previousnext

The outline of this chapter of our journey involves the examining of some of the most revealing historical insights into the limitations of our knowing:

“What we may learn is that, in opposition to what is professed by much of our history of dogma, we do not need to deny or rationalize our insights into unknowing, but rather, can take them with us as the greatest boon in the pursuit of knowledge—the very thing they may seem to essentially undermine.”

“The exploration of Popper’s perception in regard to instrumentalism underscores both the value of searching for the nature of our knowledge beyond the catch-all answer of Truth, but also the danger of accepting idealizations of any kind; of certainty, of reality, of good and evil, of progress, etc. The employment of the blank checks of dogmatism and romanticism, which impress themselves upon us through brute force and seduction respectively, obscure and retard opportunities for the deepening of our understandings.”

“Our vocabulary will begin shifting very quickly now … Possibilities of exploring the spaces between hard distinctions will begin popping up on the peripheries, in the cracks, and in possible reconfigurations of our conceptual frameworks. The Gordian knots of the liar paradoxes and non-referring names can be cut by recognizing them as semiotic dynamics, and not epistemic dead-ends. Paradoxes in general will be welcomed as describing the boundary conditions and asymptotes of specific models of interpretation … We will find ourselves moving more fluidly between lenses of understanding, free to integrate what each may have to offer without fear of the insights of one compromising the monopoly on ‘Truth’ of another.”

“We may lovingly, and with full gravity of reason, practically honor our ontological commitments, reinstate all of our crucial vocabulary (from knowing, to certainty, to truth, to absolutes), only tacitly de-capitalized, and in freer, more considered application, with a fuller awareness of and responsibility for our relationships of reciprocal authorship with them.”

previous next previous next

Documents