This week continues The New Testament and the People of God in chapter 2 (pp 31-46), on knowledge, specifically, the basis for knowledge and how one knows, or, my dad's favorite word, epistemology. Wright attempts to navigate the reader through the quagmire of objective v. subjective, positivist v. phenomenalist, to arrive at his position of critical realism.
My first time through this chapter was a real eye-opener, as I had been classically trained to assume an objective (positivist) view of knowledge--that such knowledge was possible. To put it differently, there are certain kinds of knowledge that can be known for certain, without question, an 'objective' knowledge in which there is no doubt. Apparently this has been rejected by most philosophers for quite some time (p 33). On the opposite side is the denial of any certainty and one is left with only the phenomenon, the subjective experience and interpretation that is unique to the person. This latter one certainly describes some of the current cultural moment. And I don't think Wright would deny 'objective' knowledge when it comes to mathematical proofs. He does start off the chapter emphasizing his discussion of knowledge will narrow into the areas of literature, history, and theology (areas essential to the study of the New Testament). In this area, you have wide polarity: from one can know with absolute certainty to one cannot know anything with any level of confidence. To use his illustration, how confident can I be that Caesar crossed the Rubicon (p 34)?
Critical realism is Wright's attempt at navigating these extremes while not trying to rescue either position. Rather, he proposes that critical realism "sees knowledge of particulars as taking place within the larger framework of the story or worldview which forms the basis of the observer's way of being in relation to the world... knowledge takes place, within this model, when people find things that fit with the particular story or (more likely) stories to which they are accustomed to give allegiance." (p 37, emphasis original) In other words, stories are how we make sense of the world, and stories are one of the essential components that make up one's worldview. I actually think this is a contribution that post-modernism has given us, a helpful emphasis on narrative. Human beings live far more as story-telling-beings versus data-driven-logicians.
Wright then wraps the chapter up by suggesting that questions arise when one's stories are insufficient to answer questions that arise from current events (p 40ff). But we do so from within the context of these stories! In other words, worldview and story are preconditions to hypothesis and interpretation. The stories I believe may conflict with yours. And importantly, if your story fits better with the event (more explanatory), I may come to believe that is the better story--and perhaps change parts of my worldview in the process. Not all stories go down to the level of worldview. But we are dealing with the New Testament and the claim that God has come in the flesh in Jesus the Messiah. This story is covered with all kinds of worldview questions!
I found his discussion helpful in the area of New Testament study because I have (regretfully) used the phrase "it is true because the Bible says it" as a primary argument. I considered the Bible to be a source of objective truth and my interpretation of it to be objective and therefore my statement was objective. I no longer think this. It is not helpful in discussing Biblical interpretation. Wright, and the position I now hold, suggests using far greater nuance in discussions of history and theology. What is my worldview? What are the stories I tell myself (or that I have received from others) and believe to be true? How might these stories influence my reading of the text? And--this is one of the reasons why I think Wright is focused on this so early--thinking through these things helps us view first century Judaism and the stories it told itself--and therefore what the New Testament is doing with the stories it tells! I think you will see as the discussion continues what a powerful lens this view provides.
No comments:
Post a Comment