Re: Michael Guillen

From: Rich Blinne <>
Date: Mon Jun 06 2005 - 11:28:24 EDT

You have to go with Guillen's implied definitions. Intellect is the ability
to see natural causes. Spirit is the ability to see non-natural causes.
Stereoscopic faith sees both. Having only IQ or SQ is attenuated. That being
said, I believe you have spotted an inconsistency in the book because
Guillen literally does a four-box map of the variables. If that is not
orthogonality I don't know what is.

On 6/6/05, George Murphy <> wrote:
> Rich -
> "SQ or spiritual quotient which is orthogonal to IQ"? If "orthogonal"
> here means anything like what it does in math then the implication is that
> spirit has nothing to do with intellect. (I.e., the intellectual component
> of spirituality is zero& vice versa.) This doesn't seem consistent with your
> sketch of the book's argument.
> Shalom
> George
> <>
> ----- Original Message -----
> *From:* Rich Blinne <>
> *To:* Randy Isaac <>
> *Cc:*
> *Sent:* Monday, June 06, 2005 10:36 AM
> *Subject:* Re: Michael Guillen
> The book is a mixed bag. The best concept in the book is the idea of SQ or
> spiritual quotient which is orthogonal to IQ. Guillen encourages people to
> have so-called stereoscopic faith encouraging Christians not to eschew
> intellectual efforts. He chides spiritual people who are anti-intellectuals
> and intellectuals who are not spiritual. He also does a good job of
> describing atheism as it lives in the Academy. Guillen's treatment of this
> subject while critical also shows affection.
> When Guillen uses spiritual in the book he means Christianity and at times
> the charismatic variety. This leaves him open to the charge of credulity.
> Add Guillen being used to give intellectual cover to the Raelians several
> years ago and the value of this work as an apologetic to secular scientists
> diminishes somewhat. Thus I suggest the following title: Can People Who
> Believe in God Be Smart? That part succeeds. Given the fact that Guillen is
> skeptical of evolution it might gain some credibility concerning the
> compatibility view amongst anti-Darwinists who subscribe to the warfare
> model.
> In summary, the book isn't perfect but it serves a useful albeit limited
> purpose.
> On 6/5/05, Randy Isaac <> wrote:
> >
> > Have any of you read Michael Guillen's latest book, published in Sept.
> > 2004? My sister saw him on TV this morning and asked what I thought of it
> > but I haven't read it. Are there good reviews of it somewhere? *Can a
> > Smart Person Believe in God?*
> > **
> > Randy
> > <,%20Michael:A1%7E1>
> >
Received on Mon Jun 6 11:29:34 2005

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Mon Jun 06 2005 - 11:29:35 EDT