What is the best Christian response to the empiricist epistemological objection to metaphysics, viz. that metaphysical knowledge is not possible since things can only be apprehended through the senses. Thus knowledge of God is impossible.
Discussion
21 comments
-
Isn’t the idea that things can only be apprehended by the senses a non-empirical claim?
-
I don’t know if there’s a point in responding.
-
This is false. The quantum field is non empirical. Spacetime emerges from it. We have no direct empirical access to it. The reality of things can be known by their effects. Most subatomic particles are only inffered by their empirical effects.
A dead artist is not available for empirical investigation. Yet his effects left behind are EMPIRICAL.
God in the same way is known why what can be seen. So much so that we are without excuse.
-
‘Empirical’ and ‘metaphysics’ never go together.
-
1 Corinthians 1:19 For it is written: “I will destroy the wisdom of the wise, And bring to nothing the understanding of the prudent.”
1 Corinthians 1:20 Where is the wise? Where is the scribe? Where is the disputer of this age? Has not God made foolish the wisdom of this world?
1 Corinthians 1:25 Because the foolishness of God is wiser than men, and the weakness of God is stronger than men.
1 Corinthians 1:26 Brethren, that not many wise according to the flesh, not many mighty, not many noble, are called.
1 Corinthians 1:27 But God has chosen the foolish things of the world to put to shame the wise, and God has chosen the weak things of the world to put to shame the things which are mighty.
-
The five proofs of God by Thomas Aquinas. Or some thing a little bit easier to understand and is a good read in one or two sittings is “On Faith and Reason”(Fides et Ratio).
-
And yet humans also.have a spiritual part that is not material, but spirit, the soul.
-
Tim, when you figure out the best response, please respond/reply. I’d like to know. L&P
-
Yet you speak lol not you but whoever you raise your the question to. How can we comprehend the question?
-
There is no epistemological warrant for saying the only justifiable source of knowledge are the senses. We have 4 basic sources of all knowledge
1. Reason
2. Intuition
3. Senses
4. AuthorityThe empiricist is in tremendous trouble if he relies only on his 5 senses. We could never to science because one has to presume the future will be like the past, and, visa versa. There would be no history whatsoever. Moreover, certain propositions are properly basic and are outside the possibility of verification. Go to reasonable faith’s web site and snoop around. There is bound to be much discussion there.
-
Our access to God is “given.” We do not attain knowledge by our own efforts. He reveals Himself to us in His infinite wisdom. Knowing anything about God is only possible because He grants it to be so.
-
Its a self refuting statement, that thought isnt empirical
-
.
Scripture cannot be broken. Everything is empirical, but when knowledge/the metaphysical is hidden, then the epistemology is hidden. That doesn’t mean it doesn’t exist.
One must be born again, and have a renewed mind. Then you’ll have all the empirical evidence you need to advance forward. Until this gap is bridged it is impossible to know the mind of God. -
He had to know metaphysical knowledge to say you can’t know it.
-
Best answer is 1+1 =2 how do you know this? Empirically? This is self refuting
-
The very idea of strict empirical epistemology cannot be empirically verified.
-
I love Russel’s statement. “What science cannot teach us, we cannot know.” Is that a scientific statement? No. Therefore we cannot know. If it’s true, it’s false.
-
Where did the laws of logic come from in order to even make such a statement? The laws of logic are not grounded in naturalism nor is morality as both derive from the “SUPER natural”.
-
I have no idea what you’re talking about?????
-
The answer is simple (Richard Spence). Epistemology is dependent on Ontology. You can’t have any knowing without first being. No Empiricist can demonstrate how we came to be. Abiogenesis is not an Emeperical argument. Empiricists tend to look to the scientific method but the method itself is not scientifically provable, it is a metaphysical assertion.
-
You can know God, but you can’t prove it because it’s experiential.
Comments