|
|
|
||
|
||||
|
|
|
|||
|
|
||||
|
|
|
|
||
|
||||
|
|
|
|||
|
|
||||
|
|
|||
 |
|||
|
THE TERM 'KNOWLEDGE' means the confident understanding
of a subject with the ability to use it for a specific purpose. One
who obtains a practical education in a field or profession, for example, Imagine a world in which the basic truths of existence are actually shared as innate knowledge by all living creatures. In this idealistic world the source of our creation, or God, and our relationship to Him, reside as common knowledge among all of our species. There would be no need to rely on written scriptures or teachers for this knowledge - it would be part of our being. This is the ultimate knowledge, and is the only knowledge worth pursuing. This knowledge will bring peace and harmony to our world.
The search for existential knowledge is as old as humanity. To have
such knowledge is to know and be certain of one's purpose for existence
and to be at peace with the passing of our physical body.
The Role of Belief in Meaningful Knowledge The conclusion is that we can believe something to be true, but belief in a truth alone does not make something true. Widely accepted beliefs in wrongdoing such as murder or incest are generally accepted as truths. Everyday events provide the clearest truths. If you are able to ride a bicycle, for example, you have knowledge of this capability as a truth and are able to demonstrate that truth any time by actually riding a bicycle. This kind of truth is knowledge because it does not rely on abstract concepts such as right and wrong. Personal experience provides the most solid foundation for truth. Truths leave the realm of knowledge where assumptions, judgment, faith, or deduction from abstract concepts are required. In this light, truth alone never provides meaningful knowledge.
The Role of Faith in Meaningful Knowledge Paradoxically, at the core of the concept of faith is the assumption that reason is irrelevant to faith. Think of that! Here is the logical progression we have made so far:
The role of faith in the search for meaningful knowledge is the key. This raises two critical questions:
Faith is distinguished from belief inasmuch as mere belief does not
constitute faith. Faith is the result of belief and will. The term faith is commonly used in reference to religious beliefs. Many followers of organized religions position their faith as knowledge. To justify their faith, they refer to scriptures that are claimed to be inspired by or even written by God. When they are questioned about an area of their faith, they respond with the appropriate passage from scripture to justify their faith as knowledge. While their apparent faith is quite real, it is not knowledge to anyone who does assume the total divinity of the referenced scriptures. Reliance on written scriptures is an example of epistemology wherein the belief will not pass even basic regression analysis. At the core of this faith is an unsupportable belief. The assumption that the scriptures are the word of God without empirical demonstration undermines the usage of the word faith in this regard. Reliance on written scriptures requires belief, and not faith.
Frequently what is regarded as either belief or truth is based on empirical
experience and/or observation. Observation requires the reliance on
one or more of the body's five senses. Making even this path murky is
that even in the area of perception we frequently disagree on what is
true and not true, or real and not real. What a person may perceive
something to be is subject not only to the body's sensory organs, but
then subsequently subject to the process of that person's interpretive
thought system. Suppose two people are walking down a street together
and a barking dog runs at them from an open gate in a yard. The first
person may see a vicious animal intent on attack. That person becomes
paralyzed with fear and may even flee. They experience symptoms of minor
shock - increased heart rate, hyperventilation, and blind panic. This
physical reaction is very real, triggered by the release of epinephrine
and adrenalin into the circulatory system. So far we have examined what we can base knowledge on. We have considered belief and found belief to be subjective. We have examined truth and found that truth is only valid based on individual experience and cannot become shared knowledge. We have examined belief and truth combined and found still an over dependence on assumption to provide any basis for knowledge. We looked at faith and found faith to be subjective. Finally we have looked at experience and even found personal experience highly subjective. We might well ask at this point whether true shared knowledge is even possible. As stated earlier, knowledge is the confident understanding of a subject with the ability to use it for a specific purpose. How, then, do we arrive at ultimate shared knowledge of our existence and creator? Before we look at the possible sources of shared knowledge it is important to consider what prevents us from having that knowledge in our present lives. First on this list are our perceptions.
Reliance on Physical Sight Check
back next month for the conclusion © David Williams, 2008 |
|||
 |
|||
|
ABOUT THE AUTHOR
|
|||
is able to use that education in the performance if their work. A surgeon
has sufficient knowledge of human physiology and surgery techniques
to perform surgeries and heal the sick. This is knowledge at a practical
level. If we search for knowledge of significant existential questions
such as a meaning or purpose to life or the nature of God, we find little
confident understanding and even less practical ability to apply existential
knowledge to a specific purpose. From a religious perspective, the Jewish
and Christian Bibles, Muslim Qur'an, and Hindu Sruti and Smriti contain
the deeper existential knowledge of the authors. Still, scripture does
not necessarily impart knowledge to the reader or practitioner of a
religion. The existence of existential knowledge in print does not at
all implicate the absorption of that knowledge by the reader. For every
ten people who read the Bible, for example, there will be at least five
interpretations of the contents. Many readers, in fact, will miss entirely
the deeper existential content in the bible, relying instead on the
perceived significance of supposed historical events to provide guidance.
Referring back to the definition of knowledge, scripture does not necessarily
impart a "confident understanding of a subject with the ability
to use it for a specific purpose." Actual existential knowledge
is not at all widespread.
Uncertainty
is the opposite of knowledge. Uncertainty is a symptom of separation
and is at the root of all problems facing humanity. Uncertainty is the
result of the split in our minds between our existence as eternal spiritual
beings and our temporary existence in a physical body. Most people go
through their entire lives with tremendous uncertainty as a direct result
of this split in their minds. We are uncertain about the future; we
are uncertain about our relationships; we are uncertain about our finances;
we are uncertain about our death; we are uncertain about our neighbors;
and, most importantly, we are uncertain about God. The root of all this
uncertainty is lack of true knowledge. Meaningful existential knowledge,
it can be deduced, is the solution for the unsettled soul and an unsettled
world. Is it possible to have knowledge and to eliminate uncertainty?
Certain beliefs are supported by research, resulting in factual data
that can be perceived as knowledge. Even here, though, we must assume
the research is unbiased before we are to accept the results and believe
them. The assumption of no bias in the process of conducting research
is impossible to make. There is always room for skeptical responses
to the purported knowledge of research and science. In short, belief
is a mental state where we assume that something is true based on perception
or thought whether it is in fact true or false. If the assumptions upon
which the belief is based are untrue, then the belief is false - however
it is still a belief. Belief is subjective. A belief is not knowledge,
but belief is necessary for knowledge to exist. So how do we know whether
something is true so that we can believe it?
Skeptics believe that because of the regress problem no knowledge actually
exists. It is generally accepted by philosophers that true knowledge
beyond the level of individual experience relies on a foundational belief
that is either justified by wide acceptance of an unsupported belief,
or is based on an infallible belief. Thusly we must conclude that all
shared knowledge, at some point, required a leap of faith to move from
truth/belief concepts to actual knowledge. Faith, then, is an important
foundation stone of knowledge.
When a person engages in behavior (spurred by will) as the result of
a belief, then the belief becomes faith. As an example, imagine standing
at the rim of a deep gorge with the goal of crossing to the other side.
The only means available to cross is a rickety foot bridge. You will
either believe that the bridge will hold your weight and allow safe
passage to the other side, or you will believe that it will not. Simply
believing one or the other does not require faith. Faith enters the
picture when you decide that the bridge will hold your weight, and you
cross the gorge on the bridge. In crossing the gorge on the bridge you
believed that the bridge was safe and your will caused you to cross
on it. The act of actually crossing the bridge was the result of faith
- belief and will.
To this person the danger is very real. The second person may see a
big, happy dog eager for affection and attention. This person may get
down on one knee and welcome the dog into their arms. To this person,
the meeting with the dog is a joyous event. To the second person, this
experience is also very real. Their brain releases dopamine and the
feeling of physical joy is real. In both cases, the reactions to the
dog were based on the same input from the body's sense organs, and subsequent
mental processing within the individuals' thought systems. And yet the
same event was experience as two wildly differing experiences. Perception
always requires interpretation. What one person 'knew' as truth was
not true to the other. It is obvious, then, that we cannot rely on perceptions
to bring us closer to knowledge.