truth). After that, I spent a few weeks doing almost nothing but reading Orson Scott Card and hanging out with my friends before everyone had to go back to school. That, in a nutshell, was my summer.

There was only one real downer during this otherwise happy period. When I was signing up for the Student Printz, the campus newspaper at USM, I got a little careless. I filled out the application online, and a few days later I left for the apologetics conference. I'll admit that I knew the Printz would probably ask for samples of my work, but I didn't know when and I didn't think that there might be a deadline to turn them in. I suppose it's really my fault, though. I could have found a way to check my email if I had wanted to badly enough. Let it suffice to say that my samples were late and that I didn't make it on the Printz. There's always next semester. Who knows, maybe not getting on the Printz may turn out to be a blessing in disguise, since I'm taking a couple of writing intensive courses this semester.

Anyway, my experience on the whole has been a positive one. I'll be posting again soon, I'm sure. This is Seth, signing off.
SDG

Book Ideas 2

It's been almost a year since I told you about some of the ideas I've had for future books. At the rate I'm writing them, they may cover my retirement fund and not much else. The book I mentioned last time, about a world which I made up, has undergone some extensive changes. First, I finally have a vision of what the book should really be about. I was planning on writing an allegory, similar to C.S. Lewis's Narnia series. One day, as I was reading my Bible, a particular verse jumped out at me. It said, "love the lord with all of your heart, soul, mind, and strength." Instead of thinking about the commandment, like I usually do, I thought, "Interesting. So there are four parts that make up man." I began to wonder how the parts influenced each other and what their functions were. Instantly I thought of my book, and decided that each race in this imaginary world would represent one of the four parts of man. So, even though the main storyline is full of typical fantasy fare, there is also an underlying message of how each person is put together and how our different parts work together to fight against darkness. It can also represent how society works, or should work. After all, in most people, one or two of the parts are more dominant and strongly developed than the rest. It's what gives us our different personalities. Readers might be able to identify with one of the four races, and start to learn what their function should be.
I had an idea for another book, but it's not very well developed yet. I don't know what chain of events led to this idea, but for some reason I began wondering what it would be like to be a kid being raised by the devil. I began to think of all the things that Satan might say and do, and why he would be raising a kid in the first place. Eventually, it gradually morphed into an idea for a book. If I do end up writing it, I want it to mostly have a comical feel, so that it will appeal to a wider audience and be more fun to read. Of course, I imagine that it will have its more serious moments as well.
I have at least one other idea for a book up my sleeve, but I don't think I'll mention it here. It's still really rough, and I don't want to give all my secrets away. After all, if I told you everything now, what would I post about next year?
SDG

My Favorite Author

I figure that, since I'm a writer, I should probably tell you who I look up to and get my inspiration from. My favorite author by far is C. S. Lewis. At first, I was only interested in the Chronicles of Narnia, which appealed to me because of his incredible storytelling ability and imagination. Not long after, I started reading his theological works, and I was hooked. I still haven't read all of his books, and to be honest I'm not exactly sure how many he wrote, but I am slowly and steadily working my way through them as school permits. I feel like I have to get all the boring, useless schoolwork out of the way so I can actually learn something.
Lewis is my favorite author for a number of reasons. His reasoning ability is absolutely astonishing. He has a way of taking those subconcious assumptions that most of us have and sitting them front and center for analysis. When I read Lewis, I constantly find myself thinking, "I never really realized it, but I suppose I do think that way." He also has a very appealing and understandable writing style. The best way to describe it is "conversational." If you don't have a problem with his British terminology and phrasing (which is easily understood by reading in a British accent), then you'll discover one of the clearest voices you've ever heard. That, combined with his firm grasp of logic and liberal use of analogies, makes him one of the hardest people to disagree with that I know. His proof of Christian religion, "Mere Christianity," has converted many an agnostic and atheist, and would have converted me if I hadn't already been a Christian when I read it.
Right now I'm reading his autobiography, "Surprised by Joy." It's not a book I would recommend to people unfamiliar with his works. You have to read his other books to develop an interest in who he is before you can read his autobiography, or at least that's how it worked for me. With all that said, I don't think that Lewis is for everyone. People who don't enjoy logic or truth should steer clear of his theological works and limit themselves to The Chronicles of Narnia and the Space Trilogy series. For everyone else, I recommend starting with "Mere Christianity," which I think is one of the best examples of his writing.
Until next time.
SDG

The Knowledge of Good and Evil

Here's another one of my philosophical theories which, as far as I know, hasn't been duplicated by anyone else. There's a great debate in philosophy about whether or not man has an inherent (pre-installed, or innate) knowledge of what is moral, or whether we just made it up or learned it from an outside source such as nature or God. Until recently, I sided with the philosopher John Locke, who said that although we don't have any inherent knowledge, God has told us and given us the tools to discover what is right and wrong. Locke asserts that we are blank slates when we enter the world, and that the only way we can have knowledge and ideas is by reasoning, using our five senses, and reflection (observing how our own minds work).
The reason I no longer completely agree with Locke is because I thought of an idea that I think is inherent to everyone, even if someone were raised completely separate from other humans. Let me take that example and show you what I mean. Let's assume there's a child who was born in the jungle, we'll call him Bob, and for some reason his mother died and he was raised by animals. Now let's say that you wandered into this jungle and got lost and started to starve. Bob sees you and realizes that you're starving. Due to social instinct, Bob goes to the trouble of finding and preparing some food for you. However, when he brings you the food, let's say that for no reason at all you take it, throw it on the ground and grind it into the dirt. Now what do you suppose that Bob, who has never heard of morality, justice, or right and wrong, would do? He would probably be ticked.
I think that everyone, no matter where they come from, starts out thinking that kindness should be returned with kindness. Even if people say they don't believe it, if they say that we should take what we can get and not bother about where it comes from, I think their actions show otherwise. If we do something nice, we expect people to appreciate it; or, at the very least, not to show contempt for it.
This discovery may seem insignificant, but the desire to have kindness reciprocated is actually the basis for most of our social and moral laws. After all, it is only a small step from there to the famous command, "Do unto others as you would have them do unto you." And from there, all sorts of theories can be deduced. Kant's Retributivism, and Bentham's Utilitarianism are both different interpretations of that command, when you think about it. So perhaps there is something to be said for inherent ideas after all, or at least for one. Maybe when Adam and Eve decided to chow down on the forbidden fruit, the human race was introduced to the concept of "Do as you would be done by." Maybe our ability to understand that is, in fact, the knowledge of good and evil.
S.D.G.