A Thinking Reed

"Man is but a reed, the most feeble thing in nature, but he is a thinking reed" – Blaise Pascal

Theologians, take heed!

The medieval philosophy and theology blog Scholasticus has posted a fantastic quote from philosopher Peter Van Inwagen:

One advantage philosophers bring to theology is that they know too much about philosophy to be overly impressed by the fact that a particular philosopher has said this or that. Philosophers of the present day know what Thomas Aquinas and Professor Bultmann did not know: that no philosopher is an authority. Philosophers know that if you want to pronounce on, say, the project of natural theology, you cannot simply appeal to what Kant has established about natural theology. You cannot do this for the very good reason that Kant has established nothing about natural theology. Kant has only offered arguments, and the cogency of these arguments can be (and is daily) disputed.

That’s from Van Inwagen’s collection of essays God, Knowledge & Mystery, a real gem that I picked up several years back for a song at Half Price Books in Indianapolis, if I recall correctly.

When I was in graduate school I took a class on “postmodern concepts of God.” It was good in that I read stuff that I probably wouldn’t have read otherwise (Levinas, Marion), but I was continually irritated by the literary deconstructionist types who would appeal to Heidegger or Derrida or whoever as authorities for dismissing large swaths of the philosophical tradition. It just doesn’t work that way!

There’s a real problem at work here too. Theologians obviously want to make use of philosophical work but don’t necessarily have the time, training, or inclination to work through all the arguments and counterarguments. I’ve noticed, for instance, that Wittgenstein looms large in a lot of contemporary theology, often functioning in a similar appeal to authority kind of way (“As Wittgenstein has shown us…” etc.).

After all, argument has to stop at some point since you can’t justify every premise in your reasoning – as Aristotle has shown us! 😉 – but philosophers and others are understandably unimpressed by theology that takes controversial philosophical claims as given.

3 responses to “Theologians, take heed!”

  1. It seems to me that appeals to philosopher’s as authority can function in a way somewhat analogous to symbols. That is merely by saying “Wittgenstein” I can invoke a whole bunch of perfectly imprecise ideas about language and its correspondance to reality without having to actually repeat (or for that matter have read) any of Wittgenstein’s arguments. Whether or not this is the intended effect, I would be that it is the actual effect more often than not.

  2. Good points and great post.

    Indeed, I took a class on Heidegger, Levinas, and Derrida last semester, and there was this bizarre tendency among some to disregard anything that smelled like “metaphysics,” because the entire history of philosophy forgot about the question of the meaning of being — supposedly! ehem, I like metaphysics! (And, I don’t think that was Heidegger’s point.)

    I’m supposed to be reading van Inwagen, myself, by the end of October for my Metaphysics and Epistemology class; should be good times. My prof is a huge fan of his.

    Peace,

    Eric

  3. Oh yeah, and on the note about Heidegger as well as Marion, Marion does this thing in his God Without Being (from what I’ve been told) where he criticizes Thomas Aquinas for being an onto-theologian (another favorite field-clearing word, which does have its uses nonetheless). It appears he was a bit too giddy to criticize Aquinas on this score, as Marion later published a paper recanting/modifying his earlier position a bit. I forget what it was called, but Cynthia Nielsen blogged about it over on her blog not too long ago.

Leave a reply to Eric Lee Cancel reply