Epistemological Relativism

There is a slight applicability problem with this theory. Its scope is somewhat limited. Most of us unknowingly rely on the correspodence theory of truth to separate truth from falsehood. It means that something is true when it corresponds to reality. I know, I am so over-simplifying it aren’t I? Try this test. The moon is made of cheese. Is this true or false? How can we find out? We can (spacemen) take a trip to the moon an see if this statement corresponds to reality. Unfortunately, there will be no “100% Moon Made” on your next hunk of cheese. The moon is in reality *not* made of cheese and therefore my statement is false. Not so bad right? Hold on, because here comes a huge wrench.

While this may work quite well in the present or where physical evidence is available, it does not work so well with historical narratives. Does this shock you? Not yet? Let’s travel deeper down the rabbit hole. If we read a story that is seemingly a historical narrative, how do we “verify” its truth or falsehood? In the case of little or non-existent physical evidence (besides the narrative itself), this becomes a big problem. We cannot check to see if the claims correspond to reality because that reality is in the irretrievable past. We cannot physically get back to the past to take a look. Because we lack this sort of access we cannot effectively utilize this method for verification. What do we have left? We have several options that I intend to explore. Stay tuned.

Not wanting to write a review or some half-baked overview I’ll just say that this book was great. It wasn’t great like a movie or a ride in a nice car, it was great because books like this present you with ideas and challenge you to change. I’m not necessarily talking about changing behavior, although there is plenty of that in this book, but, more fundamentally, changing your mind. Sometimes changing your mind is much more difficult than changing some outward behavior. Nothing was so new that I didn’t recognize the concepts or ideas, but Schaeffers compassion and sensitivity towards others is amazing and inspiring. Schaeffer is compassionate not because he supposes he is better or right (he does think he is ), but because he posssess some understanding about the plight of humankind. Okay, any more words here at it may become a report.

Here’s some of the ideas Schaeffer presents in this book. I won’t go into anything more that superficial detail here because, well, that’s what the book is for right?

The root of the problem is the erosion of truth and antithesis. Basic properties of truth and knowing have been ripped apart as a result of the Enlightenment and we are reaping the bountiful rewards.

Art, music and culture have been following in the wake of the redefinition of truth and knowledge.

Schaeffer provides the reader with the reasons why this redefinition is fundamentally flawed and leaves human beings more empty. He outlines the struggle out of the nothingness that many face. Finally, Schaeffer presents us with the solutions.

Schaeffer presents the reader with the god who is there. A god who truly exists and is not a fabrication. People should not take some mysterious leap into the void because this god is anchored to the reaility of this world.

It seems Schaeffer had years of practice here. His humility is anything but contrived. Understanding the situation we are in, he begs for compassion rather than arrogance, impatience and laughter. Real, honest communication with others regarding reality requires sensitivity, patience and real sacrifice. It costs everyone involved something to talk about the big ideas. We should therefore approach these encounters with respect.

Out of the 25 or so exposures I took at the zoo I think I might have one or two good ones. Sad isn’t it? Probably even more tragic is the fact that I have a photos section with 5 images.