Okay, so today we moved on to knowing and how we know which explained why ritual and practice was being pushed as so important. The professor claims to be a social constructivist. First, I will give two definitions regarding this position from wikipedia, then I will follow it with a question.
1. Constructivist Epistemology
Constructivism is a recent development in philosophy which criticizes essentialism, whether it is in the form of medieval realism, classical rationalism, or empiricism. It originated in sociology under the term social constructionism and has been given the name constructivism when referring to philosophical epistemology, though constructionism and constructivism are often used interchangeably.
Constructivism views all of our knowledge as "constructed", because it does not necessarily reflect any external "transcendent" realities; it is contingent on convention, human perception, and social experience. It is believed by constructivists that representations of physical and biological reality, including race, sexuality, and gender are socially constructed (Hegel, Garns, and Marx were among the first to suggest such an ambitious expansion of social determinism).
The common thread between all forms of constructivism is that they do not focus on an ontological reality, but instead on the constructed reality.
2. Social Constructivism
One version of social constructivism contends that categories of knowledge and reality are actively created by social relationships and interactions. These interactions also alter the way in which scientific episteme is organized.
Social activity presupposes human beings inhabiting shared forms of life, and in the case of social construction, utilizing semiotic resources (meaning making and meaning signifying) with reference to social structures and institutions. Several traditions use the term Social Constructivism: psychology (after Lev Vygotsky), sociology (after Peter Berger and Thomas Luckmann, themselves influenced by Alfred Schütz), sociology of knowledge (David Bloor), sociology of mathematics (Sal Restivo), philosophy of mathematics (Paul Ernest). Ludwig Wittgenstein's later philosophy can be seen as a foundation for Social Constructivism, with its key theoretical concepts of language games embedded in forms of life.
Can this be linked to a Biblical understanding of knowledge? Here is why I ask. If knowledge is constructed, then our knowledge that Jesus Christ is God is a social construct. Is there anything redeemable in this theory?
P.S. Once again I will not be able to respond to your comments but I will certainly read them.