Truth and Knowledge - Part 1

I always feel yucky after any heated argument, whether it is politics or theology or the price of tea. I think it's called sin :-)

Anyway, after repenting before God and my debate antagonists, I get back up and try again...I'm just hoping my getting back up instead of letting an avalanche of shame take me to new lows points to Someone greater than me. If not, all I can say is, believe it, without Him, this blog would probably have been taken down by your's truly after the first week.

Trying to transcend political issues without abandoning critical items, I would like to strip away all the names, parties, platforms and talk a little about truth and maybe explain alot of how we think in our times. So, I want to talk about truth and knowledge.

I know, philosophical is passe and far too overwhelming. So let me try to at least attempt to deal with truth and knowledge as best I can without boring or losing anyone. I want to try because I think it is very critical, whether we look at politics, literature, theology, philosophy or simply conversations on the golf course.

Did you know that if you send your child to college....and that child shoots for a PhD, the university that you spent so much money for tuition and books and room and board will end up teaching your child that no one can attain objective knowledge? To our universities, knowledge is limited to science. The only knowledge obtainable is emperical knowledge....knowledge gained solely through the five senses. To the universities, there exists no such thing as non-emperical knowledge. Any knowledge claims that are beyond the five senses, simply cannot be determined or known. So the university is split between naturalistic materialism (hard sciences with the underlying philosophy that nothing exists but matter, energy and time) and postmodernism (study about 'meta-narratives' rather than study of knowledge outside of hard sciences).

You see this with the studies that come out. Government grant money is spent for universities to crank out emperical studies (remember---emperical means the five senses--only knowledge we can have, according to the well educated). Studies reflect statistical results that arrive at inductive conclusions regarding self-esteem, work force productivity, impact of gender-based thinking on children, etc. Because universities have become overwhelmingly atheistic or agnostic regarding God, a study about prayer with statistical results claiming that prayer helps people feel better about themselves and even aids in fighting illness....not because God exists, but because the statistical result this human behavior has on the sample group.

The studies are released to the media, the media releases the studies and continues to pervade and lead 'conventional wisdom' based on new statistical results. You will hear a PBS documentary discuss how marriage is reduced to evolutionary propogation of genes (based purely on emperical knowedge). Turn the channel and you can hear Oprah bridge the gap, as she discusses god and whoever he, she or it may be (non-emperical 'narratives'--rather than knowledge--created to help us make sense beyond what the PBS documentary reduced everything to).

You get the picture? The picture is that when it comes to morals, meaning, God, spirituality, there can be no knowledge claims...only personal speculation, which is why there are no experts on God on Oprah or much of any other talk show. There are no experts on God, because there is no one with knowledge of God, let alone His existence. C. S. Lewis had called people with this same situation, in his day, 'men without chests'. We are fragmented people who, on the one hand, believe there is no such thing as non-emperical knowledge (knowledge that can't be obtained through the senses--like morals, politics, God, spirit, purpose, etc.), but can't practically live as if that were true and create our own stories to ease the tension, understanding such stories are not in the realm of knowledge.

So, what's left? Power. Pretty scary, but that sums it up. And power is gained through politics, not as a way to help weed out poor information, assess the truth and help lead a city, state or nation in the right direction. Albiet the same language is used, but only tools to win. Remember, we are taught through universities, media and culture itself (even in many churches--like the UCC), there is only emperical knowledge. Once we get outside of that realm, there are no experts, no right or wrong, no up or down...just winners and losers, those in power, fighting to keep it and those struggling to take it away. Bottom line, it is about power.

Nieztche may not have been the most original philosopher, but he was a prophet for our age. It is the age of the new superman.

So, that power is obtained by any means necessary. For example, even though insurance fraud is a crime, in and of itself, if you can do it and not get caught, so long as it aids your gaining more power and influence, it is a means to an end....and that end is solely your creation. Our current generation breathes in and exhales out this thinking and way of life...and it is propogated from the institutions of learning, through the media and politics, to our family living rooms, daily paper and talks by the coffee machine. If you think I am overreaching, consider the current Obama-Ayers controversy, looking into Ayer's past and the Annenburg Foundation (Ayer's was into bombs in his early years, which he has no regrets. He even lost a past girlfriend while constructing a bomb). You can't excuse that, unless you admit the non-existence of non-emperical knowledge, especially objective moral values...and especially if it gets in the way to power.

I want you to think about this and think about it again because in the subsequent parts of this stream, I want to tackle a couple of incredibly important things: 1) what is truth and knowledge? 2) does non-emperical knowledge and truth claims exist? 3) what impact does this have on our culture and lastly 4) what is the unavoidable conclusion of such truth actually does exist?

I hope you remain patient with me and keep me honest. This is a hard issue to tackle, but the more I observe, I truly believe this is the #1 problem with our nation, universities, churches, families and workforce. The issue of knowledge is about as basic and pervasive as the issue of eating or walking. But because it can get weighty and because I am not very good at communication, let alone issues this weighty, I need you to meet me half way....and I promise it will be worth the investment.

Political Peas and Carrots

This is in response to a rather rabid attack on the Sarah piece: The original comments are in italics and my responses are not. I'll keep responses short as I can:


No Experience…
At least you have the honesty to ADMIT she has NONE. But making the argument that this is a good thing?? Breathtakingly irresponsible.


Keep in mind, she's running as Vice President, but since she is 'a heart beat away' from the presidency, let's look at what we have. Sarah Palin was elected twice to the Wasilla, AK city counsel in 1992 and 1995. She then ran for Mayor in 1996, winning that contest and the subsequent re-election. She served 2 terms as Mayor of Wassila, AK (1996-2002) and part of a term as Governor of Alaska (2006-present), spanning a brief 16 years of public life. Her education is in Journalism, (which is well accepted expert testimony on all subjects to many folks....ok, sort of tongue-in-cheek). It is true that of past presidential candidates, she is one of the youngest and inexperienced (public office held 16 of her 44 years). According to Article One of the Constitution, the only legal prerequisites for president are to be 35 years old, American born and to have had the US as a permenant residence for at least 14 years. No prerequisites about years as being a lawyer, senator or even governer....in fact, anyone could become president if they recieve majority of the electoral vote, which makes America very unique in world governments. The lack of experience in Washington, D.C. has, ironically, been one of her biggest criticisms and also one of her biggest virtues among her supporters.


In short, she does have experience and much of it executive. In addition, the voters of Alaska seem to have approved of her performance as both Mayor and Governor, prior to being chosen as McCain's running mate. Her performance at the Republican Convention and the Vice Presidential debate in Saint Louis has also shown her ability to perform well under extreme pressure. With regards to foreign affairs, it is fair to say that not many presidents have experience with foreign affairs prior to becoming president. Lastly, experience in things such as foreign affairs or in politics in general, is not necessarily or even sufficiently a virtue.


Won’t address the media…
Good plan here. Don’t like tough questions – just don’t talk.. If the questions are really to be as stupid as you suggest, then her going out and taking them head on would be to her credit. But maybe her handlers have gotten to know her better than any of us have had the chance to and think better of it. Maybe she is awesome and want to wait to play this card as their “October Surprise”. We will see..


The period of supposed sequestration from the media was between the last Couric interview and the debate in St. Louis, which spanned 7 days (September 24 thru October 2). The speculation about her 'handlers' is inventive, but doesn't seem to match either the period of 'silence' nor the results of her performance at the debate, even by democratic pundits (never said she did great--but 'held her own'). I think this was purposefully overblown to begin with. But keep in mind, before Couric and Gibson cut out all the hours of interview to arrive at the 30 minute bits they broadcast, they were clamoring for anything, from the real mother of her infant son, her husband rumored to being a pedaphile, to her firing her ex brother in law in Wasilla....not much at all. They needed a weakness....anything. Getting an all day interview with anyone, let alone her, with hours of footage to work with, is wonderful for you, if you are looking to place someone in a bad light. Another journalist could have taken the same footage and come out with something vastly different.


Lacking in Economics…
Although she has a short track record, she speaks often about cutting spending, lowering taxes and gives plenty of lip service to the other Regan era economic philosophies. But her actions tell another story, and by cutting taxes AND doubling spending she has left the small town of Wasilla with a 20 Million dollar deficit. Let’s see, can we think of another President that talks about Regan Economic principles but actually dramatically INCREASES the size of government AND the national deficit? I can think of one ..:)


Actually, this is incorrect. A deficit is like a net loss for a business. Dustin is refering to bond debt for city projects, rather than tax deficits. Approximately $14.5 million was to build a sports complex for Wasilla. The complex contains an ice rink, indoor track and soccer field, in addition to office and conference room space. Another $5.5 million was for improvement of roads (probably more expensive and frequent in Alaska than the lower 48) and $1 million to build a park. That is considered debt, not a deficit, and is normal for growing cities. Palin cut property taxes, raised sales taxes and created city improvements during her term. Based on the 2007 Independent Auditor's Report, the City of Wasilla cleared $7.4 million, after debt interest, in surplus and the $22 million dollars in business bond debt has been reduced to $13 million.

It goes to support her qualifications, rather than her lack of it. It will amaze you to see just how much revenue has increased from the tax cuts she made. Historically, tax cuts increase revenue, rather than decrease revenue. That's because the more money we keep, we spend and produce more tax revenue than we would have otherwise. Obama doesn't understand this basic fundamental. Sarah does...and has implemented a great case study in her home town. This charge you make is a perfect example of drinking far too much media Kool-Aid and not checking it out for yourself. There wasn't any response to her dealing with oil companies and the resulting surplus, so I guess you agree.

To be fair, I kind of like her to. She is probably a good person and her success is a good story. I also like the idea of electing a woman to a high office. But making her the Vice Presidential choice behind the oldest first time Presidential nominee in history is scary. Not just scary, but IRRRESPONSIBLE. For the record although I will vote for Obama, I am not in love with him. I believe he has the potential to be one of the all time great ones, but like most propositions that have a big upsides – the risk is equally as big.


I'm not sure your first sentence has much power of persuasion. It seems clear you are not fond of her. The comments also do not suggest you think she is a good person nor her 'success story' very succesful. Her position as second behind McCain is only irresponsible if you can show her as totally unqualified, which you haven't.


With regards to Obama, based on his economic plan, especially in light of our current delimna, he probably will go down as one of the greats, along with Jimmy Carter and Martin Van Buren. Increasing income and payroll taxes when cash is tight is a disasterous and irresponsible economic position. You can't tax losses and if there are any profits, increased taxes mean less cash to hire more staff or service debt for new projects, which are usually referred to by politicians as "jobs". I think his popularity is mainly due to the war in Iraq and the media's constant favorable publicity as well as people without hating people who have. People who have never seen battle are tired of hearing about others in battle and want to focus on more happier things. There's also a feeling of vengence against the super wealthy. The abuses reported have fueled an already existing tension between those living under tight budgets from those with several homes. And with nose diving real estate values, forclosed loans and tight lending policies, it is intensified. However, Obama's policies have had little investigation from the media and the general public is 'generally' ignorant of them. I concede that he will probably win and time will tell how our positions bear out.


I gave in and swam in the peas and carrots, which I vowed to myself I would not do. My apologies. I just felt very frustrated at the sheepish way people have formed opinions and anger at the bastians of media who control those opinions. We place far too much trust in the media, let alone congressmen and women. We consider a sound bite or video bite as an adequate replacement for knowledge gained through personal investigation into a matter, like a remote control. If there is anything to my comments in this blog about Sarah, it is not as much about her or the race, as it is our need to stop placing so much trust in institutions that have proved themselves questionable....and to ask questions, don't be afraid to sound stupid to others and think for yourself....critically, but for yourself. We have bills to pay, soccer games to attend and job functions to perform....but these things are still important and can bleed over into the bills, family events and the job.