In The Evolution and Devolution of Religious Knowledge by Abdul-Karim Soroush, an idea that I can identify with is given about what people call religious knowledge. First, is that it is not knowledge, per se. I agree with Soroush that divine scripture is indeed divine, but the meaning we humans derive from the words given to us is completely human, which means that it too (like humans) can be full of error.
Because I have a Bachelors of Science in Biology, I am quite familiar with scientific inquiry, methodology, and theories. I am aware that in science, nothing can be proved; only disproved. Everything else is a theory until it is generally accepted and holds up against criticism and experiments to disprove. If a theory holds up, it is considered a law (as in a law of nature), but even laws can be disproved. It is no different with the study of religion. Proof may exist, but we will have to die to find it (perhaps repeatedly if reincarnation is true).
Soroush also explains how every interpretation of religion begins with preconceived notions and assumptions. From personal experiences to the societal whole, our perceptions are biased. As he explains, just asking the question biases the answer. Again, it is the same for science and, I would add, statistics. Asking the question is great, but often not all the variables are considered. So what gets missed? Perhaps we will never know. Perhaps someone else will consider those variables and come up with their own interpretation.
When I consider what I have learned in my religious studies, about the vast array of ideas and beliefs, I can’t help but see Soroush’s points about religious “knowledge”. That to me does not create a problem with faith, as his critics may see it. I think that acknowledging our human shortcomings can only help move us forward, because how else can we grow without knowing where we fail? You can’t fix what you don’t believe is broken. If anyone thinks we humans are perfect, then why would we need God? Perfection is the goal, but we haven’t met it yet. If we had, our world would be a much better place: a garden with lush rivers flowing underneath.
This is a response paper that was originally written in reference to The Evolution and Devolution of Religious Knowledge by Abdul-Karim Soroush for REL 432: Modern Muslim Thought at Michigan State University in September 2012
Because I have a Bachelors of Science in Biology, I am quite familiar with scientific inquiry, methodology, and theories. I am aware that in science, nothing can be proved; only disproved. Everything else is a theory until it is generally accepted and holds up against criticism and experiments to disprove. If a theory holds up, it is considered a law (as in a law of nature), but even laws can be disproved. It is no different with the study of religion. Proof may exist, but we will have to die to find it (perhaps repeatedly if reincarnation is true).
Soroush also explains how every interpretation of religion begins with preconceived notions and assumptions. From personal experiences to the societal whole, our perceptions are biased. As he explains, just asking the question biases the answer. Again, it is the same for science and, I would add, statistics. Asking the question is great, but often not all the variables are considered. So what gets missed? Perhaps we will never know. Perhaps someone else will consider those variables and come up with their own interpretation.
When I consider what I have learned in my religious studies, about the vast array of ideas and beliefs, I can’t help but see Soroush’s points about religious “knowledge”. That to me does not create a problem with faith, as his critics may see it. I think that acknowledging our human shortcomings can only help move us forward, because how else can we grow without knowing where we fail? You can’t fix what you don’t believe is broken. If anyone thinks we humans are perfect, then why would we need God? Perfection is the goal, but we haven’t met it yet. If we had, our world would be a much better place: a garden with lush rivers flowing underneath.
This is a response paper that was originally written in reference to The Evolution and Devolution of Religious Knowledge by Abdul-Karim Soroush for REL 432: Modern Muslim Thought at Michigan State University in September 2012
No comments:
Post a Comment
I would love to hear your comments and critiques. The only thing I ask is that you be respectful to me and others. Thank you!