Describing the Dances

It has come to my attention that many people are somewhat ignorant of what kinds of feelings different kinds of dances conjure up. For one reason or another, misunderstandings of the overall feel of most dance styles is quite prevalent. Among many that I am acquainted with, the sexual feel of some forms of modern club music is the reigning stereotype of dance in general. To correct this somewhat unfair generalization, I will here undertake to describe the feel of dance styles for anyone who is interested. I do not claim to be a dance scholar, but these are observations that I have found to be generally true.

Classical Dance Styles: Older dance styles, like French baroque steps and medieval court dances, are generally concerned with celebrating reason and music. They are highly structured to the rhythmic patterns of the music and are often only partially partner dances. The point is to increase the impact of the music through the visual arts.

Swing Dance: The swing dance style is a style that is characteristically flirtatious. It is a social dance style, meaning that to dance with the same partner more than twice consequentially would be considered rude. The idea is to socialize and do general, fun flirting with many people.

Ballroom Dance: Generally ballroom dance styles are more concerned with romance. They are generally much more passionate. It is also common to choose one partner to dance with, although social dancing may also occur in these settings. The point is, the ballroom dance is less about showiness and fun than swing dance and is more concerned with seriousness, passion, and the connection between the partners (although these are not as a rule absent from swing dance environments. I simply speak for the most common feelings in these environments).

Club Dancing: Essentially what I have observed of club dancing environments is that they are much more concerned with sexuality. Dancing is intended to be "sexy" in these kinds of settings. The purpose of a club is usually to attract single people that will hook up there. So the dancing undertaken here is of an explicitly sexual nature in order for individuals to attract others.

So, this is not an exhaustive list, but I think it shows a good continuum and may prompt you to reexamine dancing if you have been stereotyping it based on any of these styles. Truth is, there's something for everyone; you just have to find what's right for you.

Science and Empiricism

So, I've just finished a science class entitled "Scientific Discoveries and Paradigm Shifts." In this class we studied a lot about scientific truth and religion, specifically Christianity. Approaching science from a Christian perspective is a difficult concept for most people to envision, but we managed to do so.

One of the books that we read was Thomas Kuhn's classic The Structure of Scientific Revolutions, which essentially argued that science progresses by "revolutions" that function much the same as political revolutions with different sides, times of confusion and conflict, and a clear winner. But this approach seems to me to limit science's defining characteristic: its empiricism.

Empiricism is basically the tenet that the senses are used to formulate theories. Science works within a realm of empiricism. It must observe and interpret the data taken in with the five senses. To say that science must overcome deception of the senses and interpret the truth regardless of what is perceived is asking it to do more than it can do. The realm beyond the empirical is the realm for the humanities, philosophy, religion, arts, etc.

Kuhn's model seems to be an undue placement of the assumptions of philosophical process onto an empirically based system of thought. No wonder so many scientists are uneasy with Kuhn's ideas. While his understanding of revolutionary, argumentative revolutions holds true in philosophy, religion, etc., it is not well-suited to the environment of science, where empirical observation is the basis for accuracy.

So if we accept this understanding of science, then we can easily see that there is no threat to Christian belief from science, no matter how far it goes. They work within differing realms of proof and truth. It simply is beyond the scope of science to prove the existence of God one way or the other, much as it is beyond the scope of religion to describe the physical structure of the universe. As theologians, that is not our purpose; our purpose is to understand God. I am willing to, as a student of religion, allow scientists to examine their realm of inquiry as long as I am free to examine mine.

Kingdom People's Christmas Giveaway

You should definitely check out Trevin Wax's Christmas giveaway at his blog, Kingdom People. He is giving away all his favorite books for the year as well as an ESV study Bible. You should definitely subscribe to his blog and check out this offer.

The books he is giving away are:
1. THE REASON FOR GOD - Tim Keller
#2. CULTURE MAKING - Andy Crouch
#3. SURPRISED BY HOPE - N.T. Wright
#4. WHY WE’RE NOT EMERGENT - Kevin DeYoung & Ted Kluck
#5. HOW PEOPLE CHANGE - Timothy Lane & Paul David Tripp
#6. THE BIG PICTURE STORY BIBLE -David Helm & Gail Schoonmaker
#7. JESUS MADE IN AMERICA - Stephen Nichols
#8. RESIDENT ALIENS - Stanley Hauerwas & Will Willimon
#9. WORSHIP MATTERS - Bob Kauflin
#10. The Sermon on the Mount through the Centuries - Jeffrey Greenman, Timothy Larsen, and Stephen Spencer