An Ancient Guide to Making Sense

David Anguish

Though he is more associated with the geometry theorem that bears his name, Pythagoras is traditionally known as the first to refer to himself as a “philosopher” (Passmore 1967, 216). He joined others at “the beginning of human attempts … to make sense out of their environment … At that time (approximately 2,700 years ago) … anyone who attempted to provide answers to questions about life was simply a person seeking wisdom, and eventually came to be identified as a person who loves (philo-) wisdom (sophia)” (Troxell and Snyder 1976, 3–4).

Some may find it odd to pair the word “philosophy” with “making sense of things.” Philosophy—capital P—has a reputation in some circles for tedium and obscurity, the pursuits of ivory tower academics who appear more interested in justifying their guild’s existence than in making sense of things. I offer no brief for tedium and obscurity, but find it unfortunate that Philosophy’s press has led some to be dismissive of philosophy—lower case p—considering it a waste of time, and even unchristian. Colossians 2.8 is sometimes cited in defense of this view, but in context, Paul is condemning a certain kind of φιλοσοφίας (philosophias) that’s paired with “empty deceit [κενῆς ἀπάτης, kenēs apatēs] based on human tradition.” He’s responding to some who tried to make sense of the world without acknowledging Christ’s preeminence; he calls them to make Christ the basis of their outlook, the Christ who, he says elsewhere, “became wisdom [σοφία, sophia] from God for us” (1 Cor 1.30). Thankfully, many believers in the first three centuries adopted the positive approach implied in the latter text and “out-thought the world,” helping the Christians overcome the “one [Roman] religion that was pluralism” (Glover 1917, 186–187, 213–217). Others followed suit in succeeding centuries and are counted among history’s leading thinkers.

How useful can philosophy be? Consider the analysis of some of life’s questions by the man Peter Kreeft credits with writing “the greatest of all books of philosophy” (Kreeft 1989, 15). One of his reflections critiques the idea that life is always fair; in truth, it sometimes afflicts the righteous while sparing the wicked, rewarding sinners and punishing saints. He also despairs that heroes and villains meet the same fate, and concludes that nothing ever really changes. Reading his reflections, we aren’t surprised when he depicts life as a drudgery that leads nowhere. Or, to say it in his words, “everything’s futile.” So concludes the Teacher who left us the musings we know as Ecclesiastes.

You would be part of a sizable group if you asked whether he was (a) fair in his conclusion, and (b) informed enough to accurately speak about life now. “After all,” some will say, “he wrote more than two thousand years ago, before the advances of our enlightened world. We’re more aware now, smarter, less prone to credulity than they were. We can control things they could not have imagined.” As one group of self-described “non-theist” thinkers, who “begin with humans, not God” (Kurtz 1973, 16), said it fifty-plus years ago, by

It occurs to us that their confidence in humanity demonstrates one of the Teacher’s most famous statements: “What has been is what will be, and what has been done is what we will be done; there is nothing new under the sun” (Eccl 1.9). We also observe that they could learn from his methodology and conclusion: “under the sun” pursuits are “futile” (הֶבֶל, heḇel; 38 times in Eccl).

“But,” someone replies (again), “he didn’t know what we know; didn’t do the things we can do now.” Specifically, he didn’t have our education systems, our access to opportunities that make life more enjoyable, our financial resources to keep improving the world.

To say that is to confuse form with category. Read again what he did as he tested his premise. He tried wealth and power—finances to make life easy. He tried pleasure—hedonism to fill his senses. And, oh yes, he tried wisdom—education to fill his mind. These are the “labors” of Ecclesiastes (cf. Kreeft 1989, 36–45). Again, and again, and yet again, the Teacher concluded they all are futile.

It’s apparent that, even in our enlightened age, he has yet something to teach us.

Works Cited

Glover, T. R. 1917. The Jesus of History. New York: Association Press; New York Public Library reprint.

Kreeft, Peter. 1989. Three Philosophies of Life. Ignatius Press.

Kurtz, Paul. ed. 1973. Humanist Manifestos I and II. Prometheus Books.

Passmore, John. 1967. “Philosophy.” The Encyclopedia of Philosophy. ed. Paul Edwards. Vol. 6, 216–226. Macmillan Publishing Co., Inc. & The Free Press.

Troxell, Eugene A., and William S. Snyder. 1976. Making Sense of Things: An Invitation to Philosophy. St. Martin’s Press.

All Scripture quotations not otherwise designated are from the CSB. Italics in biblical quotations are added by the author. Permission is granted to reprint original materials with the credit line, “Reprinted from David Anguish, ‘The Berea Page,’ November 3, 2026.”

Because of this month's holiday, only one issue of The Berea Page is published in November. Look for the next issue on December 1st. Have a blessed Thanksgiving!

Contributions in support of my writing ministry (read more here) are appreciated. Click the button below to make a one-time or ongoing gift.

• Clicking the button above will direct you to the College Church of Christ's Giving portal the above button to be directed to the College Church of Christ's Giving portal.
• In the dropdown list labeled "Fund," scroll down and select Anguish Writing Ministry.
• Enter the amount and select the frequency of your gift (one time, monthly, etc.).
• Note: you may give via card or ACH.

Featured from davidanguish.com​

From the Articles, Teaching and Edification page (here), "'When There Are No Words'—Just Be There" (here). Encouraging Hope When Trouble Comes collection

Think about it …

“What is the good of telling ships how to steer so as to avoid collisions if, in fact, they are such crazy old tubs that they cannot be steered at all? What is the good of drawing up, on paper, rules for social behaviour, if we know that, in fact, our greed, cowardice, ill temper, and self-conceit are going to prevent us from keeping them? I do not mean for a moment that we ought not to think, and think hard, about improvements in our social and economic system. What I do mean is that all thinking will be mere moonshine unless we realise that nothing but the courage and unselfishness of individuals is ever going to make any system work properly. It is easy enough to remove the particular kinds of graft or bullying that go on under the present system: but as long as men are twisters or bullies they will find some new way of carrying on the old game under the new system. You cannot make men good by law: and without good men you cannot have a good society.” ~ C. S. Lewis. 1952. Mere Christianity. rev. pb. ed., 1960. Macmillan Publishing Company, 72 Image by Peggy & Marco Lachmann-Anke from Pixabay

Please forward to a friend and invite them to subscribe

To read all archived issues of The Berea Page click here

"May grace and peace be multiplied to you" (1 Peter 1.2),

David

​www.davidanguish.com​