The belief that reality is socially constructed dominates Western thinking (and pseudo-thinking). There is no such thing as truth independent of the observer and we observers are not independent of the social world in which we exist. As South Texas School of Law contracts professor Val Ricks describes modern constructivism, "It's turtles all the way down" (comparing our world of experience to a turtle whose existence depends on another turtle, ad infinitum).
It is certainly the case our social "imaginaries," as Charles Taylor describes them, are just that: social. As James K.A. Smith puts it, we are creatures pulled by our affections and our affections are far less influenced by what we know (or even what we believe) than by the "liturgies" of acquisitive consumerism that dominate the public sphere of the Western world. Yet to acknowledge that much of what we believe to be the Truth is instead what we Desire does not demonstrate that there is no such thing as TRUTH.
Getting to truth can be a tough slog and most of us would as soon settle for simple beliefs (that serendipitously justify our desires) than working hard. For an example of someone who has worked hard to discover Truth and effectively argues that the truths of mathematics must be the case regardless of the foibles of we observers go here to read an interview with Edward Frenkel about his new book, Love and Math: The Heart of Hidden Reality. In the face of the interviewer's persistent questioning, Frenkel maintains that "mathematical concepts and ideas exist objectively, outside of the physical world and outside of the world of consciousness."
Frenkel does not in this interview go on to address any of the implications of eternal truths that exist apart from human consciousness. Truth is a characteristic of propositions and propositions are an example of thinking, which entails a thinker. Together, and in short, we have an argument for the existence of God. There are problems with this argument as professional philosophers have observed but nonetheless Frenkel's clear and simple arguments for mathematical Truths are certainly consistent with believe in a eternal mind and thus the Person whose mind it is.
It is certainly the case our social "imaginaries," as Charles Taylor describes them, are just that: social. As James K.A. Smith puts it, we are creatures pulled by our affections and our affections are far less influenced by what we know (or even what we believe) than by the "liturgies" of acquisitive consumerism that dominate the public sphere of the Western world. Yet to acknowledge that much of what we believe to be the Truth is instead what we Desire does not demonstrate that there is no such thing as TRUTH.
Getting to truth can be a tough slog and most of us would as soon settle for simple beliefs (that serendipitously justify our desires) than working hard. For an example of someone who has worked hard to discover Truth and effectively argues that the truths of mathematics must be the case regardless of the foibles of we observers go here to read an interview with Edward Frenkel about his new book, Love and Math: The Heart of Hidden Reality. In the face of the interviewer's persistent questioning, Frenkel maintains that "mathematical concepts and ideas exist objectively, outside of the physical world and outside of the world of consciousness."
Frenkel does not in this interview go on to address any of the implications of eternal truths that exist apart from human consciousness. Truth is a characteristic of propositions and propositions are an example of thinking, which entails a thinker. Together, and in short, we have an argument for the existence of God. There are problems with this argument as professional philosophers have observed but nonetheless Frenkel's clear and simple arguments for mathematical Truths are certainly consistent with believe in a eternal mind and thus the Person whose mind it is.
No comments:
Post a Comment