Wednesday, January 23, 2008

Epistemological Subjectivism

One of the most recent epistemological points of view, one that is growing in popularity, is call subjectivism. As mentioned before, epistemological subjectivism is the claim that all knowledge is purely a matter of perspective. The subjectivist may allow that there are knowable basic dimensions (space and time), but we can only know them and the things in them from a vantage point of the intersecting, and completely unique, dimension of our (my?) point of view.

Clearly, everyone has a unique point of view. We come from different backgrounds. We all learn through different means. We can really only know what what we, ourselves, have either thought about (as, generally, per Rationalism), physically experienced (Empiricism), found useful (Pragmatism) or simply believed (Faith). In other words, even if any other theory is correct, we must start with what is knowable from our own unique vantage point. When I was in school, one of the "big" questions running around was whether it was possible to be an atheist in Medieval Europe. On this view, it would have not been, because atheism was not a knowable position for the Medieval subject; his or her upbringing, teaching, culture and worldview precluded atheistic knowledge.

Often, we hear people say they "feel" God's presence or God has "spoken" to them. Of course, this is completely unverifiable. For the subject alone, this is proof of God's existence. In many cases, I imagine, this may be saying that God exists but God's existence can only be knowable through subjective experience. As much as modern Christianity claims to believe in objective truth, this, to me, is an interesting side-track to the debate. Is this what people really mean when they speak of the Holy Spirit as that "quiet voice" we hear in our heart (our subjective self)? Does "Jesus is real to me, because I have Him right here in my heart" mean the same thing?

The problem that these perfectly valid expressions pose is that it reduces God to an inner mood, removing Him from His essential quality of Other. Without denigrating these experiences, for I am convinced that many may be perfectly true and I would not wish to limit God's methods, it reduces Him to the role of Jiminy Cricket (which I suppose was originally a polite way to to take the Lord's name in vain).

Labels: ,

1 Comments:

At Wednesday, April 25, 2012, Blogger Diletante said...

Fantastic! Congratulations for your point of view. The conclusion was amazing. Comments from Brazil.

 

Post a Comment

<< Home