Week 4--Barker, Chapter 7 (Enter Postmodernism)

Kuhn, Popper and Foucault are key figures for understanding a postmodern switch in the philosophy of science. They point out the fragile and contingent basis of scientific endeavors (Popper talks about science being not based on certainty, but on falsification and experimentation; and Kuhn talks about how science periodically overthrows its own paradigms). This is an important ally to help Christians stand in an era where atheistic critiques are being leveled afresh by such authors as Christopher Hitchens, Sam Harris, and Richard Dawkins.

(additional material...)

Sam Harris bases most of his argument against faith (as being epistemologically unsound) on the idea that reason is a better grounds for morality and spirituality, and faith is a mode of understanding the world that is hopelessly entangled in false metaphysical notions rooted in superstitions that are often immoral (i.e. fickle and violent representations of God in the Bible and the Koran). While many of Harris’ criticisms are warranted and helpful, a postmodern understanding of science can help us level the playing field, in a sense. Instead of trying to wiggle out from under the enormous weight of such atheistic claims, we can concentrate our efforts on unmasking the peculiar “superstitions” of rationalism and bad metaphysics associated with it.

(...more additional material...)

If knowledge is “not a question of true discovery but of the construction of interpretations about the world that are taken to be true,” as Nietzsche suggests, then the logic of rationalism is the most intrusive and oppressive mode of gaining knowledge. It seems to me faith, although maybe not as precise, is a gentler and more thorough way of gaining knowledge. Faith, when circumspectly exercised, gently pursues and attains knowledge. This is because faith is not based on absolute certainty, and it's not dependent on the harsh, cut-and-dry dictates of logical certainty. Faith may eventually achieve a degree of certainty (clearer boundaries), but its very essence is characterized by ambiguity, and it is more reflective than analytical overall. It is therefore freer and more creative, engaging the human intellect, imagination, emotions—all of the human elements we use to relate to the human condition. These are mixed and juxtaposed together in a more comprehensive endeavor for truth, yet not as precise. Faith is deemed to be ambiguous as a result, but faith is willing to sacrifice certainty for the sake of a more comprehensive handling of reality.

(...and even more additional material...)

Faith is comfortable with mystery and uncertainty being involved in the whole process of understanding reality (which is actually an important part of the scientific method, suspending what’s purported to be known for the sake of discovery). Faith is deemed to be creative, not only in its pursuit of knowledge, but also in the way it makes sense of that knowledge. Faith creatively takes in knowledge from various sources, and then it employs creativity to assemble it meaningfully.