Truth is not manifest. Positive empirical knowledge is impossible, learning proceeds through a process of falsification, and knowledge by induction is illogical.
Revealed religion maintains that Truth is knowable. As knowledge of this Truth cannot be obtained empirically, faith is required to identify ultimate sources of Truth. Revealed religion may persist, but it can never assert itself as logically valid because Truth is still logically unattainable.
Now faith is the assurance of things hoped for, the conviction of things not seen. (Hebrews 11:1)
If all knowledge is negative–that is, we can never arrive at a proven fact–then revealed religion cannot make demands of the so-called secular world to demonstrate knowledge of physical Truth. Logic, it seems, lends itself to negative knowledge (i.e., the best idea so far) while faith generates positive knowledge (i.e., we know this to be True).
Faith cannot be systematically taught, though, requiring evangelists instead of teachers–persuasion over information. This seems to me sufficient reason for the exclusion of dogma from science curricula (read: ID/creationism), for though we cannot fault those who choose faith, the insistence on positive accumulation of knowledge ultimately stems from a faith-based worldview for which no logical justification exists.
2 comments
Comments feed for this article
February 21, 2008 at 4:16 pm
Lana
Amen brutha! Testify! (Pardon the pun…)
May 14, 2008 at 2:19 pm
Successor of Faith « Reflections, Ideas, and Dreams
[...] 2008 in culture, knowledge, religion If religious knowledge, like any other form of knowledge, develops through a process of falsification, then an immutable religious tradition is unattainable. Cultural continuity, on the other hand, [...]