Episode 6

The Ways of Knowing (Epistemology according to the Four Great Worldviews)

Can we actually know the truth? And if so, how?

This episode explores how the four great worldviews answer those questions.

Transcript
Speaker:

Today, we are looking at

the four worldviews and

2

:

discussing the philosophical

category called epistemology.

3

:

That's a big word.

4

:

Yeah.

5

:

Isn't that a fun word?

6

:

Yeah.

7

:

What's it mean?

8

:

I mean, don't you just get excited

each day saying, I wonder if I can

9

:

learn about epistemology today?

10

:

I, I don't.

11

:

One of the reasons we're Because

I don't know what it means.

12

:

One of the reasons we want to do this

through the lens of the four world views

13

:

is because it makes it more clear, I

think, and I think more interesting

14

:

to look at each of the categories,

rather than just saying, OK, we're

15

:

going to have a podcast talking about

epistemology or several episodes.

16

:

So, yeah, we're going to look at the

four worldviews in terms of epistemology.

17

:

What would they teach about

epistemology, for the most part?

18

:

Cool.

19

:

Cool.

20

:

So what does it mean?

21

:

Oh, sorry.

22

:

No, you're good.

23

:

It just means the study of knowledge.

24

:

And again, like most things,

it comes from, two Greek

25

:

words, knowledge and study.

26

:

so it's a study about how we know

things and whether we can know things.

27

:

So those are the two main questions.

28

:

Can we know things?

29

:

And what are the right

ways to know things?

30

:

And, part of that then is

going to be logic as well.

31

:

So logic fits in to epistemology because

it deals with how we know things.

32

:

That's one way of knowing things.

33

:

So why, why is this such a big,

important thing to talk about?

34

:

This is crucial to us because we are

beings who act upon our knowledge, but we

35

:

also have to think about what that means.

36

:

Can we act on our knowledge?

37

:

Can we actually have

that kind of knowledge?

38

:

And we live in a culture, especially

now, where many more people are

39

:

saying, no, you cannot know truth.

40

:

you cannot know objective truth.

41

:

And we are also living in a time

and culture where people who would

42

:

not say that are elevating other

decision making factors like will,

43

:

value, beauty over intellect and

logic and the ways of knowing.

44

:

So it's important because it's

something we all do, but what philosophy

45

:

tries to do is to get us to think

about that in a reflective way.

46

:

Gotcha.

47

:

Gotcha.

48

:

So what are your goals for

this discussion here then?

49

:

the goals for the discussion

are primarily to understand how

50

:

each of the four world views.

51

:

Would answer the basic

questions of epistemology.

52

:

Can we know and how can we

know and then through that?

53

:

we understand a little bit more

about the constitute of epistemology

54

:

But more importantly we're able to

evaluate those four worldviews a

55

:

little bit more clearly So that's the

ultimate goal is that we can say all

56

:

right out of these four worldviews.

57

:

This one seems to make the most sense

Intellectually, so It has the most

58

:

coherence, the parts fit together,

it doesn't have self contradiction,

59

:

it has the most correspondence with

reality, and it's the most livable.

60

:

So those three criteria we've talked

about before, coherence, correspondence

61

:

to reality, and livability.

62

:

Yeah, and that's some good criteria,

so I appreciate that, shall we go

63

:

ahead and get started in, in these?

64

:

Yeah, let's do it.

65

:

So let's talk about monotheism.

66

:

And again, if you haven't listened to the

episodes before, monotheism, sometimes

67

:

shortened to theism, is the belief

in one God who created the universe.

68

:

the main variations of that are

Christianity, Judaism, and Islam.

69

:

Now what do they have in common?

70

:

What makes all three of them, even

though they're different religions, a

71

:

common worldview is that they answer

questions about these categories,

72

:

like epistemology, in a similar way.

73

:

They would say two things.

74

:

First, yes, you can know truth.

75

:

The human mind is able to rationally

understand the world that we are in.

76

:

We may not know all the facts about

everything, but the human mind is the

77

:

right instrument to understand reality.

78

:

It fundamentally works.

79

:

Now, obviously, not every mind works.

80

:

It doesn't work to the furthest extent.

81

:

We can't maybe solve everything

but we can have true knowledge

82

:

about the questions we're asking.

83

:

For example, is there a God?

84

:

What should we do?

85

:

What is beautiful?

86

:

What is right?

87

:

Those kinds of questions we

can have true knowledge about.

88

:

So all of them would say yes, we can

know objective truth about important And

89

:

even metaphysical concepts, metaphysics,

just meaning the things that go beyond

90

:

this physical world that we're in.

91

:

And so the follow up question

there is, okay, so how can we know?

92

:

Right.

93

:

I think most people in this,

tradition or this worldview are

94

:

going to give primarily four answers.

95

:

One is reason.

96

:

So reason or rationality, we

value that within this worldview.

97

:

And this is a little bit more

distinctive, is the idea of revelation.

98

:

Revelation like the book of the Bible?

99

:

Uh, no, it's not.

100

:

Actually, let's come back

to the definition and I'll,

101

:

let me give the other two.

102

:

Okay.

103

:

Reason, revelation, experience.

104

:

So just what we see with our,

senses, what we experience in

105

:

this world and then tradition.

106

:

Okay.

107

:

Yeah.

108

:

I'd love for you to define

each of those for us.

109

:

All right.

110

:

So reason is just the capacity of the

mind to make judgments about things

111

:

that it does not immediately perceive.

112

:

Is that the, the logic piece

you were talking about earlier?

113

:

That's part of it.

114

:

So anytime we make a statement, that goes

beyond our immediate sense experience.

115

:

Like, for example, that

the boiling 212 degrees.

116

:

Have you ever tested that?

117

:

No, but people have.

118

:

Right, but I haven't.

119

:

And it's not my immediate sense.

120

:

I'm interpreting that from other data.

121

:

Gotcha.

122

:

So science kind of is built

on a framework of reason?

123

:

It's reasoning, interpreting data.

124

:

Reason, interpreting data.

125

:

Okay.

126

:

And so the data is going to be, uh,

classified with empiricism or I called

127

:

it here, experience you're running tests,

you're experiencing, experimenting with

128

:

certain tests to see if there's a pattern.

129

:

And then the reason element of that

is interpreting that and saying,

130

:

yeah, when you do this over and

over again, it turns out this way.

131

:

And so we can say that there's a certain

percent certainty, that kind of thing.

132

:

Yes.

133

:

Okay.

134

:

And in particular, it's about More

purely, it's about the things that

135

:

we have immediate sense perception

of in the history of philosophy one

136

:

of the great debates in the last Four

to five hundred years has been the

137

:

question of should we value reason over?

138

:

empiricism or empiricism sense

experience over reason and There's been

139

:

a geographical schism in this So, the

continental philosophers, those on the

140

:

mainland of the continent of Europe,

were primarily rationalists, that they

141

:

valued rationality over experience.

142

:

Um, whereas the English philosophers

were primarily empiricists.

143

:

That's super interesting.

144

:

Yeah, it is.

145

:

And there's historical reasons for that,

but I don't think I would, I would love

146

:

to dive deeper into and how geography

played a, played a part in that.

147

:

If it did.

148

:

Sure.

149

:

that would be fascinating.

150

:

So we've got, in the realm of knowledge,

we can understand things through reason,

151

:

through empiricism, or through sense

experience, and then I think you gave

152

:

to others revelation and tradition.

153

:

Right.

154

:

Tradition, I think, is

fairly self explanatory.

155

:

Tradition is something that all the

worldviews are going to value to some

156

:

degree because we simply can't know all

things and do experiments on all things.

157

:

So we have to rely on the

tradition of people that we trust.

158

:

But the, worldview of monotheism places

a little bit more value on that perhaps

159

:

because we have this received tradition.

160

:

And so there are things that we have

received from sources that we trust.

161

:

That we value maybe a little bit

more than another world gene.

162

:

And that bleeds into then

what's called revelation.

163

:

In a way, revelation is a type of

tradition because we receive it that way,

164

:

but it's fundamentally distinct as well.

165

:

So revelation, yeah, it doesn't

mean the book of the Bible, sorry.

166

:

So that The revelation of the Bible

simply means the things revealed to St.

167

:

John in his vision when he

was on the Isle of Patmos.

168

:

But when you talk about revelation in

theology or philosophy, what you're

169

:

talking about is that this is something

revealed to humanity that they would

170

:

not know otherwise by someone who

is not themselves a human being or

171

:

limited to the world that we are in.

172

:

Gotcha.

173

:

Can you give, some examples

or an example of that?

174

:

Sure.

175

:

Well, obviously the most familiar

example is going to be the scriptures.

176

:

So when it says in Genesis 1,

1, in the beginning, God created

177

:

the heavens and the earth.

178

:

We believe that the Jewish people

had believed that the Islamic people

179

:

had believed that not because we

have direct sense experience about

180

:

that, not because we had simply,

used our reason to deduct that.

181

:

But because we believe that

that has been revealed to us

182

:

by God Himself in this case.

183

:

I see.

184

:

I see.

185

:

So there's a tradition of

holding the scriptures as

186

:

something that are revelatory.

187

:

Yes.

188

:

is personal revelation

also a part of this?

189

:

That's a good question.

190

:

I think perhaps for a person's own

journey, perhaps that can be part of this.

191

:

But I don't think personal revelation.

192

:

has any way to be on that

person's home, own journey.

193

:

In other words, if you told me God

revealed something to me that I

194

:

had to believe, I'm not going to.

195

:

But that's not the case when we talk

about the prophets of scripture or

196

:

the gospel writers saying God revealed

something to them that we have to believe.

197

:

Right.

198

:

So here we have the choice to

believe in a tradition that goes back

199

:

thousands of years that these ideas

of scriptures did not solely arise

200

:

from humans, although humans had a

part in shaping that obviously, but

201

:

also that somehow God revealed that.

202

:

Another way to think about

revelation is, you know, picture

203

:

us in this room right here.

204

:

right.

205

:

Say that we, for whatever odd

reason, had always been in this room.

206

:

Okay.

207

:

We were born in this room.

208

:

we live in this room.

209

:

we don't know anything beyond this room.

210

:

And so we would not know, especially

if we don't have any windows,

211

:

that there's a sun outside, right?

212

:

You're right.

213

:

We would not know about trees.

214

:

We would not know about grass.

215

:

We would not know about a

building's exterior to our own.

216

:

If were in just this room with no windows

and no doors, we would not know those

217

:

things unless someone came into the room.

218

:

Maybe they unlocked the door,

but there was one and they spoke

219

:

to us about things that we did

not have experience of directly.

220

:

That's the idea of revelation.

221

:

Okay.

222

:

And again, that's going to be distinct

then from the secular viewpoint,

223

:

which I think we could probably

label materialism or naturalism.

224

:

Okay.

225

:

So do you want to go on to that one?

226

:

Yeah, but just to kind of summarize.

227

:

So from the theistic perspective,

we say that you can, know truth and

228

:

objective truth and the way that

they can approach or understand that

229

:

objective truth is through reason,

experience, revelation, and tradition.

230

:

Yes.

231

:

Okay.

232

:

Okay.

233

:

Yeah, that's helpful.

234

:

Thank you.

235

:

Let's, go to, naturalism then.

236

:

Alright, so naturalism.

237

:

the idea that there is no God and that the

universe has nothing outside of itself.

238

:

When you look at the four ways we talked

about with monotheism, obviously one

239

:

of those is ruled out of court, right?

240

:

Revelation.

241

:

Yeah, the room illustration speaks

to the metaphysic that there is

242

:

somebody outside who can interact

with what's inside the room.

243

:

I mean, that's an analogy of.

244

:

Transcendence.

245

:

Right?

246

:

Right.

247

:

And so with naturalism, there's

nobody outside the room.

248

:

Just the room is all that exists.

249

:

Exactly.

250

:

So there's not going to be

anybody outside who can come

251

:

and interact and reveal things.

252

:

Right.

253

:

Gotcha.

254

:

Okay.

255

:

And so you have to interpret everything

solely on naturalistic as opposed

256

:

to anything supernaturalistic means.

257

:

So in this perspective, you'd still

have reason, obviously, and empiricism,

258

:

and you'd still have tradition.

259

:

Yes, you still have those three.

260

:

And what's especially valued

and argued about, like I said,

261

:

has been, reason, I'm sorry.

262

:

Yeah, we seem to have this, cultural

shift where we were very skeptical,

263

:

I feel like of, traditions.

264

:

Like, okay, just because people

have always believed that doesn't

265

:

mean that that's necessarily true.

266

:

We have to look at everything through

the lens of reason and experience.

267

:

is that true?

268

:

Well, yeah, but obviously it's a

matter of degree, not of totality.

269

:

Okay.

270

:

So, I mean, you and I don't believe

some things on the basis of tradition,

271

:

so it's not like Christians believe

things just on the basis of tradition.

272

:

And certainly, someone who is an

atheist or a materialist does believe

273

:

some things on tradition because they

have not done the experiments or had

274

:

the firsthand knowledge themselves.

275

:

It's more a matter of how

much it's emphasized rather

276

:

than it being there at all.

277

:

Makes sense.

278

:

Yeah.

279

:

Now, reason and experience are going to be

valued, then, as the most important thing.

280

:

And there is a difference within the

tradition of secular philosophy of which

281

:

of those you're going to value more.

282

:

And there's also an ongoing problem

in this, and that is the question of

283

:

whether you can actually find truth

on the basis of those things alone.

284

:

And that has been the biggest issue.

285

:

in philosophy in the

past 300 years at least.

286

:

Wow.

287

:

And the reason I say that, I could

be wrong, this is my opinion, but

288

:

the reason it's my opinion is that we

have moved in the West over the past

289

:

four to five hundred years from the

viewpoint of monotheism forming the

290

:

basis of our intellectual thought,

communally, to a naturalistic perspective.

291

:

But the question is, can you

also have confidence That you

292

:

can find truth on that basis.

293

:

And that has been a problem question,

perhaps the problem question, of the

294

:

last three centuries in philosophy.

295

:

Certainly in the area of epistemology,

I think that's the most important

296

:

question, most important issue

that's been at the forefront.

297

:

And we're going to dedicate a whole

future episode to that, are we?

298

:

Yeah, I'm thinking we will

because it's an important enough

299

:

question with enough nuance that.

300

:

I'll summarize it here, but

to do it justice, we should

301

:

probably do another episode.

302

:

Maybe we'll do it right after this one.

303

:

Okay.

304

:

But basically the question is, how

do we know if we have these two tools

305

:

primarily of reason and experience,

how do we know that they work?

306

:

how do we know I'm naturalistic premises?

307

:

So there is no God and we're

not creating the image of God.

308

:

So I should back up under

the monotheistic worldview.

309

:

The human mind is made

in the likeness of God.

310

:

Who is a rational being, uh, who

created this world rationally.

311

:

Therefore, it's congruent with theism

that the human mind works rationally.

312

:

Yeah.

313

:

Now, if you get rid of that though, if

you get rid of the idea that our mind

314

:

is created by a rational being, then you

start to have problems proving that our

315

:

mind could actually understand reality.

316

:

think of it this way.

317

:

if there is no God, how did

we get here on a naturalistic

318

:

perspective, how did we get here?

319

:

Say from the, the Big Bang.

320

:

All right.

321

:

And then what happened?

322

:

How did we get here?

323

:

So it's a super, small sliver of

possibility that life happened.

324

:

But then over time, as things evolved

and developed and grew, that which was

325

:

most fit to continue living, continue to

procreate and develop different kinds of,

326

:

how should I say this?

327

:

Oh, let me just, let me just

throw the question back at you.

328

:

All right.

329

:

So that's a, yeah, that's a good question.

330

:

What, what do you think?

331

:

Okay.

332

:

So I naturally took perspective.

333

:

There is no God.

334

:

There's nothing outside the universe.

335

:

This is the whole shebang.

336

:

Then the only answer.

337

:

That you can really give is that it

arose by natural processes alone.

338

:

There are no supernatural processes.

339

:

This wasn't intentional.

340

:

It's not purposeful because

there's no purpose there.

341

:

So, we know that we exist now and that

we can think about things and make

342

:

truth claims and we have consciousness.

343

:

And if we also believe or to accept

the premise that all this had to

344

:

occur by natural means alone, then

we have to out for a present state.

345

:

on that basis alone, on natural processes.

346

:

So we have to believe, then, that at some

point, matter either arose or was eternal.

347

:

Either way, we don't have a

reason or a rationale for that.

348

:

Somehow that matter, in a way

that we've never seen before,

349

:

organized itself into life.

350

:

So we have life coming

from non living things.

351

:

so again, that does not mean that life

is inherently Um, able to understand

352

:

rationality, but then further than

that, you have the unguided evolution

353

:

of mankind by natural selection alone.

354

:

Now you have that, then what you find out

is that every organ of the, of the human

355

:

body, including the organ of the mind,

which is going to produce the thoughts.

356

:

And if that's true, then how do

we know that it's selected to find

357

:

truth and not just usefulness?

358

:

Yeah, that's good.

359

:

That's good.

360

:

Yeah.

361

:

And that's what we'll delve into or

another way to put it and the Christian

362

:

worldview or the theistic worldview,

which came first rationality or humanity?

363

:

Rationality.

364

:

What about on the naturalist viewpoint?

365

:

Humanity.

366

:

Yeah.

367

:

Because no one was reasoning before humans

got here, there I mean, maybe animal

368

:

problem solving, but in terms of what we

would call rationality, it did not arise

369

:

until after mankind began developing.

370

:

So it's not something beforehand that's

there that we conform ourselves to.

371

:

It's something that arises as part

of our natural selection alone.

372

:

And that makes it problematic to trust it.

373

:

Because if it comes by natural selection

alone, we don't even know if it's

374

:

really fit to give significant or good

answers to these kinds of questions.

375

:

Exactly.

376

:

Gotcha.

377

:

And that's what we'll delve

into a little bit more.

378

:

Okay.

379

:

Yeah.

380

:

That'll be, that'll be good

conversation to delve into.

381

:

So, would it be good to

move to Eastern thought?

382

:

Yes.

383

:

Although, again, I'm not an expert,

and Eastern thought is very broad.

384

:

Yeah, of course, so monotheism, to

summarize, you can understand reason,

385

:

revelation, experience, tradition,

secularism, there's no revelation, but

386

:

there would still be empiricism and

reason, of course, and then Eastern

387

:

thought, are they thinking about it along

those same kinds of terms, or are those

388

:

terms pretty much just Western terms?

389

:

Well, yeah, pretty Obviously,

we're going to have terms like that,

390

:

but we have to be careful we don't

interpret them in terms of our Western

391

:

concepts, what those things mean.

392

:

from what I understand, the most

basic idea within epistemology is

393

:

this idea that ultimately the oneness

that you are seeking goes beyond

394

:

what we would normally define as

knowledge or knowing or even reasoning.

395

:

It's strange because the goal

can be defined as enlightenment,

396

:

knowing, or Buddha uses the example

when people asked him, what are

397

:

you in this, enlightened state?

398

:

And he says, I am one who is awake, who

is awake to certain truths that he wasn't

399

:

before and that most people aren't.

400

:

So there's, in one sense,

there's a high value on knowing

401

:

that's actually your salvation.

402

:

In a sense, it's coming to, be

enlightened, to know, to be awake

403

:

to the knowledge that, that all is

one and that reality as we normally

404

:

interpret it is maya and illusion.

405

:

So there's that.

406

:

But then along with that, the

knowledge that we normally have

407

:

about things is also part of this

maya, in a sense, to say something.

408

:

Either is or isn't is a form of duality

and the one that we're supposed to be

409

:

searching for in it and communing with

And eventually brought into is beyond

410

:

duality So the most basic teaching is

that there is no duality and yet to

411

:

say something is or isn't Or even the

law of non contradiction Is a type of

412

:

duality So, I'm a little puzzled on

how that all works together myself.

413

:

But from my understanding, you

have a goal of knowing, but it's

414

:

not an intellectual knowing.

415

:

It's more like a mystic communion.

416

:

And there is potential devaluation of

what we would normally describe as human

417

:

reasoning, especially making distinctions.

418

:

so, in terms of how you find knowledge,

I would say it's primarily reason,

419

:

mysticism and intuition, and there's also

obviously a great deal of tradition going

420

:

on here as you receive that tradition.

421

:

But ultimately it is this inward

union with the ultimate true, not

422

:

an intellectual apprehension of

certain truths that that's your goal.

423

:

So is intuition just

kind of like gut feeling?

424

:

Like, you don't see it, you don't touch

it, but you just know, like, I feel this.

425

:

Is that, is that what that is?

426

:

No, I don't think that's quite it.

427

:

So if you ever had a time where

428

:

you were in a state where you were, well,

I would describe it as commuting with

429

:

God or you were commuting with nature.

430

:

And you were deeply at peace and

it just seemed like what you were

431

:

thinking right now and the state you

were in is exactly what you should be.

432

:

And then you had a thought about

reality or about someone or

433

:

something and it just seemed to fit

right in with that elevated state.

434

:

I'm not describing that

very well, but from what I

435

:

understand, it's more like that.

436

:

So like an inward consolation

perhaps, or just peace?

437

:

Yeah.

438

:

Maybe think of it another way, you ever

been enjoying a moment with your spouse

439

:

and you're just maybe sitting on the

couch and cuddling or holding hands and

440

:

there's this inward joy and rightness.

441

:

And there's a part of you that says,

this is right and this is good.

442

:

Yeah.

443

:

so the intuition is in moments where

you're, I mean, I get that kind of

444

:

makes me understand the oneness where

it's just like, this is just good.

445

:

it's just right.

446

:

Yeah.

447

:

And that's not as much an

intellectual declaration some sort

448

:

of soul affirmation or intuition.

449

:

So, in secularism and monotheism,

there is an element of that as well,

450

:

because intellectual is just not pure.

451

:

logic and reason.

452

:

I mean, there's a way in which it

resonates with us internally, but

453

:

this is a really high elevation of

that, maybe even above reason Yes.

454

:

Yes.

455

:

I would say that.

456

:

And along with that is mysticism.

457

:

So, that very much ties in with

that because I believe the intuition

458

:

is primarily what you get from the

mystic union of various levels.

459

:

So mysticism is a big fuzzy word, but

basically what it means in philosophy

460

:

or theology more technically is

an unmediated communion with God.

461

:

not mediated through the church or

through the sacraments or through

462

:

the Word or even through prayer.

463

:

necessarily, but it's, unmediated,

perhaps the closest is the, the

464

:

communion you would have between a

man and woman, in bed, So that would

465

:

be an immediate union between them

instead of the mediated union, where.

466

:

They're the things they

have in common or whatever.

467

:

So that's primarily at the heart

of mysticism, what I mean here.

468

:

So in the East, that's an,

immediate union with, with the one

469

:

ultimately, So in the East, that's

an immediate union with the Ottman?

470

:

Well, the ottman is what's inside of you.

471

:

Okay, so you're thinking

probably the ba, the baram.

472

:

Yeah.

473

:

Yeah.

474

:

And then from a monotheistic perspective,

that would be, that would be God.

475

:

Yeah.

476

:

Again, it's not a personal God, right.

477

:

It's more the idea of the oneness.

478

:

The ultimate living force that is

in all things and is all things.

479

:

Gotcha.

480

:

Gotcha.

481

:

Yeah, that's really interesting.

482

:

Yeah, it is.

483

:

And because of this, then, the way that

you primarily get knowledge, practically

484

:

speaking, is through meditation.

485

:

Okay, now, how does that work?

486

:

Or what's the connection between

meditation and knowledge?

487

:

Well, because you're, meditation,

you're putting yourself to

488

:

be closer in that union.

489

:

Uh, but also as part of that,

you're leaving behind and putting

490

:

away from your mind the lesser

things that would distract you.

491

:

I see.

492

:

I see.

493

:

So meditation is the practice of

emptying your mind of the Maya in

494

:

order to move towards the Brahman.

495

:

Yes.

496

:

As I understand it.

497

:

Yes.

498

:

Okay.

499

:

And that's different

than biblical meditation.

500

:

I mean, biblical meditation

has some similarities.

501

:

You want to.

502

:

Put some things out of your mind, but

it's so that you can focus on some

503

:

truth in Scripture or as you're praying.

504

:

So there's propositional truth that you

are seeking to understand more deeply

505

:

in terms of its meaning and impact

in your life, what you should feel,

506

:

what you should do because of that.

507

:

So Christian meditation, and I

believe Jewish and Islamic meditation,

508

:

are focused on that, whereas this

is a meditation that's focused on

509

:

You're not removing yourself from

thinking You're not thinking about a

510

:

proposition or a sentence or a truth.

511

:

It's more this inner

apprehension of the oneness.

512

:

Now that's as best I understand it.

513

:

And again, there's a lot of

variations, but classical Hinduism

514

:

and in most Buddhism, I think.

515

:

That's true.

516

:

Yeah.

517

:

Waiting for some Eastern philosophers

to chime in, in the comments here.

518

:

Yeah.

519

:

They might be a little brutal.

520

:

It would be.

521

:

It would be interesting for sure.

522

:

Okay.

523

:

Ready to move on to the last of

the four worldviews, pantheism,

524

:

or I'm sorry, polytheism.

525

:

Right.

526

:

Polytheism.

527

:

We could also call that a

paganism, a belief in a multitude

528

:

of gods within the universe.

529

:

usually worshiping in some

way, some of those beings.

530

:

Yeah, and this isn't just in the

ancient traditions, but actually

531

:

probably on the rise here, at least

in the States as well, and in the

532

:

forms of Wicca, that kind of thing.

533

:

And we talked about Hinduism and

Buddhism and, the philosophy of the East.

534

:

But it's important to remember, many,

maybe most people that you actually

535

:

meet, say, in India, are going to

be worshiping a multitude of gods.

536

:

So there is some overlap here then.

537

:

Well, there's some overlap, but there's

also people are inconsistent with their

538

:

own belief system, just like we are.

539

:

So even someone who would call

themselves adherent of a different

540

:

religion, in practice many

of them are still worshiping.

541

:

Ancestral gods, gods of nature, they're

interacting with, with gods like these.

542

:

.

So syncretism isn't just a, Christian thing.

543

:

Not at all.

544

:

Yeah.

545

:

So I noticed the notes that

you've got Eastern thought is

546

:

kind of Hinduism, like as taught.

547

:

But then in practice, uh,

oftentimes it can be polytheistic

548

:

instead of pantheistic.

549

:

Yes.

550

:

Gotcha.

551

:

So in this perspective, and this is,

a hard one because there's probably

552

:

more variation in paganism than in

any of the others, but how would they

553

:

understand the questions of epistemology?

554

:

Can we know?

555

:

And, and how would we know?

556

:

I don't know that I've seen anyone

from that worldview address the

557

:

question of can we know ultimate truth?

558

:

I'm sure some have.

559

:

Yeah.

560

:

But I haven't seen it.

561

:

So I don't think it's

a real live question.

562

:

Okay.

563

:

It was kind of assumed

in the ancient world.

564

:

And that's kind of where I'm basing most

of this on, the ancient Greek world,

565

:

the ancient, Middle Eastern world as

a whole, even into Babylon or, Egypt.

566

:

But I mean, that's still affected

the ways that present polytheists

567

:

would understand their world.

568

:

I mean, that's part of the

foundation of their worldview.

569

:

so what you're going to say, it

doesn't just pertain to:

570

:

No, no, no.

571

:

Or 10, 000 years ago or whatever.

572

:

Okay.

573

:

and in that, I think it was just

assumed that you could know truth.

574

:

And primarily you would know truth by,

experience and reason, they may not call

575

:

them that, but also especially tradition.

576

:

So tradition is going to play an

even more important role in this

577

:

particular worldview than the others.

578

:

So tradition is handed down, through

priests, shamans, other religious

579

:

leaders, through the generations.

580

:

That is what forms what you believe.

581

:

Gotcha.

582

:

And would there also be some kind

of revelation element to it as well?

583

:

You know, that's a good question, but

I think for the most part, not, so

584

:

obviously you have sacred scriptures

in many of these cases, but it doesn't

585

:

seem to function quite the same way.

586

:

For example, Buddhism has sacred

scriptures, but ultimately there's not

587

:

a personal God in Bud who revealed this.

588

:

It's more, these are ones that

we have especially revered.

589

:

to teach us wisdom.

590

:

So it's more, in my understanding, in

most of these cases, more tradition

591

:

when you look at the books or the

ancient writings than revelation.

592

:

Gotcha.

593

:

In a way that's not true of, say,

the Hebrew Old Testament, the

594

:

Christian New Testament, or the Quran.

595

:

But maybe revelation in the sense that,

okay, we prayed to the god of the Nile,

596

:

or the goddess of the Nile, and Uh, we

caught more fish or that kind of thing.

597

:

I mean, where they, they would

claim that that would be answered

598

:

prayer or revelation or maybe

that's not what we're talking about.

599

:

Cause not primarily what I'm meaning by

the term I'm, I'm meaning about knowledge

600

:

that you would not have otherwise about

the basic or deepest issues of life.

601

:

Okay.

602

:

Especially metaphysics.

603

:

Gotcha.

604

:

Gotcha.

605

:

So just cause something

happened that seemed to maybe be

606

:

miraculous or the, the effect of.

607

:

prayer or religious, right?

608

:

Doesn't that's not really

what we're talking about.

609

:

We're talking about the metaphysical

questions and that kind of thing.

610

:

Right.

611

:

And, and part of the reason we're

struggling here is we're asking

612

:

metaphysical questions about a worldview.

613

:

That's not really that,

interested in metaphysics or

614

:

the questions of epistemology.

615

:

Gotcha.

616

:

So maybe to kind of bring

us home as we conclude.

617

:

the one thing that I notice here is

that within the theistic perspective,

618

:

there is actually this idea that

our reason and our experience and

619

:

empiricism, like those are grounded.

620

:

In the metaphysic that there is a personal

God who is reasonable and who has created

621

:

creation in a way that corresponds to

that logic and reason and that kind of

622

:

thing, as well as beauty and other ways.

623

:

And so we as those who are made

in his image, inherit that.

624

:

And that's kind of unique to

the, the theistic perspective.

625

:

Yes, it is.

626

:

And it, it's fundamentally different

and, and, deeply important.

627

:

that one thing that there is a

rational God who created the universe

628

:

and created mankind in his likeness,

629

:

is the fundamental distinction that

separates theistic epistemology.

630

:

Gotcha.

631

:

Well, any final words or thoughts

on any of this before we conclude?

632

:

No, I, I don't think so.

633

:

Again, next time we'll look at the

question of can materialism or naturalism

634

:

give us an answer to the question

without that theistic basis that we

635

:

just talked about, can we trust our

own minds to make truth claims even

636

:

about the statement, there is no God

or the material world is all there

637

:

is, the natural world is all there is.

638

:

So can they even support

their own basic premise?

639

:

On the basis of that premise,

that's what we'll address.

640

:

Sounds good, we're looking forward to it.

641

:

Thanks.

642

:

Yeah, thank you.

Next Episode All Episodes Previous Episode

About the Podcast

Show artwork for Philosophy and Faith
Philosophy and Faith
Helping you navigate your intellectual/spiritual journey

Listen for free