(Epistemology: the study of how to be confident about the things we think we know).
The validity of what we know (or more accurately what we believe we know) is greatly affected by:
- the soundness of our general beliefs and specific presuppositions
- the effect of our prejudices
- our general perceptiveness
- the accuracy of our observations
- the accuracy of our reasoning
High in that list are our beliefs and prejudices because they have a profound effect on the validity of what we regard as knowledge. That is illustrated by the diagram below, together with the following much overlooked truth.
The beliefs we choose as a basis for our reasoning will, as long as we can reason logically, pre-determine our conclusions. Assuming we reason logically, our conclusions are set in concrete when we choose our initial beliefs – even though at the time of choosing those beliefs we may have no idea what our conclusions will be.
Click to see the animated diagram (1 minute )
How do we choose the right initial beliefs? Often there are myriads of beliefs that could be starting points. Faulty beliefs lead to faulty conclusions (poor fruit), but sound beliefs lead to conclusions that match reality (good fruit).
For example, when people believed they ‘knew’ that the earth was flat:
- their observations were accurate within the limits of their travel experience and inability to view the earth from space
- their reasoning was sound enough – even their fear of falling off ‘the edge’ was reasonable given their experiences of falling off other flat surfaces
- but their ‘knowledge’ turned out to be a faulty belief when greater exploration showed they had prejudged the issue on limited data
What this example shows is that human ‘knowledge’ is imperfect and often turns out not to be knowledge, but a faulty belief. Science relies on imperfect human observation and measurement to gain knowledge. So science is not a search for ‘truth.’ It is a search for the most likely explanation given the state of knowledge at that time.
A further complication is that the more profound and fundamental matters, like the five aspects of a worldview, are not amenable to the scientific method. It was not possible, for example, for humans to observe the origin of the universe, so theories about it cannot be tested and demonstrated by repeatable experiments.
The problem is that we base all our thinking on these profound worldview beliefs that are scientifically non-testable. That is one reason why so many humans have looked to an ultimate creator to give them perfect knowledge.
Academic philosophers prefer to call worldview beliefs presuppositions – probably because it sounds less religious. The extent to which our beliefs about such fundamental matters reflect reality, determines the validity of our knowledge. In practice, this means that human knowledge is a set of beliefs that seem at present to correspond to reality.
Thus, the line between human knowledge and belief is blurred. Despite that flaw, knowledge gained by careful scientific reasoning based on presuppositions that seem reasonable, solves many practical problems and drives technological progress.
The connection between knowledge and belief is well illustrated by the way people discovered that the earth was not flat. Until then, it had seemed reasonable that a flat earth would end somewhere. Straying too far might mean falling off the edge. That changed after the bible became widely accessible.
Scientists from Copernicus to Newton became convinced by reading the bible that a highly intelligent God had created an ordered universe, which could be understood through observation and reason. The bible told believers to take dominion over the earth and it also calmed their fear of falling off the edge by assuring them of eternal life. Those beliefs fuelled the great age of exploration and led to the discovery that the earth is an oblate spheroid.
In summary, conclusions are based on reasoning and reasoning is based on beliefs called presuppositions. Beliefs are the roots of our reasoning and our conclusions are the fruits.
At the very least we should test the roots by their fruits – we should test whether our beliefs (not just our reasoning) lead to conclusions that match the created reality. Jesus put it succinctly in a different context: “by their fruits you shall know them.”
Surprisingly few people submit their beliefs to Jesus’ fruit inspector test. We will use that test as we trace the roots of modern epistemologies.
To check out the next article in this sequence click here
Recent Comments