From: kilroy@gboro.glassboro.edu (Dr Nancy's Sweetie)
Subject: Absolute Certainty about Authority
Summary: There is no way out of the loop.
Keywords: philosophy, epistemology, truth, unfounded, `Woof!'
Organization: Rowan College of New Jersey
Disclaimer: My dog Brandy doesn't seem to have a strong opinion on this issue.
Date: Thu, 8 Oct 1992 16:58:30 GMT


Jesse Carnes wants to have Yet Another Discussion On Authority, and (with no
small irony) even mentions epistemology.

Epistemology deals with the basis and origin of knowledge.  That is, given
a belief, how was it arrived at?  What evidence and arguments are used to
support it?  It can also be used more generally; for a particular field of
study, what kinds of information are available?  Is ANY information available?


As a shorthand, you can think of epistemology as "how do you know?"  That
question, it turns out, is what dooms Mr Carnes.  He writes:

> Now, what we want to establish is the desire for ABSOLUTE certainty, rather
> than some sort of blind "Kirkegaardian" leap into the dark. [...]
> We want to establish a case for ABSOLUTE and EXCLUSIVE Authority.

And that eventually leads us to a loop.

The problem with `absolute certainty' is that, at the bottom, at least some of
the thinking goes on inside your own head.  Unless you can be certain that
everything which happens in your head is infallible, the reasoning you did to
discover a source of truth is in question.

And that means you do NOT have absolute justification for your source of
authority -- which means you do NOT have absolute certainty.


Let's take two specific examples:

  a) Jesse Carnes and the Bible.
  b) Steve Creps and the Roman Catholic Church.

Mr Carnes has, we presume, spent some time studying the Bible, and history,
and several other topics.  He has concluded, based on all these studies (and
possible some religious experiences) that the Bible is a source of Absolute
Truth.  Similarly, Mr Creps has presumably spend some time studying these
issues and has concluded that the Roman Catholic Church can teach infallibly.

Either conclusion may be true; but even if it is, neither man can be certain
that he is correct.  His conclusion depends on how well he studied history --
he may have made mistakes, and the references he used may have contained
mistakes.  His conclusion depends on how well he studied the Bible -- he may
have made mistakes.  His conclusion depends on his own reasoning -- and he may
have made mistakes.  (Noticing a common thread yet?  8-)

Everything about his study of the world that he did -- everything that
happened in his own head -- is limited by his own thinking.  No matter what
he does to try and cover his mistakes, he can never be certain of his own
infallibility.  As long as ANY PART of the belief is based on his own
reasoning, that belief cannot be considered "absolutely certain".

Mr Creps and Mr Carnes both believe that they have found a source of absolute
truth -- but that belief is only as good as the quality of the search they
made for it.  Unless they can say that their own reasoning is flawless, their
conclusions are in doubt.

Any belief that you hold about absolute sources of truth depends in part on
your own thinking -- there is no way out of the loop.  Only an infallible
thinker can have absolute certainty in all his beliefs.


This is easy to demonstrate.  Let's go back to our shorthand method of doing
epistemology: "how do you know?"  Imagine a hypothetical discussion:

 A: The (Bible|Vatican) is a source of absolute truth.

 B: How do you know?

 A: I studied history and the Bible and religious writings and church
    teachings and came to this conclusion.

 B: How do you know you studied history correctly?

 A: Well, I double-checked everything.

 B: How do you know you double-checked correctly?

 A: Well, I compared my answers with some smart people and we agreed.

 B: Just because some smart guy believes something that doesn't mean it is
    true.  How do you know THEY studied it correctly?

 A: ...

And, as you see, B will eventually get A to the point where he has to say "I
can't prove that there are no mistakes" -- and as long as you may have made a
mistake, then you cannot be ABSOLUTELY certain.

There is no way out of the loop.


> I do not mean to implement Doubt as some sort of mental "club" but, what
> we really NEED is something that we can have ABSOLUTE confidence in as
> an unfailing objective source of Truth.

I am aware that many people feel a need to have absolute confidence in some
readily-available source of authority -- but as long as human beings are
involved in it, no such confidence can be justified.  Just because you NEED
something you can have complete confidence in doesn't mean that any such thing
exists.

Mr Carnes writes:

> Unless there is an ULTIMATE objective authority, there is nothing we have to
> hold to with CERTAINTY.  Would the Omnicient God who created all of this
> have us to claw in an uncertain morass of darkness if He really wanted us to
> KNOW Him and His Truth?  That would be unthinkable and unworthy of the God
> of the Bible.

When you write about Predestination, and people say "Oh, but it's unthinkable
that God would plan to send people to Hell", you always reply by saying that
their emotional reactions do not change what is true.

In reply to your paragraph above, I repeat your words back at you.  Just
because you find something unthinkable has nothing to do with whether it is
true.  (In general, I consider guessing about what God might do a dubious
exercise at best.)

I personally believe that there is an ultimate objective authority: God.  But
at the same time, humans have no way of being CERTAIN that we fully understand
him, at least not so long as our reasoning is tainted by the Fall.  As long as
you are a sinner, your thoughts will always be suspect.  You cannot be certain
of what goes on in your head.  There is no way out of the loop.


> I want to deal with this topic PHILOSOPHICALLY ...

Okay, here's a quote from possibly the greatest (merely human) philosopher
who ever wrote:

Darren F Provine / kilroy@gboro.glassboro.edu
"At the core of all well-founded belief, lies belief that is unfounded."
                                                    -- Ludwig Wittgenstein