I am More Like You Think I Am Than I Actually Am
A response to a friend...
"What do you think of the following statement: 'I am more like you think I am than I actually am.'"
The way a statement like this comes across and is usually intended is that you 
are laying out two different things, the perceived (the way I think you are) and the actual (the way you really are). This is common to people who hold to your type of philosophy. It tends to believe that we cannot know things the way they really are, we only know them in the way we create them with our language and understanding. This is classic postmodernism. The problem with this is that it assumes to know something about the actual world. First, it assumes to know that it actually exists and second, it assumes to know that it is different than the way we perceive it. But wouldn't both of those things also just be the way we perceive it? Or is this something that we actually know about it? At this point we have two choices, either we can know nothing about the actual world, which would have to be a false statement, because it is a statement about the actual world, or we can actually know things about the actual world which would refute the philosophy behind a statement like this.
are laying out two different things, the perceived (the way I think you are) and the actual (the way you really are). This is common to people who hold to your type of philosophy. It tends to believe that we cannot know things the way they really are, we only know them in the way we create them with our language and understanding. This is classic postmodernism. The problem with this is that it assumes to know something about the actual world. First, it assumes to know that it actually exists and second, it assumes to know that it is different than the way we perceive it. But wouldn't both of those things also just be the way we perceive it? Or is this something that we actually know about it? At this point we have two choices, either we can know nothing about the actual world, which would have to be a false statement, because it is a statement about the actual world, or we can actually know things about the actual world which would refute the philosophy behind a statement like this. Doug
Labels: apologetics, Emergent, epistemology, logic, philosophy, postmodernism
posted by Doug E. @ 2:32 PM
1 comments
1 Comments:
The only 'actual' way to see the world is through God's eyes, the rest is perception. The more we abstract away from primary sensory perception the greater the variety of perception and the less 'real' it is. E.g. No one would argue that blue isn't yellow, but if you talk about something deeply abstract and complex, such as the best way to govern a nation, you'll get much variety in perception.
Let me toot my own trumpet:
Trust in the LORD
Post a Comment
<< Home