Comments greatly appreciated!!!
This is only a starting point, and I may not be able to employ it for my actual dissertation, but it is the line of thinking which consumes all of my free thoughts.
This work provides an alternative narrative mode (the Virginia School of Political Economy rather than Marx) for the discussion of Theology and Christian Ethics, particularly the neo-Mennonitism inspired by John Howard Yoder and Stanley Hauerwas.
The politics of theology has never played a major role in American political life, until recently. Historically, the American political system has not been vulnerable to special interest groups. However, as the USG becomes more responsive to special interest politics (as explained by public choice theory in economics and political science) theological factions are also becoming more politically competitive.
Historically, this is not unusual. Theological differences have almost always been politically motivated. I show this is true across the broad changes in Christian theology from 300 AD to today worldwide. Where political institutions are open to manipulation by special interests theological factionism increases.
I then show how this is true through one continuous narrative of a particular denomination.
Finally, I demonstrate how public choice mechanisms explain a church split within one denomination, and within one congregation.
This method demonstrates the universal usefulness of the application of public choice analysis to explain theological shifts. In particular it provides a contrast to the mainstream Marxian narrative.
Public choice theory uncovers the incentives faced by decision makers and suggests that concentrated interests making appeals to decision makers can successfully apply for privileges at the expense of diffused imposition of costs on the rest of a community.
Comments (4)
A possible title: “The Politics of Theology”
Main objective: Use public choice theory to explain Theological Shifts.
This is such a specialized study of thought and application of Economics and Political Science,it very well may take 900 pages to explain the subtle but important differences and progression of thought.
Your fondest critic~
Jessica
I’ve read it over a few times and my head is still spinning a bit. Good luck to you, I’m sure you’ll do great. Did you not want to write on how recycling is the world’s greatest evil? Also, you may be able to use this public choice theory to have the government start paying you to recycle…
Hope you’re doing well.
Brent
Hey guy from one Ph.D to another potential one.
My suggestions are purely pragmatic.
1. Check your major premise. I can disagree with PP2 because It is phrased in a negative. “never phrased” “not been vulnerable”. It is much easier to suggest compare or prove the positive contributions of your theory.
2.Since this has a lot to do with world views, there is a whole lot out there on comparative models.
3.If you are trying for an application or to make this useful to someone, or as a potential model to operationalize it, that is a separate project that you can definitely do, only it is not a dissertation. Do not attempt to do it all in this format or for this purpose. Separate the dissertation effort out and complete it for what it is. A (pain in the butt ) academic exercise designed to contribute to the field of study, hopefully short and to the point. And something that will get you where you want to go. One of the steps to The degree. You can easily get lost if you do not make and stick to this distinction.
The applications and most of the fun stuff are spin offs or articles or books you write later; blogs that you start or publications and efforts, that come after wards… You have the rest of your life for that. I have suffered through too many people who are trying to do it all in one magnum opus. From the start look at this as eating the cabbage and not choking, not making better coleslaw.
Which reminds, me cut the cabbage up into small bites before attempting to eat it. And if you are not passionate about what you are doing why do it?
Dr. Leon Watson
Brent,
Thanks for reading! How’s the landscaping business?
Leon,
Wow, thanks for your comments. You are absolutely right about not forming statements in the negative, good point.
And you are right about this being an application of public choice theory. As such, it may not be appropriate for a dissertation, it depends on whether I can get it approved.
The project is largely a history which challenges Marxist readings of theology and church history and replaces this reading with a public choice narrative. If the evidence fits the work could represent a major expansion of the application of public choice to private associations. This is the cutting edge of public choice theory right now, especially with Peter Leeson’s recent move to Chicago simultaneous to his publication of “The Invisible Hook” (a look at pirates).
It also represents a major challenge to theology, both fundamentalist and progressive. It even pushes Yoder and Hauerwas a little. They tend to go too Marxist in their criticisms of Capitalism.
This work represents an anarcho-capitalist explanation of how power-over mechanisms invaded the church and distracted it from its peculiar mandates.
Magnum Opus it is.
Nathan