Sherlock Holmes, the Religion of Opinion, and The Joy of Returning Home

[Inspector Baynes]

SHERLOCK HOLMES,
THE RELIGION OF OPINION
And The Joy Of Returning Home

“I feel better now, and I will put the facts before you as shortly and yet as clearly as I can." 
                                                                                              Alexander Holder, (Beryl Coronet)

A quick word on the three headings within the title above to begin.

First, “Sherlock Holmes.” A name. Yet just to speak it brings images of calculation, reason, and clear thinking to mind—even to those for whom he exists only as a peripheral figure. For those who know him well it personifies and draws forth far more. Regarding him then, we require no further introduction or explanation to embark on the issue at hand.

     Next, “The Religion of Opinion (TRoO).”  Is this a term familiar to us? Perhaps not. It is my own origination driven by sad reality, defining the behaviors (idolatries) of our world today.
    As with all others, “TRoO” has its ‘doctrinal statement.’ It reads:  “This is my opinion. It is the only one there is. It may have little or no basis, but that’s irrelevant. If you differ, you’re wrong. Don’t give me facts or alternatives. You’re just wrong. You will agree with mine or you’re inadequate and deficient, and I’m happy to tell you so!” 
     When one is held in the sway of TRoO’s doctrine, no reasoning, no avenue, no word or fact exists able to penetrate the adherent’s armor. “The Religion” is in place. The irresistible force and the immovable object have inseparably amalgamated as an impregnable, unassailable unit.

 

Finally, “The Joy of Returning Home.” How is this connected?  Well, we shall see how it ties in at the end.                       

“Oh, my God!” I gasped. “What is it? What does it mean?”
                                   Watson, (Hound of the Baskervilles)
 

      Indeed. Where am I going with all this? Let’s plunge ahead.

      Some of you reading know this writer was for many years a member of The Sound of the Baskervilles.  I’ll be bold enough to say a somewhat active and relatively studious one, with no desire for, or inkling, things would be otherwise. It took a great deal to move me away from the SOBs to  take up other essential matters—and to be gone for quite a long time.

The following years were devoted to study of Greek and Hebrew, editing in a lexicon of words for an in-depth language study tool, then providing recommendations for rendering the Greek in English for a new Bible translation.  Training multiple groups here and abroad in use of the study tool mentioned above followed.

Completing the above, more years passing with some authors’ works edited and a desire forty years delayed realized; to begin study of all the works of J.R.R. Tolkien in depth.

We come to the issue (finally)! Through these last twenty and more years, in every arena, under every circumstance, everywhere, regardless of with whom—while watching the world unfold and interact around me, The Religion of Opinion has slowly but incontrovertibly become the sole tool being used to express and conduct human communication.  

Face to face. Email. Phone. News. Zoom. Social platforms (Facebook the worst). Forums. Interactions in religious spheres. Simple discussions regarding word definition, meaning and application—it does not matter. Our interaction as a species is characterized exclusively by The Religion of Opinion, as though some real power and effective result pertains thereto.  No environment escapes the hysteria of ‘needing to be right’, and ‘having (forcing) everyone to agree with ME,’ regardless of facts. Facts aren’t even sought now, being irrelevant to the Doctrine. Thinking is kidnapped, chained, and hidden from view. 

“He had to seal his mouth on the subject, however, for to express an
unorthodox opinion was a dangerous matter in those days,,,”
                                                                   Watson writing: (Study in Scarlet)

      We no longer ‘seal our mouths.’

     The Religion of Opinion was limited in former days, constrained by truths, isolated to what were generally termed ‘fanatic’ or ‘deceived’ individuals, groups, or organizations. It was not the ‘rule’ by which most lived. 

We desperately need to learn again what has been lost. The Religion’s results are inherently dangerous; quite capable of sinking the world in catastrophe.

The question before us; is thinking irretrievably lost, or can it be released from its bondage and reintegrated into people’s minds and lives.

      We used to understand ‘opinion’—what it was and what it could do—and we sought it out. We incorporated it into our being as a valuable part of learning, and so ultimately, right thinking.  We were neither afraid of receiving it, nor fearful of sharing it. We were, in a word, more like Sherlock Holmes and his associates.

“If you are unable to come I shall give you fuller details, and would esteem
it a great kindness if you would favour me with your opinion.”
                                                     Tobias Gregson:  (Study in Scarlet)

      An opinion shared was a “great kindness.” something used for improvement and springing forward into greater understanding.  Now it is Thor’s hammer under which we will suffer greatly should we disagree.

      Sherlock Holmes is, of course, the foremost antidote to The Religion of Opinion.  No quick conclusions from him. No ‘digging in the heels’ in the face of evidence and fact.  No refusal to listen, receive, and evaluate.  He is possessed of a full understanding of both the meaning, and the value, of opinion (though perhaps not always as complimentary toward the one sharing as might be wished.)   

“Oh, you must not let me influence you in any way. I suggest that you go on your line and
                          I on mine. We can compare notes afterwards, and each will supplement the other.”                  
                                                                                               Sherlock to Lestrade, (Six Napoleans)
 

“Not at all. I am glad to have a friend with whom I can discuss my results.”
Sherlock to Watson, (Blue Carbuncle)

Yet Holmes also does not hold any misconceptions about his species, and stays alert for the obvious, willing to give a nudge down the channels to improvement as needed.

                             “You are right,” said Holmes demurely; “you do find it very hard to tackle the facts.”
                                                                           Holmes to Lestrade:  (Boscomb Valley)

I daresay my time with Mr. Holmes has been the bedrock holding me firm, the superstructure through which I maintained my involvements with others, and the sustenance from which I drew strength while observing the myriad events unfolding around me through these last few decades.

He speaks truly; we are unwise to ignore his example and advice.  Humanity may currently feel it wants to build the world based on the quagmire of opinion fed it daily from every direction, but its end will not be good for the species. 

Whence comes our assurance in this world, now and ever?
 

“You are not quite in possession of the facts yet…”  (Sign of Four)

His quiet self-confident manner convinced me that he had already formed
a theory which explained all the facts,  (Study in Scarlet)

“By the method of exclusion, I had arrived at this result, for
no other hypothesis would meet the facts.”  (Study in Scarlet)

“It is the only hypothesis which covers the facts.”  (Sign of Four)

“It is a capital mistake to theorize before you have all the evidence.
It biases the judgment.”  (Study in Scarlet)

      The Religion of Opinion will have no involvements with evidence or facts.

      We come now to the last point noted at the beginning of this monograph—The Joy of Returning Home.
      My long journey and battle with The Religion of Opinion has been exhausting.  I have remained steadfast in pursuit of bringing calm, peace, and reason to discussions everywhere, to the extent possible and often beyond. I have not bowed to The Religion of Opinion and its tenets regardless of pressure to adhere to the norms of our day in history.

Indeed, returning to The Sound of the Baskervilles and the family comprising it brings great joy. It’s a return to a peaceful place of renewed involvements in needful things, and an expectation of appreciation for the mental and emotional gifts and pleasures provided unknowingly by others who grasp the true power, place and position of fact, theory, and most of all opinion, in this world.  Those people who rightly know the spheres within which each concept corporately and severally revolves and applies, and how to assess and address them consistent with their proper venues and impacts within the universe.
      Here we can be mutually refreshed by discussion for discussion’s sake, empowered by reasoning observed by and benefiting all, and challenged to take the security, sanity, and proper perspective such involvements provide into a world desperately needing to ‘Think Like Sherlock.’ (This book, whose title I have employed, may have a different focus, yet one might hope it produces somewhat the same result nonetheless.)

Holmes once said “Good old Watson! You are the one fixed point in a changing age.” There are those who say he is wrong; he is himself the ‘one fixed point’ for us all. 
      I personally opine we can neither conceive of, nor relate to, Holmes without Watson, nor of them without the whole world they still revolve in and continue to stabilize so well for so many.

Of the world of Sherlock Holmes, it cannot be said “the investment exceeds the reward.”  The reward is too great to fathom.

Lloyd R. Hedberg Jr.
Inspector Baynes
12/20/2022

[Carol the Dabbler]

Hello, Inspector.  I have not yet read your complete document, so this is just a preliminary comment:  I assume you wrote this piece primarily for one of the Holmes-related publications.  Some minor tweaking would be helpful here, because even though many people on this forum are somewhat familiar with Doyle's original stories (having perhaps read a few of them, or having watched the Jeremy Brett adaptations), most of us are not serious Holmes buffs to the extent that we know the official four-letter title abbreviations.  Therefore it would be helpful if you would use the most significant portion of the full title (e.g., "Beryl Coronet" for "The Adventure of the Beryl Coronet").  That way, if we're not familiar with the story, we can readily look it up.

Having skimmed the first part of what you wrote, I must say that so far I agree wholeheartedly!

 

[Inspector Baynes]

12 hours ago, Carol the Dabbler said:

I assume you wrote this piece primarily for one of the Holmes-related publications. 

Yes.

12 hours ago, Carol the Dabbler said:

minor tweaking would be helpful here

I'll deal with this, and remember it going forward. 
Tried to make the changes but destroyed the formatting in the process.
Will tackle it again soon.

[Carol the Dabbler]

13 minutes ago, Inspector Baynes said:

Tried to make the changes but destroyed the formatting in the process.

That's a familiar feeling -- you have my sympathy!