We Must Believe in Order to Know: Understanding the Truth
Written by: Seth Barber
Since the beginning of life for mankind, to the era of the beginning philosophers, to the present age of technology, mankind has been thinking of ways to solve the bitter equation of life. From nihilo to telos, there has been a constant battle in the realm of Earth that has captured many great thinker's attention to the understanding of what it is to exist and what it means to understand life. Rene Descartes was a man who understood that in order to know anything we must understand that we don't know anything at all. Being that we truly know nothing, we must understand that all understanding comes from faith.
Learned from Augustine, Cogito ergo Sum was the only way that Descartes could fully grasp life and the understanding of what it was he was living for and attempting to understand.(1) The “I” to him was nothing more than an object that could think and doubt.(2) For Descartes, he wanted to prove that there was at least one thing in this world that he was absolutely certain of. Descartes aimed to tear down knowledge and rebuild it upon a solid foundation. After many nights by the fire he came to the conclusion that nothing is for sure known except for the fact that he is able to think and to doubt. Descartes believed that the mind is more powerful than the body because we have more control over it and we know it better. Scientifically he was right. However that is another discussion in itself and is not the direction Descartes was aiming for.
“Faith is primary and doubt is secondary."(3) We can only know this because it the only way to truly survive. If we were to see the world from a view of doubt, nothing would ever get accomplished. However, seeing the everyday world in faith will bring us to a state of confidence in our existence and the item which was primarily in doubt to begin with. This can effect a person in a very mental and emotional way, and can lead to a better understanding of how one is to conduct oneself daily. This view lies within positivity and negativity. For example, if one were to examine a glass of water filled with a liquid to the half-way mark, one might ponder if it is half-empty or half-full. If asked this very question, Rene Descartes would doubt first and have faith second, according to his statement in his Discourse on the Method.(4) Descartes might say that the we would truly never know which it was and it is best to doubt the true existence of the answer and to realize that one can never truly know the answer to such a question. In my opinion, that is the wrong approach. In this situation, one must approach with faith, knowing that an answer can and will be found. If confronted with faith, then the question cannot take hold of the asking and the only way to truly know the answer is to believe. I believe that the answer to this question lies within the prerequisite of the situation. First of all, I have faith in the fact that the glass has half the amount of water within it. Only because an outside source made it that way. Either nature or being. So with this faith in hand, I can approach the situation and be able to correctly answer the unknown. My approach is that the glass is either one or the other, but not both. If the glass started from a state of fullness, and was acted upon in a way as to displace water from within it, then the glass is half-empty. If the glass was naturally empty and has been filled to the half-way mark by an outside source, then the glass is half-full. The answer can only lie within the previous actions acted upon and not the future or present.
Understanding the true foundations of this situation will save one much time in finding an answer. It is most important to first recognize one's approach. One might ask “Am I attempting to approach this question with faith or with knowledge.” Once this has been disclosed, it is now possible to move along. Descartes' approach does not work here because we have already discovered what our foundation is. Eventually Descartes understood that knowledge and faith are inseparable, however his first approach was to tear down knowledge and to doubt everything.
As a Christian, Cartesian Philosophy can be very useful when one's own faith is questioned. It is known that there is and has been a major dispute in those with faith and those without faith. Typically these two groups are Christian/Religious and Scientists/Atheists. I do understand that not all scientists are atheists, however they use the same method to constitute their means of understanding the world. Non-believers will always take a position from a knowledge point of view rather than one that is faith based. In 2001, Director Ron Howard produced a movie called “A Beautiful Mind.” In a particular scene John Nash asks his girlfriend to give him some proof or verifiable data that their relationship it true. She quickly responds with a counter question asking him about the Universe and how certain he is about it's truth. Nash eventually admits that he does not truly know, that he can only believe.
Descartes is one of the reasons atheists have their foundation in non-belief and that is because Descartes learned to doubt everything first, and to do this before ever having any solid faith in what he knew.(5) Modern atheists have become nothing more than doubters, and have rooted their understanding in presumably known facts. The main problem with that is; how can one know and understand a factual statement given by another human being, when according to Descartes, none of us truly know anything? At this point, one is simply believing what another tells them. How did John Nash know that the Universe was infinite? He didn't know, he only believed. The only way he could take a position was regurgitate what he learned from his studies in Edwin Hubble, who discovered red-shifting in distant galaxies which led him to believe that the Universe is expanding and could possibly be infinite. Albert Einstein later said “There are only two things that are infinite: the universe and human stupidity; and I'm not sure about the universe.” The interesting thing is that even Einstein, who is said to be one of the greatest minds ever, understood that we do not know what is factual and that we can only believe in that which we cannot prove.
So where does this bring us as a species? What can we do now that will get us where we need to be in order to understand why we are even here? Many Philosopher's have spent their entire lives trying to prove these very questions. In my opinion, the only thing we can do is have faith. In order to have faith, one must understand where it truly comes from. The answer lies within. I find it interesting that there is such a various amount of people who claim that they do not believe, and that they do not participate in such a thing as faith. What they do not understand is that by making that statement they are hiding from honesty and are too coward to admit the truth. Everyone has faith, there is no getting away from it. I would ask one of these non-believers such a thing as “Are you in love?” Let us say their answer is “Yes.” I would follow with ”How do you truly know you are in love, can you prove it to me?” They respond “No, factually I cannot prove to you that I am in love, I just know that I am.”
Then I say “How can you say that you know?” They say “I just know that I am.” I reply “Well, as I see it you have answered nothing and have run in a circle with your answers. Since you cannot answer I will inform you that you do not know that you are in love.” Their reply is “What do you mean?” I then say, “There is absolutely no way you can know that you are in love, you can only believe that you are. Not to mention that you cannot prove to or convince me that you are in love because you don't even truly know if you are in the first place. The only thing you can do is account for how you feel. You can only inform me that you believe that you are in love. Because you cannot prove it to me means that it is not a fact to be proven."
Sadly this is how we, as Christians, must approach such non-believers. However there is no shame in it. Aren't we nothing more than informants of Christ? By taking this position to an atheist, we are able to inform them of the truth that they keep denying. Funny thing is, we haven't even told them about Christ yet, we are still in the truth orientation process. Whatever the case may be, if Christians understand this concept and know that the only thing we have is faith, then we can be proper accounts for Christ. Christ taught the truth and so we must.
1.Grenz, Stanley. A Primer On Postmodernism. (Wm. B. Eerdmands Publishing Co, 1996), 64
2.Bowen, Jack. A Journey The Landscape of Philosophy. (Pearson Education, Inc. 2008), 126
3.Newbigin, Lesslie. Proper Confidence. (Wm. B. Eerdmands Publishing Co, 1995), 105
4.Lafleur, Laurence. Rene Descartes, Discourse on the Method, Part 4. (Indianapolis; Bobbs Merrill Publishing Co, 1960), 24
5.Newbigin, Lesslie. Proper Confidence. (Wm. B. Eerdmands Publishing Co, 1995), 102