FAIR is a non-profit organization dedicated to providing well-documented answers to criticisms of the doctrine, practice, and history of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.
Difference between revisions of "Holy Ghost/ Latter-day Saint Epistemology"
SpencerMarsh (talk | contribs) (Created page with "{{FairMormon}} <onlyinclude> {{H2 |L=Holy Ghost/ Latter-day Saint Epistemology |H=Latter-day Saint Epistemology |S=This series of articles defines epistemology broadly and how...") |
SpencerMarsh (talk | contribs) |
||
Line 6: | Line 6: | ||
|S=This series of articles defines epistemology broadly and how to approach and define Latter-day Saint Epistemology | |S=This series of articles defines epistemology broadly and how to approach and define Latter-day Saint Epistemology | ||
|L1=Question: What is epistemology? | |L1=Question: What is epistemology? | ||
− | |L2=Question: | + | |L2=Question: What is the best way to define Latter-day Saint Epistemology? |
|L3=Encyclopedia of Mormonism (K. Carter Codell): "Epistemology" | |L3=Encyclopedia of Mormonism (K. Carter Codell): "Epistemology" | ||
|L4=Question: Is Latter-day Saint epistemology a valid form of epistemology? | |L4=Question: Is Latter-day Saint epistemology a valid form of epistemology? | ||
Line 12: | Line 12: | ||
</onlyinclude> | </onlyinclude> | ||
{{:Question: What is epistemology?}} | {{:Question: What is epistemology?}} | ||
− | {{:Question: | + | {{:Question: What is the best way to define Latter-day Saint Epistemology?} |
{{:Encyclopedia of Mormonism (K. Carter Codell): "Epistemology"}} | {{:Encyclopedia of Mormonism (K. Carter Codell): "Epistemology"}} | ||
{{:Question: Is Latter-day Saint epistemology a valid form of epistemology?}} | {{:Question: Is Latter-day Saint epistemology a valid form of epistemology?}} | ||
{{endnotes sources}} | {{endnotes sources}} |
Revision as of 22:50, 3 January 2019
- REDIRECTTemplate:Test3
Contents
- 1 Latter-day Saint Epistemology
- 2 Question: What is epistemology?
- 3 Encyclopedia of Mormonism (K. Carter Codell): "Epistemology"
- 4 Question: Is Latter-day Saint epistemology a valid form of epistemology?
- 4.1 The verification of certain propositions in religious epistemology can come through both rational and empirical means. This is absolutely valid and Latter-day Saint scholars and lay members seek to validate these types of propositions every day
- 4.2 The witness of the Holy Ghost is more closely scrutinized and to validate this part of our epistemology, we have to make more inquiries into the nature of justification and answer criticisms against it.
- 4.3 Latter-day Saints testify to remarkable aspects of epistemology with sacred experiences
- 4.4 Further Video/Listening Content
Latter-day Saint Epistemology
Summary: This series of articles defines epistemology broadly and how to approach and define Latter-day Saint Epistemology
Jump to details:
- Question: What is epistemology?
- Question: What is the best way to define Latter-day Saint Epistemology?
- Encyclopedia of Mormonism (K. Carter Codell): "Epistemology"
- Question: Is Latter-day Saint epistemology a valid form of epistemology?
Question: What is epistemology?
Epistemology is defined as:
the study or a theory of the nature and grounds of knowledge especially with reference to its limits and validity[1]
For thousands of years, knowledge was defined as epistemologists as a justified, true belief. Knowledge is only knowledge if and only if P (a proposition) is true, S (a subject) believes that P, and P is justified. Justification simply refers the evidence that we give to verify a true belief. For instance, I can be inside a room with no windows and a single, opaque door to the outside. I can receive a call from a friend inviting me to go for a walk in the park and I can think to myself "With my luck, it will be raining right now." Now, it could be raining outside, therefore the proposition may be true. But I don't know that the proposition is true because I can't justifiy it. The JTB model came under question in 1963 when philosopher Edward Gettier proposed the "Gettier Problem" that showed that we can have justified, true belief and not have knowledge. The nature of justification came under significant question. Many theories were proposed in order refine the JTB model because of Gettier's paper. These either added a fourth condition to JTB or sought to redefine knowledge acquisition entirely. These included models such as infalliblism, indefeasibility, causalism, reliablism, tracking theories, and so on. Each of these theories had certain "Gettier Cases" proposed for them. It led certain philosophers to abandon any endeavor of seeking to define what constitutes knowledge and to see epistemology simply as a study of normative study instead of a descriptive one. This is now called "virtue epistemology".
The author of the articles in this series asserts generally justified true belief being knowledge since the proposed Gettier cases for each model can be implausible. It is the way that most humans work. It's one of the reasons that we developed terms such as "explanatory power" since certain explanations define phenomenon better than others and we rely on the explanation that is evidenced by past experience or other evidence being evaluated at any given time.
This video explains JTB in an easy way and the Gettier Problem. Readers should see the whole series on YouTube for more easy-to-learn information on Epistemology.
{{:Question: What is the best way to define Latter-day Saint Epistemology?}
Encyclopedia of Mormonism (K. Carter Codell): "Epistemology"
Epistemology is the branch of philosophy dealing with the nature and scope of knowledge. The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints has no uniform position on the classical issues of epistemology, such as the relationship of the sources of knowledge, theories of truth, and modes of verification, but the superiority of knowing by revelation from God is commonly cited from the scriptures.
The word "knowledge" is used in different ways and has different meanings in different cultures. Different kinds of knowledge may be independent of each other.
The Western philosophical tradition, like Western thought generally, emphasizes knowledge in the sense of knowing facts. But this emphasis may not be appropriate, especially from a gospel perspective. Some scriptures teach that other kinds of knowledge may be more important. Thus, Jesus prays, "This is life eternal, that they might know thee the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom thou hast sent" (John 17:3). This is knowledge by acquaintance more than "knowledge about" (cf. JST Matt. 7:32-33). There are also indications that factual knowledge alone is not sufficient for salvation: "But be ye doers of the word, and not hearers only" (James 1:22). At the request of President Spencer W. Kimball, a prophet, the words in a LDS children's hymn were changed from "Teach me all that I must know" to "Teach me all that I must do," because it is not enough just to know; one must do the will of the Lord.
A related gospel theme is that knowing comes from doing. "If any man will do his will, he shall know of the doctrine, whether it be of God, or whether I speak of myself" (John 7:17). The Prophet Joseph Smith taught, "We cannot keep all the commandments without first knowing them, and we cannot expect to know all, or more than we now know unless we comply with or keep those we have already received" (TPJS, p. 256).
In formal philosophy, "knowing," in the sense of knowing facts, is often defined to mean true belief together with good reasons. In other words, a person knows some statement X if and only if that person believes X, and if X is true, and if the person has good reasons for believing X. The European-American philosophical tradition recognizes two kinds of reasons that support the claim to know: rational argument and empirical evidence. Within the Church these are tacitly accepted as sources of knowledge, sometimes even of religious knowledge. For example, after reviewing the traditional arguments for the existence of God, James E. Talmage observed that some were "at least strongly corroborative" of God's existence (AF, p. 29).
However, there is a continuing tradition, based on the scriptures and reinforced by modern Church leaders, that specifically religious knowledge requires a different and distinctively spiritual source. "We believe that no man can know that Jesus is the Christ, but by the Holy Ghost. We believe in [the gift of the Holy Ghost] in all its fulness, and power, and greatness, and glory" (TPJS, p. 243; D&C 76:114-116). It is widely accepted by Latter-day Saints that gospel knowledge must ultimately be obtained by spiritual rather than exclusively rational or empirical means (e.g., 1 Cor. 12:3). Thus, in The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, there is no clear counterpart to the Roman Catholic tradition of natural theology.
One of the most suggestive and frequently cited scriptures in LDS teaching makes the point: "And by the power of the Holy Ghost ye may know the truth of all things" (Moro. 10:4-5). This scripture is usually taken to apply to all knowledge. This suggests that both rational argument and empirical evidence, the two traditional approaches to knowledge, can be either supplanted by or encompassed within spiritual knowledge. Of course, the scripture does not say that knowledge comes only by the Holy Ghost. Yet, within the Church, it is often held that what might be thought of as secular learning, for example, modern scientific knowledge, is directly associated with the restoration of the gospel and is rooted in divine inspiration throughout the world.[2]
Question: Is Latter-day Saint epistemology a valid form of epistemology?
The verification of certain propositions in religious epistemology can come through both rational and empirical means. This is absolutely valid and Latter-day Saint scholars and lay members seek to validate these types of propositions every day
Gratefully for many religions, epistemology isn't simply a matter of subjectivism alone. Many propositions in the Latter-day Saint tradition require that one study them out in their own mind. This is manifested a lot in the scriptures. For instance, the Savior apparently used empiricism to prove himself to the apostles (Acts 1:3). Latter-day Saints also cherish the intellectual study of the scriptures and other disciplines in order to defend them and validate their truthfulness (D&C 88:77-79). Latter-day Saint scripture also shows that God values the mind and rational decision making (D&C 9:7-9; D&C 50:12; and D&C 58:26-28). Jesus taught his followers to keep the commandments he gave them to know if they were from God (John 7:17). Thus, there is no truly official approach to epistemology in this regard from Latter-day Saints. We simply cherish all the education we can get on any facet of life and the Gospel before we believe we will be resurrected (D&C 130:18).
The witness of the Holy Ghost is more closely scrutinized and to validate this part of our epistemology, we have to make more inquiries into the nature of justification and answer criticisms against it.
Near the end of the Book of Mormon the prophet Moroni, the last to write in the book, gives a promise that those who ask God about the truthfulness of the book with real intent, having faith in Christ, and a sincere heart may have the truthfulness of the Book of Mormon revealed to them by the power of the Holy Ghost (Moroni 10:3-5). This proposition includes all Moroni's promise encompasses all other propositions compiled and abridged by Mormon as is the best interpretation of “these records” in Moroni 10:2 and “these things” in 10:3. These propositions would include God being sovereign over the whole earth (1 Nephi 11:6), God creating the earth (2 Nephi 2:13), God having a body of flesh and bone (3 Nephi 28:10; D&C 93:33-35), the prophecy from the Book of Mormon of Joseph Smith being the one to bring it forth implying his prophethood and calling from God (2 Nephi 3:14-15),[3]and the existence of the priesthood and its necessity in knowing how to find salvation in Christ through ordinances (Alma 13)—among the foundational claims of the Church. When Moroni says “these things”, he is referring to the words that he is speaking to the future Lamanites that receive them per verse 1. He is also referring to the record as a whole.
As Brant Gardner, preeminent Latter-day Saint scholar of the Book of Mormon has observed about Moroni 10:2-3:
"In “seal[ing] up these records,” Moroni is not referring to any physical process that will bind the plates together, but rather to a spiritual sealing—an anointing to their divinely ordained purpose. This is the context for Moroni’s title page:“Written and sealed up, and hid up unto the Lord, that they might not be destroyed.”
The sealing is so that “they might not be destroyed.” It is a protective sealing not a preventative sealing such as was plated on the vision of the brother of Jared. (See commentary accompanying Ether 5:1)
[Gardner here quotes of Moroni 10:3]
Moroni speaks directly to his future reader. While he wrote to future Lamanites, he certainly understood that the Book of Mormon would come to the Gentiles as well [1 Nephi 10:11]. It is appropriate for us to consider ourselves included in this direct address. [4]
Thus, Latter-day Saints believe that the reception of the Holy Ghost following Moroni's promise is a valid way of knowing the truth of the Restored Gospel and the Church that espouses it since the proposition includes knowing the truth of all other propositions contained in the Book of Mormon. This does not mean that we believe that the propositions are then loaded to our memories. Latter-day Saints are encouraged to explore the scriptures, learn their principles, and search them out. The Holy Ghost may witness to us that the Book of Mormon is true, but it will generally not force us to treasure up its propositions in our minds nor live them (Alma 32:33-37).
At the center of the Latter-day Saint noetic structure lies this central hinge of the witness of the Holy Ghost. It is this witness that Latter-day Saints use to justify their testimony as something from God that can demonstrate the truthfulness of the Book of Mormon and thus the Church.
But is this a valid form of epistemology? For Latter-day Saint philosophers and theologians the answer would be both "yes" and "no". Can we prove through external empiricism that our spiritual experience comes from God? No. But we can, at the very least, provide evidence that spiritual epistemology is a valid way of gaining knowledge and answer criticisms against it. Thus we let the door open for people to believe in the Spirit's influence, act on the promises of the Book of Mormon and other scripture, and then choose for themselves to follow those spiritual promptings as the dying Lehi told his sons (2 Nephi 2: 27-28). Some people may believe that that is a weakness of Latter-day Saint epistemology or religious epistemology in general. However, this is not a bug but a feature--especially when agency is such a fundamental part of Latter-day Saint doctrine pertaining to the Plan of Salvation (Moses 4:1-3). If we were able to prove that these experiences came from God, then would we truly be able to have agency? Wouldn't he be compelling us to believe in him? But then what is a spiritual experience meant to provide? It is meant to provide that sliver of God's power that he wants all of us to experience as we continuously seek him. God is found as we apply all of our faculties and seek him through various forms of epistemology. We can seek him through rationalism/philosophy. We can seek him empirically through ancient history that provides evidence for the Book of Mormon. We can seek him experientially by the Spirit and witnessing miracles. Those categories aren't mutually exclusive but they are used to demonstrate a point--that God is reaching to us through various forms of epistemology. However, he leaves just enough space for us to choose for ourselves to believe in him. As Hebrews expresses, faith is the substance of things hoped for.
Now, as members of The Church of Jesus Christ we still need to answer criticisms against the Spirit. Both believers and non-believers have asked questions regarding the justification of this belief in the validity of a spiritual experience. They can be roughly divided into four categories: the question of diversity, the question of neuroscience, the question of reliability, and the question of circularity. Below are our responses to different critical arguments against justification. Before readers proceed to those articles, it is wise to understand how Latter-day Saints understand the conception of the Holy Ghost and the obtainment of testimony. As additional reading, one might read the material that we have written on the conception of prophetic revelation.
Question of Diversity
Question of Neuroscience
Question of Reliability
Question of Circularity
Latter-day Saints testify to remarkable aspects of epistemology with sacred experiences
Two of the most extraordinary aspects of Latter-day Saint epistemology are these:
- The ability to receive a "no" to a question that the questioner wanted to receive a "yes" to in prayer.
- The ability to receive miraculous knowledge through miraculous experience including everything mentioned as gifts of the Spirit, warnings about eminent danger, revelation about specific people given during priesthood blessings, and other phenomena.
These events can properly be described as "top-down" revelation in Latter-day Saint epistemology as this is God correcting the mental framework of the person occupying it and giving us specific knowledge. This is distinguished from "bottom up" revelation where the subject has to correct their own state of mind before seeking revelation. Requirements for this include that Latter-day Saints and other individuals interested in receiving revelation become worthy of the Spirit's influence including trusting in God enough so that they believe that he will answer (Matthew 14:21; Mosiah 2:37; Alma 7:21; Mormon 9:27; D&C 6:36D&C 97:17), that they study something out in their mind (Moroni 10:3; D&C 9:7-9), and that they then ask God for inspiration.
Latter-day Saints and other individuals struggling with questions of epistemology should remember/seek out these two extraordinary aspects of it and the times that they have/will personally experience(d) it in their life/investigation process.
Further Video/Listening Content
The following discuss themes of epistemology and objections to the use of spiritual experience in Latter-day Saint epistemology in more depth:
- Exploring Mormon Thought Ep. 70 - Faith, Reason, and Spiritual Experience
- Exploring Mormon Thought Ep. 71 - Knowledge is Being Part 1
- Exploring Mormon Thought Ep. 72 - Knowledge is Being (Part 2)
- Exploring Mormon Thought Ep. 73 - Mormonism and Other Faiths
- See also Blake Ostler's presentation "Spiritual Experiences as the Basis for Belief and Commitment" from the 2007 FAIR Conference.
Notes
- ↑ Webster's Dictionary, "Epistemology" <https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/epistemology> (accessed 3 January 2019)
- ↑ K. Codell Carter, "Epistemology" in Encyclopedia of Mormonism (ed.) Daniel Ludlow (New York: Macmilllan Publishing Company, 1992; 2007) off-site
- ↑ Brant Gardner has brought up some valid issues about the specificity of this prophecy (especially the inclusion of the name of the prophet being the same as Joseph of Egypt) in translation of the plate text at this point of the Book of Mormon—attributing it to Joseph Smith. The verses surrounding v. 15 are enough however to establish that Lehi is looking towards the future and that he has a specific person in mind. There does not seem to be any other viable fulfillment of this prophecy than the translation of the Book of Mormon through the Prophet Joseph Smith. This gives us the proposition ready to be verified by revelation that Joseph Smith is a prophet of God. See Brant Gardner, Second Witness: Analytical and Contextual Commentary on the Book of Mormon Vol 2. Second Nephi-Jacob (Salt Lake City, UT: Greg Kofford Books, 2007), 2:55-9.
- ↑ Brant Gardner, Second Witness: Analytical and Contextual Commentary on the Book of Mormon; Vol. 6 4 Nephi – Moroni (Salt Lake City, UT: Greg Kofford Books, 2007) 6:407.