Through the River
Some saw my Facebook/Twitter status as a joke, and some interpreted it as a real question.
Of course both were partly right.
It was:
“How do we know
what we know
what we know about epistemology?”
(add your wise answers and wisecracks here)
No, I am not much for
“Woke up and went #1. Good color today.”
Not only am fascinated by epistemology, but that Facebooked question is just the kind I should have asked Paul Hiebert....the late Mr. Epistemology himself, at least in theological anthropology/ missiology circles.
(I spent an amazing, mind-expanding week with Dr. Hiebert once in New Haven, but I don’t think any of us students asked the master that exact question…).
I later came to love Hiebert’s book, “Missiological Implications of Epistemological Shift.”
(reviews and links):
This book explores the question of epistemology, or theory of knowledge, and its impact upon how we view and do missions in today's world.What must a new convert know or
believe? How do they know? How can we translate and communicate Christian teachings interculturally without distorting the message? How should we do missions in an anti-colonial, postmodern era characterized by religious relativism and accusations of Christian imperialism?
In struggling with these questions, Paul Hiebert focuses on the epistemological foundations that underlay them. He examines three specific theories of knowledge--positivism, instrumentalism/idealism, and critical realism. In the end he sides with the latter because it avoids the arrogance and colonialism implicit in positivism and the relativism of instrumentalism/idealism.
Critical realism, Hiebert argues, strikes a kind of middle ground between the emphasis upon objective truth and the subjective nature of human knowledge. It allows for a real world that exists independently from human perceptions and opinions of it, restores emotions and moral judgments as essential parts of knowing, and creates the conditions for knowing persons intimately and as fully human--all of the which have important implications for Christian mission in the modern world.
But I must admit I loved and understood the title more (I am a sucker for every key word there) than I did the deep truths of that somewhat dry, dense academic book. But at least I made a photo-op out of it. I guess the motivation behind this photo was
to illustrate that we all have truth lenses/worldviews/lenses through which we read the world , ourselves and others (let alone books)…epistemologically speaking…and sometimes (as illustrated by this hip sleepware/eyewear that El Al Airlines gives you on the way to Israel), such can be blinders.So I was thrilled to hear, through Viral Bloggers, that a young couple (Jon and Mindy Hirst), cofounders of Generous Mind ("a think tank devoted to helping people be generous with their ideas") had published (with Hiebert's participatation and blessing), a popularized version of the book, intended to reach a broader audience.
Called, “Through the River: Understanding Your Assumptions about Truth,” (preview it here) it weaves around a story, a three-pronged parable .
Let me say I like it on several levels..AND it also met some of
my low expectations and fears.But overall, I think it will be a helpful and practical volume for my teaching.
Having watched students reach those life-changing “aha” moments when I teach Leonard Sweet’s model of EPIC shift, or Paul Hiebert’s take on centered sets, or his famous “excluded middle” (which I believe Hiebert himself expressed concern that the model took on a life of its own, and used in ways it was never intended or equipped to do) , I can see potential for using the story of the book in class.
The book weaves a parable, or better yet allegory (even more dangerous) about River Town, in ordere Rock Dwellers (representing positivism), the Island Dwellers (instrumentalism), and the Valley Dwellers (critical realism). Hugely helpful in a way, but ultimately much too simplistic, and not enough nuance around the categories. And they also attempt to equate tje first with modernit, the second with postmodernity. That doesn't/ can't always work.
There is also potential contradiction over whether the second category is inevitably relativistic (72 ,187). Relativity is not relativism......relatively speaking (:
I also share with Steve Heyduck some concerns about (ironic but maybe inevitable) a simplistic overview of philosophy, and the predicatability of the “this model is bad, this one is good" technique..it felt a little cheesy.
All this philosophizing may sound meaningless to you, but if you are not familiar with these categories, this book is a good and readable introduction...though one must be aware of the oversimplifications ...which to their credit, the authors seem to admit. Such is the risk of allegory. I applaud the Hirsts for tackling it.
Here's the bottom line, and intended thesis:
Critical realist epistemology {truth lens} strikes a middle ground between positivism, with its emphasis on objective truth, and instrumentalism with its stress on the subjective nature of human knowledge...It affirms the presence of an objective truth but recognizes that this is subjectivelu apprehended"
(p 78, quoting Hiebert)
I do appreciate the discussion of critical realism, with it's emphasis on "the truth we know and the truth we are learning " , intention over letter of the law (170)...and the example of E. Stanley Jones as critical realist (179) was insightful. Nice job translating to laypeople's language. The case study on how the three Dwellers tackle divorce also opens windows to understanding.
Recommended, with the concerns and limitations noted. And for me, it will serve as a springboard back into the source. Now I can really read and respond to Hiebert's book.
That means the Hirsts goal has been reached. Kudos.
My fear about his book is that Hiebert himself operated partly out of a positivist approach (while claiming critical realist view)
and unnecessarily demonized an instrumentalized approach. I will be intrigued to reread and comment on all that.
I might even find my Facebook status question will be addressed in his volume.
But how will I know when I know that it is answered? (:
But first it's off to watch Colbert lecture on truthiness...That might answer all my questions.
Or question all my answers.
an attempt to subvert subversion and 
Posts
