Search This Blog

Monday, September 29, 2025

Authentic Living in a Divisive Age

Nobody would argue, we live in a divisive age. When I watch Fox News and MSNBC, I feel the ideological divisiveness, but when I look at my neighbors, I don't see us living that differently. Isn't that interesting?

If a worldview doesn't change how we live, how practically impactful is the ideological divide? Just like "faith without works is dead" (James 2:17), ideology without living authentic to that belief system is moot.

Authentic living can be defined as living a life that is aligned with our core beliefs. Do we do this as Christians?

If we are all living authentically ... A Vegan should live differently than a Carnivore. A Muslim should live differently than a Mormon. A Marxist should live differently than a Capitalist. A Christian should live differently than an Atheist.

When someone does not live authentically, we often call this hypocrisy. This word originates from a Greek term, hypokrite, used to describe an actor in the theater, many who wore masks to play a role that was different than who they were. Actors then, as they do now, masterfully become a role that is not authentic to who they truly are, e.g. Anthony Hopkins is a nice person but plays Hannibal Lecter convincingly. He is a hypokrite, but hypocrisy has a negative connotation off-stage. 

Jesus used that Greek term multiple times to describe the Pharisees who would pray to get praise (Matthew 6:5), worship God with their lips but hate him with their hearts (Matthew 7:6) and look perfect on the outside but are evil on the inside (Matthew 23:27-28). Even though Christ warned so strongly against hypocrisy, Christians have always struggled with hypocrisy. Jesus even said to his early disciples, "Why do you call me Lord, Lord, and not do what I say?" (Luke 6:46). This has continued to modern times as Gandhi famously challenged, "I like your Christ; I do not like your Christians. Your Christians are so unlike your Christ."

Many people do not follow a lifestyle that aligns with their ideology due to ignorance (e.g., a Marxist may not know how a Marxist is supposed to live), but Christians are given, in God's word, a guide for living. Additionally, Christians are held to a higher standard, called to live set apart (I Peter 2:9), not conformed to the patterns of this world and transformed by the gospel (Romans 12:2). Unfortunately, there are many examples in both my life and in the life of modern Christians who are conformed to the thinking of the world and who do not look/act differently than the world.

We look similar to our neighbors because we follow common "patterns of this world" that worship the  idols of our time. You can evaluate these idols by asking two questions -- 

  1. What do you love more than anything? 
  2. What do we put our faith in?

If you look at my "neighborhood" we love money above all things, and we put our faith in our bank accounts and future financial security. We love entertainment, primarily sports and put our faith in teams that we follow with religious dedication. We love personal happiness that drives us to pursue recreation, leisure, pleasure, and "me time." We love our families and re-arrange all schedules to allow us to spend time in the pursuit of happiness with them. We put our faith in humanity and technology to solve all the local and global problems. Money, entertainment, happiness, families, and human innovation are not necessarily formal ideologies, but most people live authentically in line with these loves. 

Hedonists who pursue happiness at all costs are living authentically to their ideology. Secular Humanists who look only to humans and our intellect to solve the world's problems are living authentically, Nationalist who put their faith in political leaders and a country's laws/constitution are living authentically to that ideology. Greedy, materialists who are only concerned about making more money and getting more things are living authentically. Non-Christians are actually living authentically. 

I'm not sure about your neighborhood, but in my neighborhood, we all look quite similar because I am a hypocrite. 

Augustine classically framed this conversation by discussing "ordered loves": essentially, if we say that God is the most important love of our life, our life should align with that priority. After that, all other loves are ordered after God.

Do we place God first and strive to live in obedience to His word? If we do, we would look different from our neighbors.

Let us pray that our difference will bring glory to God.

Saturday, September 6, 2025

The Slow, Hard Work of Learning

Educators ... what have we done wrong?

Why are our graduates so dumb and lazy?

I've been working in education for 35 years, and, as Facebook, brutally reminds me, my first students are now in their 50s, so I've helped educate the Millennials and Gen Z. Reflecting on these two generations, they are stereotyped as the Dumbest Generation (Millennials) and the Laziest Generation (Gen Z). That is not a great legacy for my years in education. Of course, stereotypes are not accurate, and I can point to so many former students who are brilliant and industrious, but stereotypes are given for a reason, and I bet most of us can provide examples that affirm these stereotypes. 

While educators are not solely to blame, we should reflect on what we have done to produce these generations.

Let's look at two factors: the Industrial Revolution and the "Easy Button" mentality.

The Industrial Revolution

In the late 19th and early 20th Centuries, the impact of the Industrial Revolution swept through America. Our culture unquestioningly embraced the "good" of speed/efficiency in mass production, and consequently, that bigger is better. American capitalism has flourished during this time, and we are living in, arguably, the most materially wealthy time in history. 

Over the past 100 years, education has also adopted these pillars of the industrial revolution, but what is good for many industries, is bad for education.

Schools have embraced standardization, moving as many students through the assembly line as possible. Students are explicitly and implicitly praised for getting the answer quickly, finishing their test first, and "mastering" content as quickly as possible. In addition, bigger is definitely seen as better in class sizes and school enrollment. However, mass production is counter-productive to learning. 

Research has continuously affirmed that students need personalized instruction, specific feedback, and high levels of student engagement with the teacher and peers. Also, it takes time to learn well. Deep learning involves creating and strengthening neural pathways (schema theory), and that takes preparation, challenge, practice, repetition, and time ... and over the past 100 years, nobody in education seems to have had the patience for meaningful learning.

Was the industrial revolution good for education? We can debate this, but it has produced the dumbest generation. 

The Easy Button Mentality

Compounding this perspective on education is the explosion of technology at the end of the 20th Century. This has morphed the "industrial" perspective to what I call the "easy button" mentality.

Essentially, the easy button mentality believes that it is the role of society to take whatever is difficult and make it easy ... and making things easier is always good. Technology, of course, is the primary tool to make things easier.

One of the first products of this perspective is the television remote control (1950). Clearly, it is too difficult to get off the couch to change a channel, so a remote control is needed. Yes, a remote control is easier, but was that truly good for us? 

Another example is the power leaf blower. It is too difficult to rake leaves and sweep up debris after yard work, so we create a blower to move the debris into the street (or into our neighbor's yard). Operating a leaf blower is definitely easier, but was that truly good for us?

The easy button mentality can be seen in almost every facet of life, including education.

However, it goes against a universal truth, most concisely summarized in fitness jargon: "No pain, no gain."  If I go to the gym and use only the lightest dumbbells or the lowest level on the elliptical machine, I will not grow in strength or cardio-vascular health. In fact, when something becomes too easy for me, I should step up to the next level of weight or resistance in order to continue to grow.

That translates to other areas. If I never push myself outside of my comfort zone socially, I will not grow interpersonally. In fact, another saying re-iterates this: "There is no growth in the comfort zone, and no comfort in the growth zone."

Our brains grow much like our physical muscles do. We need to "work out" our brains and make them hurt. Ben Franklin said, "What hurts, instructs," and he is right. When was the last time your brain hurt because you were thinking so hard? Due the the most pervasive "easy button," our phones, I rarely use my brain for anything. I don't need to recall phone numbers, directions, or random facts; everything is a swipe away.

Yes, everything is easier for our brains, but is that truly good for us?

Ever since John Dewey, our educational system has been student-centered. This means that we have spent 100 years making learning easy for our students. In fact, learning styles (which became popular in education in the 70s-80s) have the premise that students learn easiest by using their dominant learning style: auditory, visual, kinesthetic. Consequently, teachers have spent the past 50 years designing lessons to match the learning style of their students. However, the opposite is true; students learn best when something is presented in one of a student's non-dominant learning styles because it makes the brain work harder. While the myth of learning styles is finally becoming recognized, education continues to make things easier ...

  • Mental math is hard, so we develop more advanced calculators to make it easier.
  • Reading primary sources is hard, so we have created textbook anthologies with secondary excerpts. 
  • Cursive writing or even writing with pencil and paper is hard, so we use the computer to type ... but typing is hard, so we have voice transcribing. 
  • Reading an entire novel is hard, so we have audio books.
  • Completing any academic work is hard, so we use AI to complete assignments for us.
    • ChatGPT Plus was given free to all college students in April and May (2025) because the last few months of the academic year are hard, so let's make it easy for them. 

Instead of student-centered (or learner-centered), we need to be learning-centered. Instead of asking how can we make learning easier for the student, we should be asking how can we best encourage deep learning and brain growth. We know that we learn best when our brains work hard, so making it easier is not learning-centric.

When Apple first showed up and offered free computers to schools in the 1980s, educators across the world accepted them with open arms and much fanfare but without asking if computers were actually good for learning. Today, we are finally asking that question.

Johnathan Haidt, author of The Anxious Generation, has set his research sights on the benefits of any screens in school, and he is finding little evidence that digital devices (of any kind) help learning. In fact, it appears to be making us dumber (The False Promise of Device-Based Education). This aligns with the generational stereotypes of those raised in the digital age of education.

Today, learning is easier for students, but is that truly good for us? 

Looking at these two aspects of our culture ... the Industrial Revolution's impact on education and our current "easy button" mentality, I am not shocked that we've produced the dumbest and laziest generations.

So what should education look like to reverse this trend?  Here are a few quick suggestions ...

1) Differentiation of Learning Styles -- use a wide variety in pedagogy and assessment to hit multiple learning styles (multiple intelligences is a better paradigm). This is done not to cater to the student's dominant learning style, but to ensure we are stretching the student's brain to work in their non-dominant learning styles.

2) Be Learning-Centric -- Identify what classroom activity or homework assignment is best for learning, and require the students to complete that ... even if (especially if) it is hard. Don't allow students to choose their own experience; they will most likely select what is easiest for them, stunting their brain development.

3) Take your time -- Speed does not correlate with deep learning. Resist the industrial revolution concepts of mass production. Carefully design curriculum to utilize what we know about meaningful learning and schema theory. It takes time to build a cognitive foundation, scaffold around the foundation in order to make our brains "sticky" so that students retain new materials. Then, take the time to circle back to previously learned materials in order to solidify meaningful learning.

4) Use Hard Assignments to Develop a Love of God and Others -- Simone Weil in her essay "Reflections on the Right Use of School Studies with a View to the Love of God" claims that doing a complex math problem helps her build attention so that she can pray more intimately and love her neighbor more fully. As she says, "school studies" should help us fulfill the two great commandments to love God and others. (stay tuned for future blogs about this article as I read more from Simone Weil)


As we step into the learning groove of another academic year, slow down and make your students work hard. The slow, hard work of school is best for learning. 

Remember, "what hurts, instructs."