Hi.
00:00:20.77\00:00:21.82
Clifford Goldstein here
00:00:21.85\00:00:23.12
and I want to welcome you
to "Contending for the Faith."
00:00:23.15\00:00:27.09
The talk that I
want to do now is called
00:00:27.12\00:00:29.26
the science of knowledge
and its part of a series
00:00:29.29\00:00:33.44
I'm doing called
faith and science.
00:00:33.47\00:00:36.12
And when we look at questions
of science in our modern age
00:00:36.15\00:00:40.48
and how these questions
relate to issues of faith.
00:00:40.51\00:00:45.53
They're quite often faith
and science are in harmony.
00:00:45.56\00:00:50.40
There are times
00:00:50.43\00:00:51.68
when they are
absolutely opposed to each other
00:00:51.71\00:00:55.93
that is if the science is right,
00:00:55.96\00:00:59.16
the particular
issue of faith here
00:00:59.19\00:01:01.74
has to be wrong and vice versa.
00:01:01.77\00:01:06.40
Now the question then
is not only which is right
00:01:06.43\00:01:10.77
but how do we know
which one is right.
00:01:10.80\00:01:13.62
And how can we know that
we know which one is right.
00:01:13.65\00:01:18.13
Can we really know it? Okay.
00:01:18.16\00:01:20.87
These things I admit
can get rather complicated.
00:01:20.90\00:01:25.89
Nevertheless considering
the importance of the issues,
00:01:25.92\00:01:29.97
it certainly well worth
our time to try the best
00:01:30.00\00:01:34.41
that we can to
work through them,
00:01:34.44\00:01:36.86
at least to the
degree we can as human beings
00:01:36.89\00:01:40.48
with a greatly
limited in our knowledge.
00:01:40.51\00:01:45.82
Now to begin, I want
to look at an article
00:01:45.85\00:01:50.07
that ran in the 2013 edition
in the Economist Magazine.
00:01:50.10\00:01:56.51
The Economist is a British,
00:01:56.54\00:01:58.36
is a very-- very
well respected magazine,
00:01:58.39\00:02:01.97
and as you can
discern by its name,
00:02:02.00\00:02:03.95
it deals with
the economic things
00:02:03.98\00:02:05.63
but it deals with politics,
foreign affairs, culture.
00:02:05.66\00:02:09.70
It's a very respected magazine
and very, very, well done.
00:02:09.73\00:02:15.46
Anyway I was reading from
an October 13, 2013 issue.
00:02:15.49\00:02:21.75
And the title of the article was
00:02:21.78\00:02:24.44
"How Science Goes Wrong."
00:02:24.47\00:02:28.17
What?
00:02:28.20\00:02:29.42
Science, how
does science go wrong.
00:02:29.45\00:02:33.06
Isn't science
kind of the ultimate
00:02:33.09\00:02:35.43
standard bearer of truth?
00:02:35.46\00:02:37.65
How does this go wrong?
00:02:37.68\00:02:39.73
I mean, haven't we
been told all our lives
00:02:39.76\00:02:42.07
that science is
wealthy way to get truth.
00:02:42.10\00:02:45.79
When something is
scientific or proven by science
00:02:45.82\00:02:50.08
or comes with all the
imprimatur of science.
00:02:50.11\00:02:53.24
Doesn't that sort of
have all the authority
00:02:53.27\00:02:56.92
that makes it unchallengeable?
00:02:56.95\00:02:59.21
When science speaks what
plea they speak out against it.
00:02:59.24\00:03:04.69
It's been for a long time
00:03:04.72\00:03:06.48
at least in
contemporary society,
00:03:06.51\00:03:09.32
contemporary culture,
00:03:09.35\00:03:10.86
a sign of a lack of
knowledge of sophistication
00:03:10.89\00:03:14.71
to dare to challenge
the findings of science.
00:03:14.74\00:03:19.45
Well, it's fastening
because recently a book
00:03:19.48\00:03:21.61
came out called
"Mind and Cosmos."
00:03:21.64\00:03:25.27
Why the
Materialist Neo-Darwinian
00:03:25.30\00:03:28.02
Conception of Nature
Is Almost Certainly False.
00:03:28.05\00:03:33.30
The problem
however was the author
00:03:33.33\00:03:35.87
was not some dumb hick
Bible thumping creationist
00:03:35.90\00:03:39.55
as folks who
believe in the Bible
00:03:39.58\00:03:41.60
and the biblical account
of origins are often depicted.
00:03:41.63\00:03:45.13
Instead, he is one of the most
00:03:45.16\00:03:46.67
respected
intellectuals alive today
00:03:46.70\00:03:50.36
and so those who
took umbrage at him
00:03:50.39\00:03:53.75
are daring to
challenge the greatest
00:03:53.78\00:03:56.08
and greatest science
couldn't easily get off,
00:03:56.11\00:03:59.72
you know, writing off
the author Thomas Nagel
00:03:59.75\00:04:02.44
as some illiterate
yahoo who didn't get it.
00:04:02.47\00:04:06.06
Nagel, I've read
most of his books.
00:04:06.09\00:04:08.43
He's one of smartest,
00:04:08.46\00:04:10.09
deepest thinkers
writing today, okay.
00:04:10.12\00:04:13.81
So what was interesting
just to see how condescending
00:04:13.84\00:04:17.61
many of the attacks were on him?
00:04:17.64\00:04:20.50
Well, this was just an example
00:04:20.53\00:04:22.54
how the poor man doesn't
understand the real issues,
00:04:22.57\00:04:25.67
that kind of things.
00:04:25.70\00:04:27.11
It's out of his
ignorance of the facts
00:04:27.14\00:04:29.20
that he would dare to questions
00:04:29.23\00:04:31.29
something as
scientifically sound
00:04:31.32\00:04:33.76
and established
as the Neo-Darwinian
00:04:33.79\00:04:36.46
Conception of how we got here.
00:04:36.49\00:04:40.46
Anyway,
00:04:40.49\00:04:41.73
I'd like to maybe some
day come back to Thomas Nagel
00:04:41.76\00:04:44.60
and his challenge to a
purely materialist world view
00:04:44.63\00:04:48.44
which is at the heart
00:04:48.47\00:04:49.50
of the
Neo-Darwinian view of origins.
00:04:49.53\00:04:53.30
And I think the point is
we have been led to believe
00:04:53.33\00:04:55.26
that science is kind
of a higher form of truth
00:04:55.29\00:04:58.41
or more certain kind of
truth than anything else.
00:04:58.44\00:05:01.76
And I think sometimes we
can have good believing--
00:05:01.79\00:05:04.63
reasons for believing that.
00:05:04.66\00:05:06.52
Though what's
important to realize,
00:05:06.55\00:05:08.63
and this is something
00:05:08.66\00:05:09.69
that I want to
comeback to one day
00:05:09.72\00:05:12.07
that you can have
very good reasons,
00:05:12.10\00:05:15.18
very sound reasons
00:05:15.21\00:05:17.40
for believing in
things that are wrong.
00:05:17.43\00:05:21.22
Man, I can do a whole project,
the whole program on that.
00:05:21.25\00:05:24.67
Stay tuned, I
think I will one day.
00:05:24.70\00:05:26.98
Anyway, the point
is we have an article
00:05:27.01\00:05:30.52
in a well respected magazine
00:05:30.55\00:05:33.10
talking about how
science goes wrong.
00:05:33.13\00:05:36.45
And I think it's
something we need to look at.
00:05:36.48\00:05:39.58
Now the jest of the article
00:05:39.61\00:05:40.97
is not science
going wrong morally.
00:05:41.00\00:05:43.54
You know, we can split the
atom to make a nuclear bomb
00:05:43.57\00:05:47.49
or we can make
medicine that kind of thing.
00:05:47.52\00:05:49.98
That's a whole different matter.
00:05:50.01\00:05:51.78
No, the question of the article
deals with is how the practice,
00:05:51.81\00:05:56.53
the result, the
methods of science
00:05:56.56\00:06:00.79
that are being done shoddily.
00:06:00.82\00:06:04.38
Let me read you a
quote from the Economist.
00:06:04.41\00:06:07.51
Listen to this, they were
doing some studies on science,
00:06:07.54\00:06:12.60
you know, looking at
how science was done.
00:06:12.63\00:06:15.15
See, "Too many of the findings
that fill the academic ether
00:06:15.18\00:06:18.96
are the result of
shoddy experiments
00:06:18.99\00:06:21.22
or poor analysis.
00:06:21.25\00:06:23.08
A rule of thumb
among biotechnology
00:06:23.11\00:06:26.96
venture-capitalists
00:06:26.99\00:06:28.49
is that half of the published
research cannot be replicated.
00:06:28.52\00:06:32.93
And even that may be optimistic.
00:06:32.96\00:06:35.25
Last year
researchers at one biotech firm,
00:06:35.28\00:06:38.62
Amgen, found
they could reproduce
00:06:38.65\00:06:41.26
just 6 of 53 landmark
studies in cancer research.
00:06:41.29\00:06:47.73
Earlier, a group at Bayer,
00:06:47.76\00:06:50.09
a drug company,
managed to repeat
00:06:50.12\00:06:52.64
just a quarter of 67
similar important papers.
00:06:52.67\00:06:58.17
A leading
computer scientist frets
00:06:58.20\00:07:01.19
that three-quarters of papers
in his subfield are bunk."
00:07:01.22\00:07:06.93
I mean this to me is incredible,
00:07:06.96\00:07:09.44
at least I
would seen that people
00:07:09.47\00:07:11.16
who buy the
popular view of science
00:07:11.19\00:07:13.46
as well kind of an exact science
00:07:13.49\00:07:16.17
should be stunned by
this, should be stunned by this.
00:07:16.20\00:07:19.24
You know, it's done by a means
00:07:19.27\00:07:21.13
that we're all
told it has to be truth.
00:07:21.16\00:07:23.66
I mean, what they're
saying one study after another,
00:07:23.69\00:07:26.67
they could be
replicated on and on and on.
00:07:26.70\00:07:30.55
So for many people however,
00:07:30.58\00:07:32.74
if you study the philosophy
and history of science,
00:07:32.77\00:07:37.84
you look at
things quite differently,
00:07:37.87\00:07:40.12
I wasn't surprised at all.
00:07:40.15\00:07:42.75
Even though it was
still an amazing article,
00:07:42.78\00:07:45.68
even to me who has been open
to these things for a while.
00:07:45.71\00:07:49.59
Let me read you another
quote. This was amazing.
00:07:49.62\00:07:52.62
That's why I'd like to
be one of these people.
00:07:52.65\00:07:54.44
"In 2000-10
roughly 80,000 patients
00:07:54.47\00:08:00.77
took part in clinical
trials based on research
00:08:00.80\00:08:04.94
that was later retracted
00:08:04.97\00:08:06.69
because of
mistakes or improprieties."
00:08:06.72\00:08:09.46
Come on.
00:08:09.49\00:08:10.85
That's 80,000 people
taking part in clinical trials
00:08:10.88\00:08:15.28
based on
mistakes or improprieties.
00:08:15.31\00:08:18.28
I wonder how it made those,
00:08:18.31\00:08:19.35
some of those
80,000 guinea pigs feel.
00:08:19.38\00:08:22.65
The article went on
to talk about the reasons
00:08:22.68\00:08:25.59
for many of the
problems in science.
00:08:25.62\00:08:27.79
And what are they?
00:08:27.82\00:08:29.69
Okay, they're
competing for scarce resources
00:08:29.72\00:08:34.32
and there is as a
powerful tendency to exaggerate,
00:08:34.35\00:08:37.41
the article said
that exaggeration,
00:08:37.44\00:08:39.91
they talked about exaggeration
and cherry-picking of results.
00:08:39.94\00:08:44.22
In science,
exaggerating, cherry-picking.
00:08:44.25\00:08:49.01
How do those ideas stood in
00:08:49.04\00:08:50.79
with the image of
scientists in a lab
00:08:50.82\00:08:53.75
doing everything rationally,
logically, scientifically?
00:08:53.78\00:09:00.15
Also, isn't it something that--
00:09:00.18\00:09:03.12
isn't it
something that peer review,
00:09:03.15\00:09:05.69
we've often hear
the word peer review.
00:09:05.72\00:09:08.55
Well, it's peer reviewed,
00:09:08.58\00:09:10.52
well, therefore
don't question it.
00:09:10.55\00:09:13.12
It's peer reviewed.
00:09:13.15\00:09:14.19
Well, I mean, that
what more do you need.
00:09:14.22\00:09:16.15
Well, look at what this
says. Listen to this quote.
00:09:16.18\00:09:19.63
Okay, quote, this is
again from The Economist.
00:09:19.66\00:09:22.76
"The hallowed
process of peer review
00:09:22.79\00:09:25.36
is not all it is
cracked up to be, either.
00:09:25.39\00:09:28.43
When a prominent..."
00:09:28.46\00:09:29.49
Listen to me
this, this is amazing.
00:09:29.52\00:09:31.28
"When a
prominent medical journal
00:09:31.31\00:09:33.26
ran research past
other experts in the field,
00:09:33.29\00:09:36.87
it found that
most of the reviewers
00:09:36.90\00:09:38.98
failed to spot mistakes
00:09:39.01\00:09:41.29
it had deliberately
inserted into the papers,
00:09:41.32\00:09:45.21
even after being told
they were being tested."
00:09:45.24\00:09:48.65
Can you believe this?
00:09:48.68\00:09:50.07
They purposely put mistakes in
and they missed it completely.
00:09:50.10\00:09:54.75
This is peer review.
00:09:54.78\00:09:56.38
Oh, my goodness, I
could spend an awful
00:09:56.41\00:09:58.36
lot of time on this
today if I wanted to,
00:09:58.39\00:10:01.22
but I got
different fish to fry today.
00:10:01.25\00:10:04.04
Anyway, I'm
bringing all this up.
00:10:04.07\00:10:06.72
It's not to dirt science
but it's to point out something
00:10:06.75\00:10:10.76
that people tend to forget.
00:10:10.79\00:10:13.79
Okay, and they tend to
forget that in most cases
00:10:13.82\00:10:17.75
scientists stick to
study the world out there
00:10:17.78\00:10:21.42
objective reality,
the things in itself,
00:10:21.45\00:10:24.74
stars and rocks
and birds and all that.
00:10:24.77\00:10:28.48
Who is doing the studying, okay?
00:10:28.51\00:10:33.16
Of course it's human beings,
00:10:33.19\00:10:37.55
fallible, bigoted,
subjective human beings.
00:10:37.58\00:10:42.51
Science like art and like sports
00:10:42.54\00:10:45.57
and like bridge building
00:10:45.60\00:10:47.03
and computer programming
and music is a human process.
00:10:47.06\00:10:51.06
It's something that humans do.
00:10:51.09\00:10:53.59
And thus it comes
with all the inevitable
00:10:53.62\00:10:56.09
and inbuilt problems
00:10:56.12\00:10:58.23
that humans by the very
nature of how we construct
00:10:58.26\00:11:01.73
or constructed
bring to whatever we do.
00:11:01.76\00:11:05.22
And that includes
our scientific study
00:11:05.25\00:11:08.30
of objective reality.
00:11:08.33\00:11:11.55
You know, if you ever
study the philosophy of science.
00:11:11.58\00:11:16.36
This truth about the limits
00:11:16.39\00:11:17.89
of what humans can
do comes home quickly.
00:11:17.92\00:11:21.50
Now some might ask what
is the philosophy of science?
00:11:21.53\00:11:25.32
You know, we tend to
think of them as the opposite,
00:11:25.35\00:11:27.75
you know, philosophy is this
kind of other worldly musings
00:11:27.78\00:11:32.04
about metaphysics
and first principles,
00:11:32.07\00:11:34.96
while science is
kind of this nitty-gritty
00:11:34.99\00:11:37.92
getting your
fingers and hands dirty
00:11:37.95\00:11:40.17
study of reality.
00:11:40.20\00:11:42.05
Well, I suppose there
is some truth to this,
00:11:42.08\00:11:45.65
but it's very
small almost to the point
00:11:45.68\00:11:48.02
of being meaningless.
00:11:48.05\00:11:49.78
The fact is that science,
00:11:49.81\00:11:52.05
yes, science proceeds on
philosophical assumptions.
00:11:52.08\00:11:58.10
You can't separate
science from philosophy.
00:11:58.13\00:12:02.27
Indeed, in a sense
science is a form of philosophy.
00:12:02.30\00:12:09.17
Now I read a lot of
philosophy of science
00:12:09.20\00:12:13.12
and I'm reading these books.
00:12:13.15\00:12:14.88
And then one day
it suddenly hit me
00:12:14.91\00:12:17.52
as I'm reading these books.
00:12:17.55\00:12:19.42
It suddenly hit me
that really all I'm reading
00:12:19.45\00:12:22.52
is I'm studying epistemology.
00:12:22.55\00:12:26.72
Now that's a fancy world.
00:12:26.75\00:12:28.50
What is epistemology?
00:12:28.53\00:12:30.75
I mean, we've heard of biology
and theology and immunology
00:12:30.78\00:12:36.78
and astronomy and so forth.
00:12:36.81\00:12:40.18
And their names pretty much
say what they're dealing with.
00:12:40.21\00:12:44.50
But what is epistemology?
00:12:44.53\00:12:47.83
Well, it's the study of episteme
00:12:47.86\00:12:51.87
which is from the Greek
word that means knowledge.
00:12:51.90\00:12:56.33
Now we have to be
very careful here.
00:12:56.36\00:13:01.68
Epistemology is not
the study of what we know.
00:13:01.71\00:13:07.35
It's not the study of
things like red blood cells
00:13:07.38\00:13:10.64
or how the cells feed our brain
00:13:10.67\00:13:12.85
or that the earth
rotates on its axis.
00:13:12.88\00:13:15.71
Or that two
plus two equals four.
00:13:15.74\00:13:18.34
No, it's much broader than that.
00:13:18.37\00:13:20.99
Instead
epistemology is the study
00:13:21.02\00:13:25.09
of how do we come
to know the things
00:13:25.12\00:13:28.80
that we know or
say to it that we know.
00:13:28.83\00:13:32.08
It's not the, you know, it's--
when we say that it's not--
00:13:32.11\00:13:37.03
it's the study of things
like how we know what we know.
00:13:37.06\00:13:40.82
How do we know
that the blood cells,
00:13:40.85\00:13:43.24
what blood cells do?
00:13:43.27\00:13:44.65
How we do know that the
earth rotates on its axis?
00:13:44.68\00:13:48.08
How do know that two
plus two is equals four?
00:13:48.11\00:13:51.91
Or when I say that I know
that Jesus is coming back?
00:13:51.94\00:13:56.83
How do I know that?
00:13:56.86\00:13:58.17
Or when I say that I
know that I have a toothache?
00:13:58.20\00:14:01.60
How do I know that?
00:14:01.63\00:14:03.24
One thing is for sure
how I know I have a toothache
00:14:03.27\00:14:07.30
is quite
different from how I know
00:14:07.33\00:14:09.23
that Jesus is coming back.
00:14:09.26\00:14:11.26
And that's quite
different from how I know
00:14:11.29\00:14:13.47
that two plus
two that equals four.
00:14:13.50\00:14:16.23
And how I know, you
know, and how I know
00:14:16.26\00:14:18.80
that is
different from how I know
00:14:18.83\00:14:20.54
that the earth
rotates on its axis.
00:14:20.57\00:14:24.22
In each case, I am
using the same verb know.
00:14:24.25\00:14:30.73
And I mean pretty much
the same thing in every case.
00:14:30.76\00:14:34.26
And that my use
of the verb means
00:14:34.29\00:14:35.87
that I'm sure of
something that it is correct.
00:14:35.90\00:14:40.04
But in each case
I know these things
00:14:40.07\00:14:43.30
in very, very,
radically different ways.
00:14:43.33\00:14:47.44
The methods, the
reasons, the causes, the steps,
00:14:47.47\00:14:50.55
the procedure,
the justifications
00:14:50.58\00:14:53.96
that we use to know something,
00:14:53.99\00:14:56.69
very greatly in
these different areas.
00:14:56.72\00:15:00.33
And see the crucial
question in epistemology then
00:15:00.36\00:15:04.51
is how accurate are
these different ways
00:15:04.54\00:15:07.24
that we come to
know what we know.
00:15:07.27\00:15:09.50
Or come to know
what we think we know
00:15:09.53\00:15:12.39
because sometimes
things we think we know,
00:15:12.42\00:15:14.60
we don't really know
00:15:14.63\00:15:15.66
because they
turn out to be wrong.
00:15:15.69\00:15:18.78
How do we know what we
think we know is correct.
00:15:18.81\00:15:22.09
This becomes
especially important
00:15:22.12\00:15:24.41
because we come to know things
in radically different ways.
00:15:24.44\00:15:29.68
And the million--
00:15:29.71\00:15:30.74
it's the million dollar question
00:15:30.77\00:15:32.47
that people have
been wrestling with
00:15:32.50\00:15:34.89
since all through known history.
00:15:34.92\00:15:37.59
Solomon said in Ecclesiastes,
00:15:37.62\00:15:40.01
There is nothing
new under the sun.
00:15:43.75\00:15:47.31
Think about this for a minute.
00:15:47.34\00:15:51.10
How do I know, how do I know
that I have toothache, okay.
00:15:51.13\00:15:56.92
Well, I feel pain in my tooth,
00:15:56.95\00:15:58.88
that's about as immediate
sensation as I can have.
00:15:58.91\00:16:02.31
But you know there's something
very interesting here too.
00:16:02.34\00:16:06.18
Some would say that
this is a form of knowledge
00:16:06.21\00:16:08.18
that I cannot
possibly be wrong about.
00:16:08.21\00:16:10.68
I could be wrong
about the reasons
00:16:10.71\00:16:12.41
why I have a
toothache, too much candy
00:16:12.44\00:16:16.04
or a filling fell out
or I have a chipped tooth
00:16:16.07\00:16:18.81
when I fell down last week.
00:16:18.84\00:16:20.94
I can really be wrong
about my understanding
00:16:20.97\00:16:24.36
but I can't be wrong
about having a toothache.
00:16:24.39\00:16:28.12
Again I could be
wrong about the reasons why
00:16:28.15\00:16:30.75
or I guess I
suppose I could be dreaming
00:16:30.78\00:16:33.64
or I suppose some evil
demon could be deceiving me
00:16:33.67\00:16:37.26
in some way or another.
00:16:37.29\00:16:39.26
But how could I be wrong
about the pain in my tooth,
00:16:39.29\00:16:43.82
whatever the immediate cause is.
00:16:43.85\00:16:46.54
I don't see how?
00:16:46.57\00:16:48.23
That is something we
could be pretty sure of.
00:16:48.26\00:16:51.61
But you know
that's kind of ironic
00:16:51.64\00:16:54.17
because of all the ways
00:16:54.20\00:16:55.47
we come to know truth
and come to know things.
00:16:55.50\00:16:58.79
I mean, aren't feelings
about the least trustworthy.
00:16:58.82\00:17:02.72
How often we are told
not to trust our feelings?
00:17:02.75\00:17:06.31
I mean, feelings can be
very, very deceptive, right?
00:17:06.34\00:17:10.95
How often if you
had a gut instinct
00:17:10.98\00:17:13.39
your feelings would lead
you astray even at the moment
00:17:13.42\00:17:17.10
when you were absolutely sure.
00:17:17.13\00:17:20.00
You were sure that
your gut feeling was right.
00:17:20.03\00:17:23.82
I mean, I tell you one thing
I'm glad at the men and women
00:17:23.85\00:17:26.16
who fly jet liners don't
make most of their decisions
00:17:26.19\00:17:29.02
based on gut feelings.
00:17:29.05\00:17:32.01
Also, can we use our
feelings other ways too?
00:17:32.04\00:17:36.43
I mean, I feel this table.
00:17:36.46\00:17:39.57
I can feel this table and
it sure feels solid for me.
00:17:39.60\00:17:45.26
I mean, it sure feel-- my
nerve endings touched the table
00:17:45.29\00:17:48.97
and send the
message to my brain that,
00:17:49.00\00:17:51.45
that table is
hard and solid, okay.
00:17:51.48\00:17:55.59
And, yet, but reality
00:17:55.62\00:17:57.41
what do we know the
reality about that table?
00:17:57.44\00:18:00.95
Well, we know what
has science taught us?
00:18:00.98\00:18:03.25
Science taught us that this
table is mostly empty space.
00:18:03.28\00:18:07.41
The atoms that make up
a part are tiny entities
00:18:07.44\00:18:10.61
and I've no idea what
they really are down there
00:18:10.64\00:18:13.25
that surrounded by electrons
00:18:13.28\00:18:15.04
and they got this
wide space between them.
00:18:15.07\00:18:18.03
Somebody once described
that they said of something like
00:18:18.06\00:18:20.33
you had a spec
of dust on the floor
00:18:20.36\00:18:22.98
and you put it in
Westminster Abbey.
00:18:23.01\00:18:25.33
That's how much
empty space is here.
00:18:25.36\00:18:27.87
And, yet, my feelings tell
me that it solid, it's hard.
00:18:27.90\00:18:33.89
And, yet, how can I be wrong
00:18:33.92\00:18:35.83
when I say that
I have a toothache.
00:18:35.86\00:18:37.87
And I came to know it
because I can feel it.
00:18:37.90\00:18:40.50
In fact that would be the
only, that would be the only way
00:18:40.53\00:18:43.17
I could know I have a toothache.
00:18:43.20\00:18:45.10
How can anybody else
come to the knowledge
00:18:45.13\00:18:47.54
not that they have a cavity
or they have my chip tooth
00:18:47.57\00:18:50.74
but they had a chip
tooth they can know it only
00:18:50.77\00:18:53.08
because they felt
the pain themselves.
00:18:53.11\00:18:55.68
That's one way, okay.
00:18:55.71\00:18:58.75
On the other hand, how do I know
00:18:58.78\00:19:02.55
that two plus two equals four?
00:19:02.58\00:19:06.17
I say that I know
two plus two equals four.
00:19:06.20\00:19:10.84
And I can say that I
know that I have a toothache.
00:19:10.87\00:19:14.50
Again I'm using
the same verb know.
00:19:14.53\00:19:19.04
To mean the same basic thing.
00:19:19.07\00:19:21.92
But I have
knowledge about those things
00:19:21.95\00:19:24.23
in completely different ways.
00:19:24.26\00:19:26.94
Clearly, how I
know I have a toothache
00:19:26.97\00:19:29.90
is not how I know that
two plus two equals four.
00:19:29.93\00:19:33.39
I don't feel that
two plus two equals four.
00:19:33.42\00:19:37.01
I don't put my hand
on the math equation
00:19:37.04\00:19:39.33
and all I can feel it.
00:19:39.36\00:19:41.24
Two plus two equals four.
00:19:41.27\00:19:43.45
And it sends signals to
my brain and tells me that.
00:19:43.48\00:19:48.08
Yet I know two
plus two equals four.
00:19:48.11\00:19:52.52
Just assuredly as I
know I have a toothache.
00:19:52.55\00:19:56.38
And, yet, it's true,
00:19:56.41\00:19:58.01
I know them in
radically different ways.
00:19:58.04\00:20:01.82
The equation that comes
from a rational understanding
00:20:01.85\00:20:05.04
of what the
number two stands for?
00:20:05.07\00:20:07.39
And what the
plus sign stands for?
00:20:07.42\00:20:09.68
And what the
equal sign stands for?
00:20:09.71\00:20:12.09
And what the
number four stands for?
00:20:12.12\00:20:14.75
There's a certain
rational and logical formula
00:20:14.78\00:20:18.11
and a logical
relationship between the two
00:20:18.14\00:20:21.17
and the plus and
the equals and the four.
00:20:21.20\00:20:23.97
And that causes me to
say two plus two equals four.
00:20:24.00\00:20:28.20
Fair enough, okay.
00:20:28.23\00:20:30.16
That's basically how
we come to knowledge,
00:20:30.19\00:20:33.10
get that knowledge,
00:20:33.13\00:20:34.16
but it's a whole
different root thing,
00:20:34.19\00:20:35.82
you know, you have a toothache.
00:20:35.85\00:20:38.20
What else can I say?
What else do we know?
00:20:38.23\00:20:40.98
I could say I
know that the earth
00:20:41.01\00:20:43.10
is rotating on its axis.
00:20:43.13\00:20:45.78
But how do I know the
earth is rotating on its axis.
00:20:45.81\00:20:49.38
I mean, it sure doesn't
feel it's rotating on its axis.
00:20:49.41\00:20:54.01
And if I wanted to I
could throw something up
00:20:54.04\00:20:56.06
I can do an experiment right now
00:20:56.09\00:20:58.42
or could challenge it.
00:20:58.45\00:20:59.73
I can throw a rock up in the air
00:20:59.76\00:21:02.01
and if I throw it straight up,
00:21:02.04\00:21:03.93
if the earth were rotating
00:21:03.96\00:21:05.22
wouldn't the rock go
one way or another way.
00:21:05.25\00:21:07.53
Instead it falls straight down.
00:21:07.56\00:21:10.82
So how do I know the
earth was rotating on its axis?
00:21:10.85\00:21:14.64
Yet, I say I know that it is,
00:21:14.67\00:21:17.02
the same way I
know I have a toothache,
00:21:17.05\00:21:19.60
the same way I know
two plus two equals four.
00:21:19.63\00:21:23.00
It was funny there
was a philosophical
00:21:23.03\00:21:24.62
Ludwig
Wittgenstein and somebody went
00:21:24.65\00:21:26.30
and said to him was
mocking the ancients.
00:21:26.33\00:21:29.13
Those stupid ancients
were actually thinking
00:21:29.16\00:21:31.53
the earth stood still
00:21:31.56\00:21:33.00
and the sun
moved across the sky.
00:21:33.03\00:21:36.41
And Wittgenstein
said, he said, well,
00:21:36.44\00:21:39.49
"I wonder what
it would look like
00:21:39.52\00:21:40.86
if the sun really were
moving across the sky."
00:21:40.89\00:21:44.03
Of course the point is it
would look exactly the same.
00:21:44.06\00:21:47.46
But anyway how many of
you listening right now,
00:21:47.49\00:21:50.47
you know, that the
earth is rotating on its axis.
00:21:50.50\00:21:53.78
You know it? You're sure of it.
00:21:53.81\00:21:56.76
But you don't
know what how you know
00:21:56.79\00:21:58.65
you have a toothache
or a backache, do you?
00:21:58.68\00:22:01.39
Or in my case I got
a broken finger ache,
00:22:01.42\00:22:03.84
'cause I got to broke my finger.
00:22:03.87\00:22:05.64
Or do you know what rationally.
00:22:05.67\00:22:07.75
The way you know two
plus two equals four.
00:22:07.78\00:22:10.72
I mean, there's nothing
deducted that must nothing
00:22:10.75\00:22:13.09
that follows at the
earth must rotate on its axis.
00:22:13.12\00:22:17.01
God could have created
the world somewhere else.
00:22:17.04\00:22:19.98
But you say,
00:22:20.01\00:22:21.10
you know that the earth
is rotating on its axis.
00:22:21.13\00:22:25.43
How do you know that?
00:22:25.46\00:22:27.14
Well, that's even
another kind of knowledge.
00:22:27.17\00:22:31.42
This is the type of knowledge
that is revealed to you,
00:22:31.45\00:22:35.13
told to you by other sources.
00:22:35.16\00:22:37.87
And, please, how
reliable is that.
00:22:37.90\00:22:41.24
I mean, come on, have you
not been told things by others
00:22:41.27\00:22:44.66
that have turned out to
be utterly, utterly wrong.
00:22:44.69\00:22:48.09
How much wrong
information is out there?
00:22:48.12\00:22:51.25
How many people believe things,
00:22:51.28\00:22:54.11
wrong things that
have been told to them?
00:22:54.14\00:22:56.89
And, yet, think about it too.
00:22:56.92\00:22:58.79
There's an awful lot we know
because it's been told to us.
00:22:58.82\00:23:02.45
Where were you born?
00:23:02.48\00:23:04.18
How do you know
that you have been born
00:23:04.21\00:23:05.88
where you were
told you were born?
00:23:05.91\00:23:07.62
I was born in Albany, New York.
00:23:07.65\00:23:10.12
I mean, I was aware of my birth
00:23:10.15\00:23:11.52
but it doesn't do
me a whole lot of good,
00:23:11.55\00:23:13.96
at least as far
as epistemology goes,
00:23:13.99\00:23:16.77
I know I was born
there because I've been told
00:23:16.80\00:23:19.48
and I have pretty good reasons
00:23:19.51\00:23:20.85
to believe those
who told me that.
00:23:20.88\00:23:24.39
But this leads
to something else.
00:23:24.42\00:23:27.24
Maybe people told you in
the past things were right.
00:23:27.27\00:23:31.20
Maybe they told you
those things were right.
00:23:31.23\00:23:34.20
They tell you this new
thing and every time you get
00:23:34.23\00:23:36.45
or maybe somebody
told you something
00:23:36.48\00:23:37.87
and every time they
told you it was right, okay.
00:23:37.90\00:23:40.73
Thus you have valid
reasons for thinking each time
00:23:40.76\00:23:43.80
this person told you
something it was right, okay.
00:23:43.83\00:23:48.01
And maybe you do.
00:23:48.04\00:23:49.56
But maybe just
because the source
00:23:49.59\00:23:51.20
was right the first time
00:23:51.23\00:23:53.01
or the first 50 times
or the first 50,000 times.
00:23:53.04\00:23:57.37
Does it mean the
source is gonna be the right
00:23:57.40\00:23:59.51
the next time it
gives you information.
00:23:59.54\00:24:02.35
You know, we can
get into all things like
00:24:02.38\00:24:04.01
odds and statistics
00:24:04.04\00:24:05.56
and someone told you something,
correct 100 times in a row.
00:24:05.59\00:24:09.62
Then you would
have reasons to believe
00:24:09.65\00:24:11.36
and to trust him
for the 101st time,
00:24:11.39\00:24:14.44
instead if he told you something
00:24:14.47\00:24:15.69
once you have
believes and the trust,
00:24:15.72\00:24:17.47
we can get into all that.
00:24:17.50\00:24:19.25
The point is
there's still a chance
00:24:19.28\00:24:21.71
of what they
told you being wrong.
00:24:21.74\00:24:26.75
Thus the question is, the
question in all of this is.
00:24:26.78\00:24:31.48
How reliable are the means
00:24:31.51\00:24:34.86
that we come to the various ways
00:24:34.89\00:24:37.16
we know something.
00:24:37.19\00:24:39.37
And this comes back
to what I said earlier.
00:24:39.40\00:24:42.97
I said, when you study science,
00:24:43.00\00:24:46.37
you were studying a
form of epistemology.
00:24:46.40\00:24:50.36
It's a very
distinct means of synching
00:24:50.39\00:24:52.93
to come to knowledge.
00:24:52.96\00:24:54.62
And if some would argue,
it's not a really very reliable
00:24:54.65\00:24:59.14
means of coming to knowledge.
00:24:59.17\00:25:01.06
And we're gonna look
at that more in our next--
00:25:01.09\00:25:03.85
we're gonna look at
that more in our next talk.
00:25:03.88\00:25:06.85
But as we close,
00:25:06.88\00:25:08.10
I want you to look at
one more question about
00:25:08.13\00:25:12.13
when we look at epistemology
and we look at science.
00:25:12.16\00:25:15.91
How reliable it
can be because again
00:25:15.94\00:25:17.66
we look at those
studies in the beginning.
00:25:17.69\00:25:20.37
They got all the scientific
method, all these things
00:25:20.40\00:25:24.10
and look at all the
mistakes that they made.
00:25:24.13\00:25:27.47
But see epistemology though
presents a very big problem.
00:25:27.50\00:25:33.01
Let say I want to
study my epistemology.
00:25:33.04\00:25:35.65
I want to come to know
00:25:35.68\00:25:36.95
how it is I know
the things I know.
00:25:36.98\00:25:40.71
But that leads to a big problem.
00:25:40.74\00:25:44.94
How do we study
epistemology itself?
00:25:44.97\00:25:49.85
How do we study the
methods of knowledge
00:25:49.88\00:25:53.13
when they are the very things
00:25:53.16\00:25:54.60
we are using to
study to begin with?
00:25:54.63\00:25:57.35
The methods of knowledge.
00:25:57.38\00:25:58.69
These are the
things we're questioning.
00:25:58.72\00:26:00.98
We can study biology,
we can study physiology,
00:26:01.01\00:26:05.15
astronomy, theology
using various methods of,
00:26:05.18\00:26:09.98
methods of
epistemological tools.
00:26:10.01\00:26:12.97
Reason, logic, our
senses, revelation,
00:26:13.00\00:26:16.82
things revealed by God
or humans or revealed to us
00:26:16.85\00:26:20.58
by someone else
and that's all fine.
00:26:20.61\00:26:24.63
But how do we study
these tools themselves.
00:26:24.66\00:26:28.08
When the tools
themselves are the very things
00:26:28.11\00:26:30.77
that we are questioning.
00:26:30.80\00:26:32.63
How do we study the very things
00:26:32.66\00:26:34.28
that we are using to
conduct the study itself?
00:26:34.31\00:26:38.14
If you are using
reason to study reason,
00:26:38.17\00:26:41.03
you are kind of
going in a circle, right.
00:26:41.06\00:26:44.09
And if you are using your senses
00:26:44.12\00:26:45.76
to study your senses then
you are going in a circle.
00:26:45.79\00:26:49.70
How can you trust your senses
to teach you about your senses
00:26:49.73\00:26:54.07
especially when your
senses are the very things
00:26:54.10\00:26:56.87
you are
questioning in the first place?
00:26:56.90\00:27:00.36
And I guess this all boils down.
00:27:00.39\00:27:04.23
I think in many ways, I think
00:27:04.26\00:27:06.99
when we look at
science we have to remember
00:27:07.02\00:27:10.56
we are looking at a
fallible human endeavor.
00:27:10.59\00:27:16.30
We're looking at
fallible subjective
00:27:16.33\00:27:19.66
human beings with prejudices,
00:27:19.69\00:27:23.58
with their own ideas,
with their own agendas.
00:27:23.61\00:27:28.26
And I think what we looked at
00:27:28.29\00:27:29.49
in the beginning shows this that
00:27:29.52\00:27:31.74
because science is a form
that we said of epistemology,
00:27:31.77\00:27:36.10
it's a form of know--
00:27:36.13\00:27:39.87
it's a way of trying
to learn about the world
00:27:39.90\00:27:43.98
and it can be a
very, very fruitful way
00:27:44.01\00:27:47.98
but it also can be a way
filled with a lot of pitfalls.
00:27:48.01\00:27:52.62
And I think I
think I can so relate
00:27:52.65\00:27:55.44
to the words of
the Apostle Paul.
00:27:55.47\00:27:59.00
Because even
though he was talking
00:27:59.03\00:28:00.49
specifically about faith.
00:28:00.52\00:28:03.53
It's broader than that.
00:28:03.56\00:28:06.07
He said, "For we see
through a glass, darkly."
00:28:06.10\00:28:11.28
That's his way of saying
we are limited in what we know
00:28:11.31\00:28:14.66
and that
includes science as well.
00:28:14.69\00:28:17.68