According to Taylor Descartes, Hume, Kant, Dewey, Wittgenstein and Ayer all have three things in common:
"One, they all begin with the consciousness, the mind, as the starting point of reality, as opposed to an independent existence outside the knower; two, doubt, as in the modern scientific mode, is the method of procedure to establish, if possible, certitude, or some experimental social agendas; and, three, following from number two, all these philosophies distrust, if they do not reject, the traditional view that the senses, inner and outer, are intimately integrated in the act of knowing with the will and the intellect, and have, as it were, a cognitive power in themselves, a light whose source is the illuminative energy of the mind that knows reality immediately and certainly.To summarize, then, in the spirit of Maritain: these modern philosophies stemming from Descartes all violate a primordial disposition of man, doing violence to his very nature as a specific being, who is capable of knowing his world as a whole being, integrated and entire, body and soul, recognizing unselfconsciously and spontaneously, that all is real and good. It is only when an exaggerated and isolated status of the mind is assumed, and removed from its proper integration within the knowing powers, that Descartes and his legacy gain prominence."
Several times Taylor brought up the topic of "first principles" which brings to mind a tenant of my faith which says in part, "We believe that the first principles and ordinances of the gospel are: first, Faith in the Lord Jesus Christ...'. Although, as Taylor says, Descartes "was convinced...his method would lead to truth" we are instead left with "a preoccupation with doubt". Obviously if one practices doubt that is what they will be filled with. If one practices faith, on the other hand, then that is what they will be filled with. Now, I looked up the definition of doubt and faith at dictionary.com. Doubt received 5 definition group results, faith received 0, zip, nada, zilch.
Hmmmmmm........ **
Regardless...here are some definitions for you:
Doubt: to distrust,a feeling of uncertainty about the truth, reality, or nature of something.
Antonyms for doubt: Assurance, certainty, conviction
Faith: "Faith is the assurance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen" Heb. 11:1 KJV JST
So we see that doubt and faith are opposing ideas and Descartes and his Cartesian legacy are against God and faith because those ideas lead to, "the ultimate rejection of the necessary first principles and self-evident truths". How perfectly in line with Satan's desires. He is a fallen spirit (Isaiah 14:12) with no body and tries to do all he can to separate us from the spirit + body = soul connection.
Once again, I am strongly impressed that what Taylor refers to as Poetic knowledge is actually a spiritual inspiration and knowing. So much of our socially accepted norms of our day work to separate us from this well of knowledge by either telling us it is not important, "only science and math is" or by distracting us from the whisperings of wisdom with constant "noise" from TV, video games, twitter, radio, etc. “The Spirit speaketh the truth and lieth not. Wherefore, it speaketh of things as they really are, and of things as they really will be; wherefore, these things are manifested unto us plainly, for the salvation of our souls” Jacob 4:13
I thought this scripture is a good one to ponder in relation to Taylors book and his definition of fear: "And unto man he said, Behold, the fear of the Lord, that is wisdom; and to depart from evil is understanding." Job 28:28 KJV see also verses 12-13, 20-23
In another reading of mine I found this quote applicable: "If the world is to be improved, the process of love must make a change in the hearts of humans. It can do so when we look beyond self to give our love to God and others, and do so with all our hearts, with all our souls, and with all our minds." Gordon B. Hinckley Standing for Something p.9
How can we fully love with all our hearts, souls, and minds when the philosophies of the world separate us from our complete selves?
**When this was originally written on 5/10/11 there were no definitions for faith (I have the screen prints as proof) but by the night of 5/13 there were definitions and today when I checked there are 8 listings. 5/15/11
That verse from Job seems very applicable because it shows the integration between your life and your understanding. A very well educated but bad man will be a fool, and you see that all the time in today's politics and social commentary.
ReplyDeleteThat's a good point that "practicing doubt" will not lead to certainty -- I like the way you express it. I guess something is only as good as the foundation it rests upon.
Yes, I think Poetic Knowledge has some spiritual connection, whereas Descartes wanted a pure rational mind and other after him wanted pure evidence.
ReplyDeleteI think, too, of Proverbs: "The fear of the Lord is the *beginning* of wisdom" -- not the end result, but where you need to begin.
How can we fully love with all our hearts,souls, and minds when the philosophies of the world separate us from our complete selves?
ReplyDeleteWell, from the discussions going on this week I think we need to step back from the philosophies of the world and just concentrate on the love. Wittgenstein is a case in point. He was actually homeschooled for a while but his family life, the suicides of his brothers and his trouble with his temper ( he was involved in beatings of students while a teacher) would make any philosophy of his very suspect. Once again, the more I read Poetic Knowledge the more I am in awe of Charlotte Mason. How i wish she had been the revolutionizing force and not Dewey!
Well now that is an interesting thought from Shari: What if Charlotte Mason had ended up being the revolutionzing force? Something to think about! A couple of her volumes imply she hoped to be. She hoped that her methods would change the face of Britain, but unfortunately she was pretty marginalized. My guess is that this is because Dewey went with the natural flow of philsophy at the time--he totally matched up with Darwin, who, according to Andrew Kern at least, matched up with British economic philosophy at the time. So Dewey was in the stream of culture, and CM was like us--on the outside, wishing to stop the flow and redirect it in the old ways.
ReplyDeleteSigh.
Rebekah, I really appreciate you quoting that paragraph which includes what all of these guys have in common. I had forgotten it already, but I really think it draws it all together...
Willa - The whole book of Job made for a great book club discussion this Friday past. Chapter 28 was particularly enlightening. :) We definitely need to build our spiritual houses on a sure foundation don't we?
ReplyDeleteMystie - Thanks for the reminder of Proverbs. I find Proverbs 3:5-6 vary applicable. If we trust in Him to direct us we will not go astray. Sadly, it seems, Descartes did not. He wanted to "prove" God through mans ways and was led astray. (I say, "it seems" because all I know of Descartes if from Taylor's book and not a personal study).
Shari - I too wish Charlotte Mason had been the "revolutionizing force" in our educational system. Sure makes one wonder what our world would be like now doesn't it?
Brandy – Thanks for connecting those dots. It’s interesting to note how all things are related no matter how much we try to compartmentalize them. Economics…Science…Education… If we really cannot separate these areas why do we keep on trying to separate the different parts of ourselves?