Contra

Walking down the street having a boisterous shotuing match is a rare thing for me. But at least one good idea came out of it. I posed a deceptively simple question: "who would win in a (metaphorical) fight: Pope John Paul II or legendary German chemist Fritz Haber?" It might take a while to explore the full (and ridiculous) ramifications of this notion, so once again I'm asking the reader to bear with me as I approach the matter at hand in a roundabout, meandering way.

I suppose it comes down to one's belief about what rules the world, how the world works, what ought to rule the world, and whether might makes right. I need to explain that. The Pope has the faith and belief of billions of Catholics, living and dead, that there is a world beyond this one, and that justice in this world is in a sense fixed by what awaits in the next. In contrast we have the materialist, who defended the use of poison gas in the trenches of the western front (read the article) as "death is death", and who, while living to the best of his ability, came to a dispirited and ironic end and wasted away to nothing. Offered this choice, even I want the Pope to win. But there's the litte matter of harsh reality, which we need to face, which we need to peer at unblinkingly. Only then can we see what's at the end of every fork, so to speak. And, contrary to hopes, this will not set anyone free or put anyone at peace. But it will allow one to manage a little better. Realizing that the world is a scary place will reduce temper tantrums upon being treated unfairly.

Consider: "Dante once said that the hottest places in hell are reserved for those who in a period of moral crisis maintain their neutrality. I took the view opposing him on almost everything, but he--and his God--can't hold moral neutrality against me."