Sustaining Democracy: Epistime and Ontos
By: David Breeden
Tags: Unitarian Universalist, Democracy In America, Humanism, Multiculturalism, Nationalism

Photo by Lance Grandahl on Unsplash

You may have seen the recent interview with former president Obama published in The Atlantic magazine. In the interview, Obama says:

If we do not have the capacity to distinguish what’s true from what’s false, then by definition the marketplace of ideas doesn’t work. And by definition our democracy doesn’t work. We are entering into an epistemological crisis.

An “epistemological crisis.” Not a word most folks hear every day. “Epistemology” is a term used in theology and philosophy to mean how we go about finding and proving what is real. Progressive people tend to use science and scholarships and reason as epistemological devices.

But many — if not most — of our fellow citizens do not see those methods as epistemologically sound. Other things, such as scripture, or religious tradition, or the voice of God are how many if not most Americans go about finding and valuing what is real.

This isn’t a case of “you say potato, I say potata.” And, no, we can’t “break the whole thing off.” Not if we hope to have a functioning democracy.

Obama is absolutely correct that “we are entering into an epistemological crisis” that might make American democracy impossible. But looking at epistemology and fighting about epistemology is not the answer. Most of us already have a non-negotiable epistemology — we believe in science and reason or we don’t. A person’s epistemology is almost always non-negotiable.

Yes, we can change epistemologies — I did — but it’s a long, slow, subjective slog for most of us. It’s not something that’s going to happen in the public sphere, as anyone who has had the misfortune to participate in arguments about the existence of god knows too well.

However, there is another tool that is more basic and more far-reaching than epistemology — what is known as ontology. “Ontos” is the Greek word for being. Ontology is the study of being — how we live from moment to moment in the world.

Epistemology is subjective and largely invisible; ontology is how we live our lives in the world.

Yes, everyone has an ontology, even if we haven’t thought about it all that much — each of us has a socially-determined way of seeing being itself. But most of us also have the ability to see that other people live in other ways that appear to work for them.

For example, I was raised in a working-class fundamentalist Protestant religious ontology. I grew up believing that the US government was a scam by the man — a way of exploiting the poor and further extracting our labor and diminishing our lives.

We called that “Caesar,” and we believed that “rendering unto Caesar” was something we had to do because Caesar had an army. However, we had no honor for Caesar.

Rather, we rendered unto God “those things that were God’s,” and that’s where our loyalties lay. That was the ontology I grew up with — God is in charge, the “principalities and powers” of this earth are evil, and we’re all just in for the ride — sinners who are by nature going to treat each other badly.

Photo by Aaron Burden on Unsplash

That ontology and versions thereof is still where many (most?) Americans live. I got lucky — I got enough education to see that ontology is flexible: our basic way of understanding our very being can be changed. Altered.

My suggestion for making democracy work is that we find ways to demonstrate — concretely — that the ontologies — the ways of being — of other groups and individuals have meaning and value in the world.

This isn’t a new idea among (multi-)culturally adept progressives. But many Americans don’t understand ontological multiplicity. Such a concept doesn’t have to be all philosophical, however. Multiple ontologies can be discussed and considered with good ol’ fashioned storytelling.

Then, we aren’t calling people out, we’re calling people in.

FirstUnitarian.org

Huumanist.org

YouTube

Facebook