The epistemology thread

[Josh]

Knowledge is in good part a result of the sources we trust.

Epistemologically, those who are the most successful in learning are those who have developed the greatest discernment in deciding who they will trust for knowledge.

Conversely, those who are the least successful in synthesizing knowledge are those who lack clear discernment when it comes to sources of knowing.

Discernment is mostly a learned behavior and is one of the key roles of any educational program. The Epistemological crisis society is In right now is, in good part, a failure of education to keep up with the information revolution. Post-modern relativism has exacerbated the crisis.

Illiberal tyrants and autocrats are always interested in limiting discernment and controlling knowledge.

That is a decidely Enlightenment view; I would say that the fact I don't think a 10 year old should read about certain topics doesn't make me an "illiberal tyrant". A lot of people simply cannot handle or successful discern a flood of knowledge, and are indeed prone to being manipulated by the purveyors of such knowledge.

The ultimate knowledge is the knowledge of good and evil. God told his children not to partake of the fruit of that. Yet the serpent came along and said, "God is an illegal tyrant and autocrat; he does not want you to be wise. Come and learn of the knowledge of good and evil, and you will be as great as him!"

[Dan Z]

Knowledge is in good part a result of the sources we trust.

Epistemologically, those who are the most successful in learning are those who have developed the greatest discernment in deciding who they will trust for knowledge.

Conversely, those who are the least successful in synthesizing knowledge are those who lack clear discernment when it comes to sources of knowing.

Discernment is mostly a learned behavior and is one of the key roles of any educational program. The Epistemological crisis society is In right now is, in good part, a failure of education to keep up with the information revolution. Post-modern relativism has exacerbated the crisis.

Illiberal tyrants and autocrats are always interested in limiting discernment and controlling knowledge.

That is a decidely Enlightenment view; I would say that the fact I don't think a 10 year old should read about certain topics doesn't make me an "illiberal tyrant". A lot of people simply cannot handle or successful discern a flood of knowledge, and are indeed prone to being manipulated by the purveyors of such knowledge.

The ultimate knowledge is the knowledge of good and evil. God told his children not to partake of the fruit of that. Yet the serpent came along and said, "God is an illegal tyrant and autocrat; he does not want you to be wise. Come and learn of the knowledge of good and evil, and you will be as great as him!"

Ok...hooray for tyrants and autocrats then.

Honestly - sometimes I think you just disagree for sport.

[MaxPC]

Knowledge is in good part a result of the sources we trust.

Epistemologically, those who are the most successful in learning are those who have developed the greatest discernment in deciding who they will trust for knowledge.

Conversely, those who are the least successful in synthesizing knowledge are those who lack clear discernment when it comes to sources of knowing.

Discernment is mostly a learned behavior and is one of the key roles of any educational program. The Epistemological crisis society is In right now is, in good part, a failure of education to keep up with the information revolution. Post-modern relativism has exacerbated the crisis.

Illiberal tyrants and autocrats are always interested in limiting discernment and controlling knowledge.

That is a decidedly Enlightenment view; I would say that the fact I don't think a 10 year old should read about certain topics doesn't make me an "illiberal tyrant". A lot of people simply cannot handle or successful discern a flood of knowledge, and are indeed prone to being manipulated by the purveyors of such knowledge.

The ultimate knowledge is the knowledge of good and evil. God told his children not to partake of the fruit of that. Yet the serpent came along and said, "God is an illegal tyrant and autocrat; he does not want you to be wise. Come and learn of the knowledge of good and evil, and you will be as great as him!"

Josh, fair point. Iron sharpens iron.
We do have to consider the cognitive and emotional maturity of the person who is seeking knowledge. Not all knowledge (regardless of its validity) is appropriate for all ages or individuals as you rightly indicate.
1 Corinthians 10
23 “All things are lawful,” but not all things are helpful. “All things are lawful,” but not all things build up. 24 Let no one seek his own good, but the good of his neighbor.

[Josh]

Knowledge is in good part a result of the sources we trust.

Epistemologically, those who are the most successful in learning are those who have developed the greatest discernment in deciding who they will trust for knowledge.

Conversely, those who are the least successful in synthesizing knowledge are those who lack clear discernment when it comes to sources of knowing.

Discernment is mostly a learned behavior and is one of the key roles of any educational program. The Epistemological crisis society is In right now is, in good part, a failure of education to keep up with the information revolution. Post-modern relativism has exacerbated the crisis.

Illiberal tyrants and autocrats are always interested in limiting discernment and controlling knowledge.

That is a decidely Enlightenment view; I would say that the fact I don't think a 10 year old should read about certain topics doesn't make me an "illiberal tyrant". A lot of people simply cannot handle or successful discern a flood of knowledge, and are indeed prone to being manipulated by the purveyors of such knowledge.

The ultimate knowledge is the knowledge of good and evil. God told his children not to partake of the fruit of that. Yet the serpent came along and said, "God is an illegal tyrant and autocrat; he does not want you to be wise. Come and learn of the knowledge of good and evil, and you will be as great as him!"

Ok...hooray for tyrants and autocrats then.

Honestly - sometimes I think you just disagree for sport.

Post-modern relativism is decidedly a result of the idea that all knowledge is somehow good and everyone should have unrestricted access to it, and is the ultimate end of the Enlightenment.

Of course, we are having illiberal tyrants and autocrats once again restricting discernment and controlling knowledge, albeit in the sake of "freedom", mostly to help us be "free" from the constraints of tradition and religion. The harsh reality is there is no way for the humans to live without tight control on "unlimited knowledge". Someone is going to end up in control of someone else; the question is who, and under what terms. I vote for family, tradition, local church, local govenrment, and stable societal forms, and against revolution, war, mass society, and globalism.

[Wayne in Maine]

Of course, we are having illiberal tyrants and autocrats once again restricting discernment and controlling knowledge, albeit in the sake of "freedom", mostly to help us be "free" from the constraints of tradition and religion. The harsh reality is there is no way for the humans to live without tight control on "unlimited knowledge". Someone is going to end up in control of someone else; the question is who, and under what terms. I vote for family, tradition, local church, local govenrment, and stable societal forms, and against revolution, war, mass society, and globalism.

We have illeberal tyrants and autocrats in our churches, restricting discernment and controlling knowledge as well. That is, in my humble opinion. the greater threat to the propagation of the Word of the Kingdom.

[Josh]

Of course, we are having illiberal tyrants and autocrats once again restricting discernment and controlling knowledge, albeit in the sake of "freedom", mostly to help us be "free" from the constraints of tradition and religion. The harsh reality is there is no way for the humans to live without tight control on "unlimited knowledge". Someone is going to end up in control of someone else; the question is who, and under what terms. I vote for family, tradition, local church, local govenrment, and stable societal forms, and against revolution, war, mass society, and globalism.

We have illeberal tyrants and autocrats in our churches, restricting discernment and controlling knowledge as well. That is, in my humble opinion. the greater threat to the propagation of the Word of the Kingdom.

I think that era is obsolete. Most people are sitting around on the Internet to get their information from their Google News feed, and doing Google searches to try to learn about (for example) a theological topic. Bookshelves contain mostly mainstream and mainstream-evangelical books, with a smattering of Anabaptist books mixed in.

There are people out there who don't use Internet at all, but I am not in much regular communication or fellowship with them.

[Wayne in Maine]

Of course, we are having illiberal tyrants and autocrats once again restricting discernment and controlling knowledge, albeit in the sake of "freedom", mostly to help us be "free" from the constraints of tradition and religion. The harsh reality is there is no way for the humans to live without tight control on "unlimited knowledge". Someone is going to end up in control of someone else; the question is who, and under what terms. I vote for family, tradition, local church, local govenrment, and stable societal forms, and against revolution, war, mass society, and globalism.

We have illeberal tyrants and autocrats in our churches, restricting discernment and controlling knowledge as well. That is, in my humble opinion. the greater threat to the propagation of the Word of the Kingdom.

I think that era is obsolete. Most people are sitting around on the Internet to get their information from their Google News feed, and doing Google searches to try to learn about (for example) a theological topic. Bookshelves contain mostly mainstream and mainstream-evangelical books, with a smattering of Anabaptist books mixed in.

There are people out there who don't use Internet at all, but I am not in much regular communication or fellowship with them.

There's more than one way to control someone's mind, especially a young developing mind where one thinks that if they "train up a child in the way he should go" that "when he is old he will not depart from it."

[Dan Z]

That is a decidely Enlightenment view; I would say that the fact I don't think a 10 year old should read about certain topics doesn't make me an "illiberal tyrant". A lot of people simply cannot handle or successful discern a flood of knowledge, and are indeed prone to being manipulated by the purveyors of such knowledge.

The ultimate knowledge is the knowledge of good and evil. God told his children not to partake of the fruit of that. Yet the serpent came along and said, "God is an illegal tyrant and autocrat; he does not want you to be wise. Come and learn of the knowledge of good and evil, and you will be as great as him!"

Post-modern relativism is decidedly a result of the idea that all knowledge is somehow good and everyone should have unrestricted access to it, and is the ultimate end of the Enlightenment.

I don't think this is quite right. The issue with postmodern relativism is not that it encourages open access to knowledge (which is something it sounds like you are uncomfortable with), but that it believes that truth is relative to one's particular circumstance (or épistémè as Foucault calls it at the macro level). Thus, simultaneous and conflicting "truths" can all be correct depending on one's point of view.

Postmodernism rejects the meta-narrative and the idea of universal truth, while the Gospel worldview is built upon it.

Of course, we are having illiberal tyrants and autocrats once again restricting discernment and controlling knowledge, albeit in the sake of "freedom", mostly to help us be "free" from the constraints of tradition and religion. The harsh reality is there is no way for the humans to live without tight control on "unlimited knowledge". Someone is going to end up in control of someone else; the question is who, and under what terms. I vote for family, tradition, local church, local government, and stable societal forms, and against revolution, war, mass society, and globalism.

The answer to the problems of an enlightenment idea of open access to knowledge (even if many don't have the epistemological ability to process that information) is not a return to the good old dark ages - where knowledge was controlled by the religious and folk establishment. Knowledge is not something to be feared or controlled - it is something to be discerned and applied. People (especially Kingdom people) need to be given the epistemological tools they need to discern truth from untruth. I work from the assumption that what I (we) believe, if true, will hold up epistemologically. If our beliefs don't hold up to exposure to truth and knowledge, then they deserve to be challenged and possibly discarded. I would take no comfort in living in a house of cards, no matter how cozy and comfortable it feels.