T.V., Game Shows, knowledge and wisdom

There is a fascinating book printed in 1984 by a man named Neil Postman entitled "Amusing ourselves to death." In the book, he basically asks and answers the question of "how does the method of communication and not just the message impact our culture?" All that to say, he analyzes how television, the photograph, and the telegraph changed the way we learn and process information. (I know this sounds like I'm a deep reader and I'll just let you continue to think that.)
Postman asserts that when TV, Radio, and the telegraph became the means of communication, the learning process changed. These methods of communication erased the time factor and brought an instant influx of information. The spattering of instant information changed the concept of learning from knowing about things and understanding them to knowing of things.

To illustrate he gives an example, and I quote " if you imagine a stranger's informing you that the illyx is a subspecies of vermiform plant with articulated leaves that flowers biannually on th island of Aldononjes. And if you wonder aloud, "Yes, but what has that to do with anything?" imagine that your informat replies, "but here is a photograph.... you might murmur, now I see."... If this happens you have learned something, But if the event is entirely self-contained, devoid of any relationship to your past knowledge or future plans, if that is the beginning and end of your encounter with the stranger...so the impression of meaning attached to it is illusory. You will, in fact, have "learned" nothing, and the illyx will fade from your mental landscape as though it had never been.

(maybe that was ridiculously long), but all that to say, we equate knowledge of facts with learning. I know I do. But Postman's point is that unless knowledge leads to understanding we really aren't learning. Yet, our modes of communication now spatters us with so much information that we think if we know the current events of the world and the latest headlines then we are knowledgable. Postman concludes by saying that "where people once sought information to manage the real conteexts of their lives (let me figure out x to help me perform y), now they had to invent contexts in which otehrwise uselesss information might be put to some apparent use. The crossword puzzle is one such pseudo-context; the cocktail party is another, and the modern game show are still others; and the ultimate, perhaps, is the wildly successfull "trivial pursuit."

Perhaps this has been longwinded. But I think its genius. We want to be amused and want to feel smart so at least I equate knowing facts with being smart. I think this carries over to Christianity as well. People equate Christianity with knowing facts. And while knowing facts are necessary and Christianity is based on factual events etc., just knowing the information does not equal Christianity. Information must lead to knowledge, knowledge is to understanding, understanding must lead to wisdom, and The fear of the Lord is the beginning of wisdom. In other words knowing the fact of God's sovereignty is not learning until the belief in the sovereignty of God has led to wisdom and we can say in rough times and good times with Job that "The Lord giveth and the Lord taketh away but blessed be the name of the Lord."

I hope this blog made sense. It was a little rough and by no means am I bashing game shows. Long live Bob Barker!