Читать книгу Philosophy for Believers - Edward W. H. Vick - Страница 7

1 Introduction:

Preliminary, Why Philosophy?

We all have many and varied beliefs. You are an individual and you think about a whole range of interesting subjects some of which are not of particular concern to other people. Your range of interest is both wider and narrower than that of other people.

As you persist you will find that much serious, productive and illuminating work has been done by philosophers in their thinking about subjects central and related to your beliefs. This is the case, even if they are not thinking specifically of particular kinds of belief, say political, religious, or moral beliefs. but of the interesting questions that arise about belief in general. You may find that you have taken for granted what such thinkers have spent great effort in reasoning about. Certainly to understand them with any seriousness, but also to attain any clarity about your beliefs, you need to know some philosophy.

Often seemingly simple questions can demand rational treatment in quest for answers. Try answering the question; ‘What does that mean?’ when you have made a claim. Ask that of any belief and you will begin to see that a whole multitude of issues arise demanding attention. Or just think of the terms you use. Ask, ‘What does that word mean?’ Or, ‘What do I understand that term to mean?’ You may find that you have taken for granted a great deal that you might now wish to examine further. You may then discover that you have relied upon meanings handed down to you and that you have not really made your own. It is much better to ask, ‘What do I believe?’ and start thinking, than to ask ‘What do we believe?’ and rest satisfied without any real thought with the answers you are given. Why should you get someone to give you an answer, accept it without real consideration, and thereafter take it for granted?

This book is intended as an introduction. I would like to give some guidance as you begin or continue the process of inquiry just suggested. It is intended to be as simple as makes for clarity.

1 Examining BeliefsWe said ‘We believe many things’. That’s not very explicit. The ‘things’ we believe are statements, propositions, claims. We believe many different kinds of belief. We might classify individual beliefs into many different classes.Here are examples of individual beliefs:We can trust John.Lynne is competent for this task.Tomorrow’s weather will be fine.Advertisements need very careful scrutiny.That is a genuine Vermeer.God is love.Moses received tablets up in a mountain.Here are some possible classifications of kinds of belief:Medical diagnosisCampaigning politician’s promisesA historian’s accountClaims in an ancient documentReligious teachingMoral claimsAesthetic claimsWe can ask the questions we raise in this writing about any belief, however we classify it, such questions as, What motivates the belief? What reason, or lack of it, is there behind the belief? How could one argue in a rational way for the belief? What makes for the justification of a belief?The term ‘argument’ has two meanings. It meansa disagreement between believers. Contrary beliefs are expressed in opposed or contradictory claims. The attempt to justify them may vary. There may be no attempt to provide justification. An attempt to justify may take bizarre forms. But in this sense of the term you can have an argument simply by stating opposed beliefs.a set of statements arranged in such a way that they give support for the conclusion that is drawn from them. This is sometimes called deduction.

In discussing belief and believing we can operate on two levels. We can ask about the particular belief. Take for example the belief: ‘This building is safe.’ We can also ask about the fact of my holding this particular belief and then pass over to asking what makes this or any belief reasonable. Clearly there are different avenues of approach.

When you start to talk about Christian faith, even though you do not realise it you have already been engaged, I will not say ‘immersed’, in philosophical issues. For you already have developed certain attitudes before you fill your speech with content. You implicitly say ‘I believe’, whatever it is that you affirm or deny.

You then expand the statement that begins with the claim, ‘I believe’ with all kinds of content, with many kinds of assertion: about the future, about the past, about authority, about yourself, about the world, about the beginning of all things, about the end of all things, about life after death, etc, etc. But you believe many things, even if you do not consciously preface your convictions with the terms ‘I believe’.

So a good place to start would be to ask, ‘What is belief? What does it mean to believe?’

When we have spent time in thinking about those questions we might then go to some specific and important beliefs and ask the similar question, for example, What does it mean to say that you believe that God is creator? You will now see, of course, that philosophical discussion will help you to come to a better understanding of your particular beliefs.

You ask, ‘What will I achieve by engaging in such a pursuit?’ You will find the best answer to that question as you immerse yourself in the activity this book invites you to engage in. There is no substitute for persistent participation. But we can give preliminary answers and say what we hope you will discover. Take just three:

Achieve clarity. Misunderstanding is often due to not being clear as to what a belief means. So we must raise and persist in answering the questions, ‘What do the words used to state the belief mean? What does the belief mean?’

Understand what makes for reasonable support of a belief. This involves being able to see that the reasons you put forward to expound and to support your belief are rational, that the arguments you use are sound, that the evidence to support the belief is reliable.

Achieve an adequate vocabulary. A confused or inadequate understanding often results from having a limited mastery of the appropriate language. Fuller understanding results from expanding our mastery of concepts.

1 Discussing IssuesPhilosophy and theology both consist in the discussion of issues. In each of our chapters we state an issue to which we then address ourselves. The point of departure in each case is with a position held by the believer. We first make a statement of that belief. We then go on to present and explain relevant philosophical themes, showing what importance they have for the believer’s understanding.There is hardly any philosophical or theological position which has not been questioned and disputed. So when you hold one of alternatives it is only reasonable that you are aware of the claims, arguments and discussions that differ from your own. They may be more reasonable than the ones you are at present holding. But if you do not know what they are you cannot assess your own satisfactorily.As you read we hope that you will learnto articulate a problem, to define an issue, to recognise a significant question.where appropriate, to consider different possible approaches to the issue. So we consider contrary positions and the arguments by which these are defended.to assess the arguments, so as to decide which explanation is worthy, which is defensible, which appears most reasonable.to reckon with the fact that our conclusion may be tentative, to be revised upon further consideration of arguments and evidence.what constitutes a good argument, and what pitfalls to avoid in constructing an argument.

We discover:

that for every topic we discuss there is a philosophical literature. This includes classical statements, exploratory statements, varied and opposed points of view.

that to sample such writing seriously is an invigorating, challenging and sometimes frustrating experience — in short, a rewarding enterprise.

that there are classic treatments of particular theological issues and philosophical problems. So we do not need to start afresh when we tackle a particular issue. That means that we are learning to be sophisticated and not to think that we have made novel discoveries when we begin to have opinions about a particular topic:

that it is often only through considerable struggle that one arrives at a particular position on an issue. In that sense we make important discoveries when we come to accept or reject, attack or defend a particular position.

that such activity is fascinating, drawing us on, always with the realisation that there is more than meets the eye.

You will find that you cannot hurry understanding. Better to read a paragraph and puzzle out its meaning and significance than race through a chapter with the result that you only vaguely understand its content. Mind you, a cursory reading may be a preparation for a second or third reading as you come, again slowly, to more adequate understanding. But only as a preparation. Things take time, T. T. T. Give yourself time. Experience the satisfying joy of increased understanding as with the time you have patiently spent you come to real comprehension,

1 Why Be Interested in Philosophy?Why should the believer be interested in philosophy? In what ways is philosophy related to theology? We can take the two questions together.a. The language Christians use in declaring their belief and developing their doctrines has been widely influenced by philosophy. So understanding ideas and methods of philosophy illuminates and clarifies because they are directly related to the believer’s usage, and often to the content of scripture passages.b. Philosophy can illuminate particular ideas: for example word, beginning are creative ideas introduced in the Gospel of John and are also well established concepts in Greek thought as logos, arche. The well established meanings of these crucial terms enabled John to make significant universal claims for Jesus, whom he identifies as logos. They enable him to portray him as agent at the creative act. Understanding the Greek philosophical terms is essential for an adequate understanding of the claim the Gospel of John goes on to make, a claim no Greek would think of making: ‘the word became flesh’.You can’t understand Paul’s use of the Greek term pleroma as he battles the heretics without considering their use of the idea and others associated with it. Take the passage in Colossians 2:9 which reads: ‘For in him dwelleth all the fullness of the Godhead bodily’ (AV). Here pleroma is rendered simply as ‘fullness’ (AV). Other versions think to improve on this. RSV renders the term ‘whole fullness’, NEB renders the term ‘complete being’. Obviously you get little enlightenment for understanding the meaning by scanning the alternative versions. Only with the original context in mind and the contemporary significance of the term can you see that the writer is making a cosmic claim for Jesus. The Gnostics had built a whole structure of the universe into the meaning of the term pleroma. They left no place for the uniqueness of Jesus. Paul is correcting that aberration.We have given two instances where a depth of understanding becomes possible only with the expenditure of effort to explore how some important terms now established in the Christian vocabulary have come to be there. Think for a moment how without this understanding a reader reacts to such passages. Perhaps the sympathetic attitude would be simply to acknowledge that something important is being claimed but to leave alone such ‘deep’ things. Perhaps one even begins to think one’s own thoughts about the terms one meets in Scripture. These may be rather vague. The constructive desire to understand may lead one to the serious discipline of inquiring further. Several passages in the New Testament reveal that the early Christian teachers were even then demanding an effort from their people to go beyond an elementary understanding, for example: ‘let us leave the elementary doctrine of Christ and go on to maturity’ Hebrews 6:1 (RSV), and Paul bemoans the immaturity of his converts at Corinth. He writes that he has ‘fed you with milk not solid food; for you were not yet ready for it, and even yet you are not ready (I Corinthians 3:2 RSV). This plea for progress was made as the Christian leaders and their congregations faced opposition to the Christian beliefs. How can one counter error if one does not understand what one believes and also what the alternatives are?c. It can illuminate particular contexts of exposition within which characteristic terms are used. Take the book of Hebrews for example with its theme of reality in the heavens, the true tabernacle, the ideal priest, beyond the shadows on earth. That reflects a central theme of Plato and the Platonists. The real is the ideal. Earthly, temporal things are shadows, lacking reality, but giving hints of the real beyond.d. Passages of Scripture get illuminated by seeing parallels in philosophical treatments and giving them due consideration. This point differs from 2 above since here there is no direct influence between the philosophical idea and the Christian use. A case study would be the Greek concept of akrasia as providing similarities to Paul’s definition of sin: we do not do what we see as good and we do do what we see as evil (Romans 7:5ff). [See chapter 9]So in describing what happens to the original philosophical materials, we speak of adoption, adaptation, redefinition. The new context of Christian faith provides for and enables new meanings to emerge in relation to terms already rich in meaning. They become the vehicles for expressing Christian claims. Where the church finds heresy, it tackles the meanings given to the essential terms being employed, and progress in understanding is achieved in the counter play of debate and denial. So the opponent is not simply denied. Where something constructive comes out of the encounter, he is first understood.The Christian vocabulary has owed much to philosophical discussions from its very beginning. We have only to consider some of the many terms that have been thought essential for the expression of Christian beliefs. We have already taken a few examples of some used in Scripture with direct links to philosophical discussion.The Christian vocabulary has grown steadily from the very beginnings of Christian belief. As the church moved into different communities and encountered different languages and customs, it developed and expressed its beliefs in different ways. It was inevitable that various ways of explaining Christian doctrines would emerge. This variety of expression emerged so as to connect with the different contexts within which the Gospel was being preached. Different forms of expressing Christian faith emerged and gave rise to differing explanations. As a different context provided for different thoughts about the meaning of faith, so different theologies were created and discussions and disputes took place, even and sometimes especially within the same communities. Traditions emerged and proliferated.So emerged the sad phenomenon that often more effort was expended in defending the tradition than in seeking further and renewed understanding. This was true not only of sophisticated traditions but also of very simple ones. Here the defence was vigorous but often without a real understanding or a willingness to understand. For that might mean revision and change.e. We have spoken of the influence of particular philosophical ideas. We now speak of the influence of philosophy in providing vehicles for systematic expression of ranges of Christian teaching. The Greeks had developed comprehensive systems of philosophy. Here a level of mature philosophical thought emerged as in no other ancient culture.In these systems certain guiding principles (archai) provided unity. So for long afterwards Christians decided: Think as Plato thought. Or, think as Aristotle thought. Then go one stage further and think how Plato might provide for Christian expression. Think Christian teaching in harmony with the Aristotelian approach. Here were resources Christian thinkers knew and employed. So in the early centuries it was the influence of Plato, characteristically exemplified in the writings of Origen and Augustine. Later in the Middle Ages Thomas Aquinas provides the outstanding example of a theologian who thought in Aristotelian terms, becoming the foundation for Catholic theology. The influence of philosophy in providing systematic vehicles for conceiving Christian themes continued to the present time. An acquaintance with such philosophical approaches provides for understanding of the Christian expressions. That is a very good reason for studying them, quite apart from their intrinsic interest.Being aware of these considerations, we may find it enlightening to ask of a Christian teaching, ‘What is the context of this particular expression of belief?’ To give examples: the confession of belief in the incarnation often takes the form, ‘two natures in one person’. The confession of faith in God has sometimes taken the form: ‘three persons in one substance’. If you want to see the rationale for the use of these terms you have to plunge into the philosophical background where the terms ‘nature’, ‘substance’, ‘person’ were developed. For in fact there is a direct connection between the background context and the confessional statements. Without this background it is very easy to end up misunderstanding what the doctrine intended. So as backgrounds change, the form of expression for the Christian teaching undergoes change. ‘Time makes ancient good uncouth.’

2 Understanding FaithOur enterprise in this book is an exercise in Fides quaerens intellectum ‘faith seeking understanding’. So a good place to start is with the question ‘What does it mean to understand?’ Then we can ask, ‘What does the faith that understands do?’ In clarifying what understanding means we shall be answering these questions.We are often quite ready to use things we do not understand. We are often quite ready also to leave things we do not understand to the ‘experts’, the specialists. We sometimes have to. We do not know how to fix the computer because we do not understand it in sufficient detail, and moreover it is very complex. So we call in the service person who does understand.Let’s make a distinction between observing and explaining. I may see something working and be able to manipulate its workings without understanding it. Advances in science, for example in the understanding of electricity, started with seeing how things operated before attempting to explain the observations. Indeed a complex medium for explanation had to be developed before that understanding occurred. What seems an abstruse and unconnected language was required before there was a breakthrough. This is the language of advanced mathematics. Without that becoming a highly developed discipline, we would never have come to understand what electricity is, what light is. The production of the everyday things we take for granted resulted from the understanding that mathematics and accompanying theories made possible.Then there are things we would like to understand but, because it takes a great deal of application and intelligence and often a great deal of time, we never get around to the dedication, exploration and learning that is required. Sometimes we do not achieve understanding because there is just no-one able or willing to help us with the needful explanations that would enable us to understand. So we rest content and live our practical lives with what understanding we have.Another context for our not coming to understand as we might is that we are quite content with the understanding we have. We believe and we confess our beliefs and do not have any desire to ask any questions about them, to ‘go into them’ (as we say). We are often encouraged in this attitude by being members of a like-minded group with its traditions of belief and understanding. Unfortunately that sometimes breeds an attitude of rejection and even contempt for those who seek further understanding. Christian communities have ways of setting boundaries. Heresy is the name for the understandings that go beyond those boundaries, understandings that do not have the imprimatur of the group. Excommunication is the penalty for non-conformity.You can make claims without understanding them. So, we shall make a distinction between believing and understanding what we believe, between confessing and confessing intelligently, between simply stating the doctrine and understanding the statement of the doctrine, between making a claim and being able to explain the claim, between expressing a belief and grasping the meaning of that belief.Understanding always involves grasping concepts. Concepts are expressed in words, ‘terms’, and are used to construct sentences. We understand sentences only as we understand the concepts used in them. Take examples. What does it take to understand the following statements?The earth is rotating.The sun, our nearest star, is 93 million miles away from the earth.Or take just the first part of this one:The universe ‘is 45 billion light years across and filled with 100 billion galaxies –– each containing hundreds of billions of stars. . . .’Let’s list some of the concepts without which we could not even begin to come to an understanding of the above statements:star, mile, speed, light, million, 93, near, away from, sun, earth, rotate universe, year, light year, 100, billion, across, filled with, galaxy.Even when you understand the meaning of these concepts, it takes something more before you can really be said to understand the statements that contain them. Do you really understand what ‘45 billion light years’ means? Can one grasp what ‘hundreds of billions’ means especially if you follow it with ‘light years’, a light year being 5,874,601,673,407.3 miles. So multiply the big figure with 45 and then add the required number of noughts! Now do you understand? But that is only the beginning!Now make an application of this principle: Without understanding the concepts used or implied in statements, you can’t begin to understand believers’ claims. Then take some examples:God brings about events in the world in answer to prayer.Jesus ascended into heaven.I believe in the resurrection of the dead and the life everlasting.Consider some of the concepts in the statement of these beliefs:Jesus, ascend, heaven, into, resurrection, life, dead, everlasting, event, bring about an event, prayer, answer, world.

3 Where Are You?

(See the chart on the following page)

The following chart may enable you to take stock of your present situation. You hold various beliefs, some of which are more important to you than others. It is your desire to be logical and rational, so that you may claim that your beliefs are reasonable. As you think about those beliefs, rather than simply assert them, you find some difficulties. The belief you are now considering poses a real difficulty. It may be because of a contradiction with other beliefs or because when you think about your belief you face a dilemma. It may be that you simply are not clear as to what your belief means. It may be because your belief does not co-ordinate with an alternative belief. You will have your own problem!

You are now faced with a choice, the first of several. Shall I simply pass on, not even articulate it to myself in any detail, but simply ignore it, even if momentarily? You had admitted that there was a problem. If you ignore it the problem remains, even if you have repressed your expression of it and it will surface again in some form.

You decide to tackle the problem and, when you do, you find that there are considerations that you had not previously made. Perhaps someone has pointed them out. Or perhaps you have heard, or read an article, come across an argument you had not previously heard. Perhaps you encounter a few new concepts that you had not known previously that set the issues in a new light and make simple repetition impossible for you.

Now you have another choice to make, a little more advanced than the previous one. Shall you go on? Since the concepts with which you have up to now been working are, in the light of the things that have been brought to your attention, inadequate, you have the choice to examine the problem in the light of the new and promising concepts. But that will take effort and possibly call for reorientation. Shall you be ready for that? If you choose at this point to go no further, the problem has not gone away. It has simply been repressed. Maybe it will return and you will later take a different choice about what to do with the new situation.

You will then consider the new concepts and the reorientation of your thinking that employing them will require, so you find either a satisfactory solution to your problem, or you find a satisfactory restatement of that problem and that will lead you to further investigation.

Every one, I believe, will understand the moves here described. For they often occur in our everyday lives. But when it comes to our religious convictions, it is often difficult to make the choices called for at the different stages of development to maturity. Certainly some will be easy to make. Others will be difficult, so that we resist making them. For there are other than logical and rational considerations. People we know and with whom we worship will not be asking us questions about our beliefs all the time. Mostly they will take for granted that we believe what they believe, that our beliefs are similar, or even identical to theirs. That may make things harder for us when the choices are before us. For the realisation that there is not full agreement between believers often causes alienation, rather than the kind of understanding that goes by the name of tolerance. Unfortunately nothing has the power to separate believers more than the refusal to consider the reasonableness of another’s beliefs when they differ from ours, and of course when ours are the widely accepted beliefs within the community in which we find ourselves. It often requires doubt for one to be tolerant.