(May 9, 2013 at 3:23 pm)ChadWooters Wrote: A common opinion among AF members is that these are just different ways of describing the same thing. To me that answer begs the question. By saying that subjective/objective distinctions refer to the same aspect of reality is to presume that one description reduces to the other without leaving any form of knowledge behind. But the objective description in no way coveys any of the qualitative aspects of the subjective experience. So I believe this opinion leaves much to be desired. In short, it does not explain everything that needs to be explained.
It does leave much to be desired, and it is an answer we desire as much as you do. But, I'm willing to wait until we understand more about the question to give it the best answer.
You're right in that every experience we have requires some amount of interpretation, even those we generally consider to be objective. But, to equivocate all subjective experiences is not honest. Our puny primate brains work best when they cooperate, and there are many subjective experiences which can be shared, compared, and scrutinized. Is the color of the sky blue? Everybody who has fully-functional eyes can agree on this. Most of us have eyes which allow us to interpret the sky in such a way that it does not appear differently to us. We're operating by group consensus, and the more people who agree with the consensus, the more we can trust it to be an accurate representation of reality.
When we're talking about events which cannot, in any way, be shared like this, how can we trust any of it? When we hear you guys talk about revelation and private messages from God, you understand that if the vast majority of people on earth had experiences just as any individual stated, we would believe it. We do not dispute you merely out of principle. It just sounds terribly shady when the only people who get messages from the Christian God are current Christians. What is it you see, and how is it you can know that it is not a trick of the mind? We know the mind plays lots of tricks on us. We know that hallucinations are possible and they can affect every sense we have. When it comes right down to it, you, Chad Wooters, must decide to interpret these sensations as communication from God. How can you do this? How do you trust your own ability to decode your sensations to know that it is God, and that it cannot be anything else? This is why I cannot call such phenomena 'knowledge'. You cannot even verify it for yourself, much less anybody else. All you really know is that you had an experience. Even when you attempt to explain it as a supernatural occurrence which is impervious to our scrutiny, that doesn't exempt you. It is as impervious to your scrutiny as ours.
That's faith, and it's blind faith. You are hoping you are right, but it is only a guess. It is not, and cannot be, knowledge. You are just as physical as we are.
