Archive for the ‘epistemology’ Category:
The Seminarian Wager
We have seen discussed on several different blogs Pascal’s Wager. The contemporary atheist/agnostic response has been to generate their own version, or a “De-Conversion Wager” (it’s on the side-bar, scroll down a bit to read it). In each of these Wagers there are strong points and weak points to the logic behind them. So in our desire to affirm the strengths and challenge the weaknesses, we have come up with our very own “Seminarian Wager.” While this is far from a final product (the language of it may get massaged around a bit), at the very least the concept should come through. Without further ado, our wager: Read more »
Epistemology and the Nature of Scripture
I once read in a book by a Christian author that he had no use for the “red letter Bible” (the ones that have all of Jesus’ words in red) because “every word in the Bible is from God!” I used to think along these lines. I thought God had dictated the Bible to the authors, making God the real author. But is this view is really necessary for the Bible to be considered true, and does it really matter?
Certainly the Bible is of vital importance. After all, through it we come to know God made the world and everything in it. We come to know that mankind blundered and became corrupt, and thus also corrupted creation. We also come to know that Jesus came into the world to redeem it and will in the end be victorious. The Bible is certainly important, but is every word in it literally a word from the mouth of God?
Practical Epistemology
I know what you’re thinking.
“How can a post on epistemology be practical?” After all, isn’t philosophy only useful in ivory towers? I think this has been a major flaw in philosophical thought for many people. Philosophy has no value if it is not lived out; if it does not affect the way we live our lives. And let’s face it, a lot of us like to make statements in papers, in posts, or commenting on blogs that just aren’t livable.
A philosophy must be lived out. If I argue that no knowledge is possible, I need to live that idea out (otherwise I am a hypocrite). If I believe there is a God who made the world, but that God has stepped back and is no longer involved, I need to live that out. If I believe there is a God who is involved in the world, I should probably figure out how he is involved and act upon that.
Why Do I Care?
In a conversation on De-Conversion, Pat (comment #15) said
“I would like to see a post on your blog as to why someone would follow God.”
This is a very good question and one that needs to be asked by Christians and non-Christians alike, but often goes unaddressed in Christian circles. I will endeavor to provide a generic answer to the question here. However, before we can start to answer why someone would follow God, there are a lot of underlying assumptions about God and our knowledge of Him that we must first address. By doing so not only will we all be on the same page regarding certain terms and concepts, but we will be able to follow the logic used (hopefully) in answering this question from start to finish. Read more »
The Gospel and “Religious Experiences”
During chapel recently on my campus, I witnessed something truly religious.
Our speaker sculpted a head of Jesus while telling of his betrayal (with a little bit of theatrics and exaggerations). Then he explained how Jesus was beaten and crucified. He thrust a crown of thorns on the clay Jesus’ head and sprinkled it fake blood. It was meant to evoke a highly emotional response, and it did. As he brought up a pianist to play some music in the background as he made the altar call. One young female briskly strode to the front of the auditorium and began uncontrollably weeping. The speaker continued to call people forth to have an experience. Then this young woman started screaming, at the top of her lungs. I could not make out exactly what she was saying. She continued for a few minutes saying the same two or three words over and over again. The speaker was pleased, and affirmed her experience as true.
Mistakes in Knowing
In Brad’s last post you learned of my apparent run in with the mob (thanks Brad), but I would like to ask upon what epistemology can we even know that (just kidding)? That got me thinking, what if someone really believed the mafia had kidnapped me on the basis of Brad’s post? And how does that apply to epistemology? Mistakes in sense perception and reason happen all the time.
In Men in Black, Will Smith learns, totally contrary to what Will Smith believed, that man is not alone in the universe. Tommy Lee Jones challenges Will Smith saying, “a thousand years ago everybody knew as a fact, that the earth was the center of the universe. Five hundred years ago, everybody knew that the Earth was flat, and fifteen minutes ago, you knew that humans were alone on it. Imagine what you’ll know tomorrow.” So why do mistakes happen in our knowledge? Read more »
Magic Eye
Disclaimer: this post is an explanation of Ether Meek’s thesis in her book Longing to Know. Most of the examples are taken from this book as well.
I have dealt with knowing in my two earlier posts about the need for certainty and the three epistemic options. Meek offers this new definition: “Knowing is the responsible human struggle to rely on clues, to focus on a coherent pattern, and submit to its reality.”
Meek argues that knowing is a three step process. First, we look at clues. Then we struggle to looks through the clues, and finally we integrate the clues. Confusing? Let’s look at an example. Think of those “magic eyes.” One is shown above. You are supposed to look at this 2D image and somehow you are able to see something in 3D. Knowing is like coming to see this 3D image. We are given a list of clues to how to see this image (http://www.magiceye.com/faq_example.htm). Then we try to do it ourselves. For the longest time I couldn’t get the stupid thing Read more »
