Disorientation: How to Go to College Without Losing Your Mind

by Donna Steichen (Editor), Elizabeth Scalia, Eric Metaxas

Every year, thousands of young Catholics leave their homes for higher education at our nation's colleges and universities. Very few realize, however, that from orientation day onward, they will be indoctrinated with a vision of reality that is very different from the values their families hold dear. Sadly, many of our young people will fall prey to one or more of the dominant ideologies ingrained in their college education, ideologies that can lead them away from the Church and, ultimately, their faith in God. Students who are not taught how to think critically or who lack the tools needed to sift through the logic of these positions are easily swayed by the smooth sophistry of the intellectual elite. For this reason, twelve of the top Catholic writers in America, who are professors, priests, journalists, philosophers, and theologians, have come together to dissect the trendy ideas that can lead young Catholics away from the Church. Disorientation is intellectual ammunition for every college student and parent, as it breaks down the history, analyzes the appeal, and debunks the empty promises of wildly popular errors such Edited by John Zmirak (author of The Bad Catholic's Guide to Good Living and Choosing the Right College ), this book is guaranteed to get college students thinking hard about what their professors are telling them, and what they should really believe.

Genres: Education, Christianity, Nonfiction, Cultural, Philosophy

181 pages, Perfect Paperback

First published May 21, 2010

Reviews

[Sarah · Rating 5 out of 5]

I loved it. It was a dose of philosophy for the distracted and is the kind of book I won't have any problem lending, rereading, and talking about. It summarizes exactly what was "wrong" with my college education, and I plan to gift this to every graduate in the future. Even though it's Catholic, I'd recommend it for anyone--the truths it points to are universal. Highly recommended.

[Clare · Rating 5 out of 5]

If only I had read this when I started college. I used Best Things in Life and The Journey: A Spiritual Roadmap for Modern Pilgrims (which are fantastic and hardly 'making do'), but this covers even more topics that I'd never understood as 'isms, though that's clearly what they are.

Young readers without a background in philosophy will need to go slowly, and it would be even better if they could be guided in a group study by someone who can answer their questions. However, even if they don't understand everything the first time, when they hear these ideas at college things will slowly start to make sense, and they'll be far better off than if they never heard this side of the argument.

Detailed contents:

Sentimentalism: an upbeat overemphasis on the inherent goodness of mankind that judges what is good or evil according to how well it accords with our feelings, or the feelings of people we want to impress.

Relativism: the assertion that truths, especially moral truths, have no validity independent of the "values" treasured by the person or society that asserts them.

Hedonism: the belief that the pursuit of pleasure - intellectual, emotional, or physical - and the avoidance of suffering ought to guide human decisions.

Progressivism: or "chronological snobbery," confuses "new" with "true." It also confuses facts with values, by using a factual, chronological term to carry a value meaning. Hence, something "modern," "contemporary," or "current" is "truer," "better," or "more reliable."

Multiculturalism: an anti-Western ideology that urges us to view the achievements of Judaeo-Christian civilisation with a jaundiced eye and to overlook the flaws in other civilisations, in order to redress the results of past injustices. It is the intellectual equivalent of affirmative action quotas.

Anti-Catholicism: as used in this essay, is the belief on the part of other Christians that the Catholic Church has a false gospel, is a force for evil in this world, or (as some say) the "Whore of Babylon" leading people away from the true, "biblical" form of the Christian faith.

Utilitarianism: the ethical theory that pleasure is the greatest good, suffering the greatest evil. Therefore, our actions must be guided by calculating what will bring the most pleasure or least suffering to the largest number, regardless of other considerations.

Consumerism: the contemporary face of avarice, which drives individuals to define themselves and judge their value in terms of material acquisition and the social status that it confers.

Cynicism: an intellectual stance that seeks to debunk the motives of other people and "expose" commonly treasured deals - generally for the sake of making the cynic feel superior to others, or freeing him from the necessity of attaining difficult virtues.

Feminism: an ideological movement that sees women in families as akin to exploited workers in industrial factories: as a "domestic proletariat" that must engage in class struggle within the family rather than the workplace.

Scientism an exaggerated belief in science. Scientism claims that the methods of the modern natural sciences provide our only access to the world and give the only kind of "truth."

Americanism: the tendency to put conformity with American culture and politics before the teachings of the universal Church. (I guess this could go for other countries too)

Marxism: a philosophical system that asserts that "real" explanation of most things that happen in society rests in the unequal relationships of money and/or power, which are inherently unjust and should be remedied by the use of force - either through a violent revolution that will impose equality, or through organising society's "have-nots" to take political power and seize what is "rightly" theirs by means of taxation and regulation.

Modernism: the theological tendency that alters or even rejects unchanging Catholic truths given to us by divine revelation, to adapt the Faith to the perceived needs and preferences of modern man.

www.GoodReadingGuide.com

[Naomi Young · Rating 4 out of 5]

I think my college career might have been far different had I read this book-- but that of course would have required time travel. I'm sure Disorientation was created to prevent the loss of faith and poor moral choices that so often mark the college years of previously devout teenagers.

This book consists of 14 topical essays with an introductory and concluding essay by editor Zmirak. Each essay spotlights an "ism" common to the university environment: Sentimentalism, relativism, hedonism, progressivism, multiculturalism, anti-Catholicism, utilitarianism, consumerism, cynicism, feminism, scientism, Americanism, Marxism, and modernism. The authors describe the philosophy as the reader will discover it in the classroom, describes the flaws in the view, and presents the complementary Catholic teaching. Each chapter concludes with a list of suggested reading; these lists are a blend of classic works and contemporary wisdom.

As with any anthology, the chapters are of uneven quality. Elizabeth Scalia's essay on sentimentalism has turns of phrase that make you want to read them out loud to the nearest person in the room. (This was very frustrating, as I read it in a nearly deserted pizza place late at night.) Eric Brende's "Consumerism" and Mark Shea's "Americanism" will probably do much to erase the impression given in Jeffrey Tucker's "Marxism" that the unfettered free market is ordained by God. An essay by a woman who could articulate what John Paul II called "New Feminism" would be more helpful and more accurate than Donna Steichen's assertion that people who believe Christianity and feminism are fundamentally incompatible.

This would be a good book for discussion groups, FOCUS (Fellowship of Catholic University Students) studies, or just late-night gab sessions over pizza and beer. Press it into the hands of a high school senior you love, and be prepared to shore up the weaker parts of the book with your own perspectives and experience.

[Haley · Rating 2 out of 5]

I didn't finish this book, and I'm not going to give a full review of it because it covers too difficult of topics that I don't want to go into. However, I will say why I was unable to finish it: the book seemed a little over the top. The introduction claims that "none of these ideologies is completely 100 percent wrong," but then the book seems to not specify what about these ideologies could be right. That was my main problem. The book was too negative. I get what it was trying to say, but I can also see the good point of a lot of these movements. Sure, Catholics want to know the aspects of these movements that can conflict with their beliefs, but I also think it's important to realize that all of these movements became so popular because their are positive aspects to them. I wish those positive aspects would be focused on more. One specific example from the book is feminism. The book attacks feminism for being for contraception and pro-choice, but it fails to address the countless other aspects of feminism. I think everyone in this day and age should be able to acknowledge that women are still marginalized at times and that this isn't a good thing. (Even today, women are often paid less than men doing the exact same job, for instance.) You can attack certain parts of feminism as being against Catholic teaching, but I don't think that makes it fair to dismiss feminism as a whole, which is what this book seems to do. This ended up being longer than I had planned, so I don't want to go into detail about any of the other movements covered in this book. I just wish this book had looked at these movements in a way that could both criticize them and acknowledge any positive aspects that they have.

[Robert · Rating 4 out of 5]

This book is directed to high school students (9-12 grades), but it is highly recommended for people of all ages. Each chapter is written by a different individual (philosophers, theologians, sociologists, psychologists, speakers, etc) who each give an insight into a prevalent ideology of our time. Each of the ideologies present a world view that have certain truths and half-truths, and the value of this book comes from how each author is able to convey the dangers of taking any one of these ideologies and making it the over-arching truth of one's life (e.g. Hedonism is the ideology of guiding every single action by the principle of seeking pleasure and avoiding pain. If one were to make this ideology the source of all meaning, though, then there is no dignified view of the value of suffering. In fact, suffering would have no value in a Hedonist's world-view). Read this book if you would like a clear and simple explanation about the many patterns of thought that exist in today's society!

[Julie Davis · Rating 3 out of 5]

A series of essays looking at current philosophical trends that drive modern society and that can send a faithful Catholic off the rails if not identified. This is directed at college students.

This was quite good and should not be confined to college students. My review will go up next week and I'll link then.

[J. · Rating 4 out of 5]

I must confess I wish I had read this book when I was just starting out either on my own intellectual adventures or at least when I started college, how much time I could have saved!

Luckily, I am still relatively young and having once been immersed in the cultural and philosophical Zietgiest [Spirit of the Age] I can say with confidence that this book is probably the best go to book for any young adult to read or to be given the opportunity to read as they go into college, especially if they wish to grown in greater understanding of their Faith as it interacts with the world around them, and so they may grow in a greater Orientation about how 'the world, the flesh, and the devil' (to use spiritual warfare lingo) will attempt to war against them.

I would like to point out however that while the book is overall fair and balanced from each authors perspective, as one grows in deeper understanding of their Faith (i.e. more well-read) one will become aware of each authors particular biases.

For example, I was once an Austro-Libertarian of the Mises School, one of the contributers in this book is Jeffery Tucker who comes from the school, I would be careful however of blurring the lines between the Austro-Libertarian school of thought with Catholic Social Teaching, since some Austro-Libertarian Catholics have felt so inclined to pronounce the Pope as someone who doesn't have the right to give moral guidance in matters of the economy, as Distributists Catholic authors like Christopher Ferrara have pointed out in the past.

I also know of Mark Shea who in this book as he writes a critique against the philosophy of "Americanism" tries to paint up Traditionalist Catholics as mere Monarcho-philes who hate America just as much as the Multiculturalists do, this I find to be a straw-man argument.

Nonetheless the book is overall well-written, highly recommended, and the nuances will become more apparent as one grows in deeper understanding of their Faith. Plus with the recommended reading's provided at the end of each chapter you know you will receive additional support to continue where this book starts off.

[Chad · Rating 4 out of 5]

I stumbled upon this book in a Goodreads review for another book on my shelf, Another Sort of Learning by James V. Schall. The reviewer commented that "This book in union with Another Sort of Learning" would be a powerful combination in keeping young adults from being thoroughly swiped up by the ideological 'education' which the youth are being initiated into via most college campuses today." I am usually wary of broad statements that dismiss the value of the university, but the longer I am at one, the more I realize that there are some things that just don't sit well with me. Probably because I'm isolated from quite a lot of the ideological battles thanks to my position in the engineering department. It was only through an aggressive and politically militant student union and a lecture on micro-aggressions at a TA conference that I realized how much more widespread such thought is in the university.

This book is written by a series of Catholic authors with the intent of giving a primer on the underlying ideologies of the university that are either blatantly promoted or more insidiously advanced as common sense and invisible assumptions. This isn't necessarily a political book, and it doesn't come off as one; but in Chestertonian fashion, it pokes holes in the popular fads of the day, and resists the "spirit of the age." Each essay is dedicated to on of fourteen ideologies defined as follows:

Sentimentalism: an upbeat overemphasis on the inherent goodness of mankind that judges what is good or evil according to how well it accords with our feelings of people we want to impress.

Relativism: the assertion that truths, especially moral truths, have no validity of the "values" treasured by the person or society that asserts them.

Hedonism: the belief that the pursuit of pleasure-- intellectual, emotional, or physical-- and the avoidance of suffering ought to guide human decisions.

Progressivism: aka "chronological snobbery" confuses "new" with "true." It also confuses facts with values, by using a factual, chronological term to carry a value meaning. Hence, something "modern", "contemporary", or "current" is "truer", "better", or "more reliable."

Multiculturalism: an anti-Western ideology that urges us to view the achievements of Judaeo-Christian civilization with a jaundiced eye and to overlook the flaws in other civilizations, in order to redress the results of past injustices. It is the intellectual equivalent of affirmative action quotas.

Anti-Catholocism: the belief on the part of other Christians that the Catholic Church has a false gospel, is a force for evil in this world, or (as some say) the "Whore of Babylon" leading people away from the true, "biblical" form of the Christian faith.

Utilitarianism: the ethical theory that pleasure is the greatest good, suffering the greatest evil. Therefore, our actions must be guided by calculating what will bring the most pleasure or the least suffering to the largest number, regardless of other considerations.

Consumerism: the contemporary face of avarice, which drives individuals to define themselves and judge their values in terms of material acquisition and the social status that it confers

Cynicism: an intellectual stance that seeks to debunk the motives of other people and "expose" commonly treasured ideals-- generally for the sake of making the cynic feel superior to others, or freeing him from the necessity of attaining difficult virtues.

Feminism: an ideological movement that sees women in families as akin to exploited workers in industrial factories: as a "domestic proletariat" that must engage in class struggle within the family rather than the workplace.

Scientism: simply an exaggerated belief in science, it claims that the methods of modern natural sciences provide our only access to the world and give the only kind of "truth."

Americanism: the tendency to put conformity with American culture and politics before the teachings of the universal Church.

Marxism: a philosophical system that asserts that the "real" explanation of most things that happen in society rests in the unequal relationships of money and/or power, which are inherently unjust and should be remedied by the use of force-- either through a violent revolution that will impose equality, or through organizing society's "have-nots" to take political power and seize what is "rightly" theirs by means of taxation and regulation.

Modernism: the theological tendency that alters or even rejects unchanging Catholic truths given to us by divine revelation, to adapt the Faith to the perceived needs and preferences of modern man.

I was familiar with a few of the authors. I have read Eric Metaxas's biography of Dietrich Bonhoeffer, and some of the names like Peter Kreeft and Mark Shea are very familiar. I am also acquainted with many of the authors they cite, including G. K. Chesterton, one of my favorite writers, and John Henry Newman whose Idea of a University I have read (and even managed to quote in my general exam last month!).

I found it very empowering to find authors with views and concerns regarding that modern age that I agree with. I thought these ideas had died with C. S. Lewis and G. K. Chesterton, but they are still alive and well. You just won't find them publicized very well in the modern ideological climate. The book's introduction states:

None of these ideologies is completely, 100 percent wrong. If they were utter, obvious nonsense, then nobody would be taken in by them. Instead, every heresy amounts to a tiny piece of the truth, surgically removed from the rest of reality and grown in a test tube into a giant thumb, or ear, or tongue. When you try to reattach it to the body, it causes all sorts of problems because it throws everything out of balance. That’s what ideologies do, with their fierce, fanatical focus. They narrow our vision, whip up our emotions, and tempt us to throw aside common sense, faith, and finally even logic. They are like intellectual drugs, and, yes, they can be addictive. This book is meant to save you the trouble of ending up in rehab.

There are two analyses in particular that I found very compelling. First, the idea of progressivism as "the aristocracy of the living." Many of today's assumptions go unchallenged and are taken at face value. Old stuff is, at best, boring, at worst barbaric. Kreeft states "progressivists try to tell truth with a clock instead of an argument." "Modern man" has outgrown the superstitions of religion, and his impressive accomplishments in science and technology speak for themselves. This isn't a "liberal" or democrat argument; it's the air we breath, it's just assumed. I found particularly striking his conclusion that

This is actually a mild form of possession. For those who have become possessed by a demon, an evil spirit, an alien, another spirit than their own true self, have lost not only their own identity but even the knowledge that there is a distinction between themselves and their possessing spirit. They are so deeply self-deluded that they sincerely believe that the thoughts emanating from their mind come from within, not from without. This is as true of possession by the Zeitgeist as it is of possession by a demon.

The second essay that added a lot of clarity to current ideologies was Tucker's on Marxism and class warfare. Tucker asserts that many of the oppressed groups of the day-- feminists, multiculturalists, and LGBT groups, got a lot of their ideas and methods from Marx. The juxtaposition of the victims and the oppressors is Marx's contribution to today's dialogue. This zero-sum game, this constant striving for power, also removes the necessity of developing clear arguments, because those who disagree are "trapped in the logic of a privileged class":

As a member of the ruling class who is wedded to bourgeois ways of thinking, Böhm-Bawerk is just not capable of thinking the right away about these things. Because he thinks like a businessman, his mind is impervious to the truth—so there is no point in arguing with him. Instead, you should simply gain power, and then arrest him.

This little book was a pleasure to read, and I added a lot of the books they recommend at the end of each chapter to my reading list. I also couldn't agree more with the advice given at the conclusion of the book:

So here’s my message to students who want to make a difference in the world someday: Sign up for hard-core, serious courses and for the love of God do the reading.

So many people are unaware of the multiplicity of ideas out there, that we get stuck believing whatever those around us believe. Most people today are like sheep, following whatever happens to be entertaining or scandalous on their Facebook feed. Get out there and challenge your beliefs, read something that makes you think.

[Jamie Pauline · Rating 1 out of 5]

Lol, if you hate college so much, why even attend? The sample was more that enough to convey the writers’ dogmatic, anti-intellectual stances.

[Nana · Rating 5 out of 5]

Good

[James Koehler]

wish it included better summaries of the ideas it provided criticism for. it also fell short on being as objective as possible by not including the good things of the ideas. not awful though.