Quote:Why should it not be?
If you have some other set of criteria, show that the functionality of those criteria follows from the same assumptions that grant me your existence.
And even if another method was found, how would one demonstrate that is more effective than empiricism?
How do you know beauty and courage "exist"? What do they have to do with "reality"?
Above is a set of quotes all raising questions about what else could we base our understanding if we do not base it on empiricism. I would like to began with making the following clarifications:
I want to make it clear that I do not deny the value of Empiricism.
a) Observable science has allowed humanity to do some remarkable things. The very ability to communicate on a blog thousand's of miles away from each other is just one simple way that we all can appreciate the value of empiricism.
b) I simply believe that empiricism looks at the physical world and therefore it is unable to go beyond the physical world (the soul of man, the spiritual world of God). The chief way we can know this is the fact that we all of sentiments about right, wrong, beauty, courage. Yet can any of truly demonstrate what courage is or isn't (empirically). We all have this common experience yet we have no way to empirically study it (other than the fact that we all have it). This limitation has to be recognized and dealt with to have a coherent philosophy. (atheist, agnostic, theist, ...)
With that clarification made I would like to deal with the quotes listed above.
1) What alternative would I suggest?
There is one option in which many of the bloggers on this site have already rejected. That option is interpreting the world not first on the basis of empirical observation, but on the the transcendent nature of God as defined by Scripture (Bible). You asked how else could you know reality, but there is one answer that has been left out. We can know reality based on the transcendent nature of God. I cringing at the response I am likely to get from this point, but I hope that you would carefully consider my point. Many of you have expressed distaste or even arguably hatred for Christian theism. I could have dealt with suggestions about God in which we all know we disagree about. But I wanted to make the following point first!
2) What basis do we have to put empirical investigation before any other alternative?
Many of you have challenged me on what basis could an alternative be made. Let me ask first, on what basis do we make empiricism the first paradigm for understanding the world? It is an assumption that empiricism should be the first criteria for there is no basis for There is no rational reason to do so above any other reason. You could argue that we can touch and feel it, but how often have we misinterpreted what we could touch and feel. The fact is we all work from a philosophy of history (atheist or theist) in which we interpret the world in light of. Therefore, if we began with empiricism it is not surprising we do not come to know God. God is beyond the physical realm that we are investigating. Many of you have challenged me where is the evidence? I propose that the reason you can't find the evidence is because you have elevated empiricism to a level that is in appropriate. Your method ignores anything that is not physically observable even though there are realities that are not physically discernible.
Conclusion:
My only hope from my postings is that I would bring awareness to the fact that there is a world that exists beyond empiricism. To rely on empiricism alone is to only evaluate half of reality. We all must also evaluate where our paradigm (empericism) breaks down to truly have an understanding of reality.
It may be worth noting that I am not the first person to suggest this. It is not as though the philosophers before the enlightenment were ignorant man. They thought about things deeply and rationally. The difference is the role of the revealed Word and the elevation of empirical investigations. The rejection of the first and the elevation of the second is in large part why the Western world has shifted from a Christian theistic worldview. It is a matter of philosophical understandings more than it is fact and understanding.
