The Preconditions of Knowledge, Part 2

On the last post I had 4 items which were listed as Preconditions of Knowledge.  These items are required preconditions to any epistemology in that not meeting these criteria makes knowledge impossible, thus defeating the epistemologies own implied claim to be a true.  Item 3 of the last post is “A process must exist by which to distinguish truth from falsity.”  Upon this item I’d like to elaborate.

What would such a process look like?  It seems it would need the following:

A. A method by which knowledge about an object can be extracted from the object.

B. A medium in which knowledge is transferred from the object to the subject.

C. A method by which knowledge is brought into the mind of the subject.

How might these be satisfied in a Christian philosophy?  Is the medium perhaps the Logos, the divine logical/reasoning that gives light to all men?  What about A and C?  I’m not sure.


About douglasdouma

I am a graduate of the University of Michigan (BSME), Wake Forest University (MBA), and Sangre de Cristo Seminary (Mdiv). I've learned far more from books than in school. I'm particularly in debt to Martin Luther, Ludwig von Mises, and Gordon H. Clark for any thoughts I have.
This entry was posted in Theology. Bookmark the permalink.

2 Responses to The Preconditions of Knowledge, Part 2

  1. Rick Huizen says:

    I suppose that the scientific method transfered via the man-made mediums of mathematics and reason would fail here. 😦

    Wouldn’t the medium be the Holy Spirit then?

    I would argue that the Logos is not the medium because the Logos is like a rope pulled taught with forces pulling in opposing directions. True knowledge of God has no force to counter it. Knowledge of God cannot be refined through constant war and opposing argument like Science. Knowledge of God needs no rational analysis or peer review. Knowledge of God grows like a mustard seed, not by hypotheses and testing.

    And might the method be a personal relationship with Jesus Christ? (Concerning question A).

    And I think question C blew my mind. That question may be beyond the limits of human knowledge. 😜

  2. douglasdouma says:

    The scientific method (i.e. empiricism) has a number of serious problems. It’s a bit of a long post, but I address them here:

    The Logos that I refer to is that of John’s Gospel; specifically the first chapter. It is the “light of God that enlightens every man that comes into the world” and is equated with Jesus himself in the passage. I think you are on to something in mentioning the Holy Spirit as well.

    Knowledge of God is innate in man. This means we are born with it. Those who deny God are suppressing that very knowledge they’ve been given, and doing it to their own peril. When they deny God they no longer has a basis for knowing anything because “The fear of the Lord is the beginning of knowledge” as the Psalmist says.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s