Chastened Certainty- a rejection of teleological reading

Posted by Kirk M. Wellum @ http://redeemingthetime.blogspot.com/2007/01/sin-of-teleological-reading.html

Here are two quotations I have come across that have something to say about certainty.

"The whole problem with the world is that fools and fanatics are always so certain of themselves, and wiser people so full of doubts". Bertrand Russell, philosopher, mathematician, and writer (1872-1970).

"It is not bigotry to be certain we are right; but it is bigotry to be unable to imagine how we might possibly have gone wrong". G.K. Chesterton, essayist and novelist (1874-1936).

We live in a day when ironically people are uncertain about certainty! They are suspicious and critical of anyone who is certain in a way similar to Russell quoted above. Just yesterday I read an art critic's analysis in which he prefaced his remarks by talking about "the risk of performing the sin of a teleological reading". A teleological reading is one that has to do with intention and purpose and meaning. This is a postmodern way of saying that we cannot know with certainty what is going on in another person's mind and therefore we cannot know what they are communicating through their work. We can only make sense of our own reality, and interpret the works of others in light of our experience. Anything beyond that is pure presumption. Interestingly enough, this particular art critic and people in general are unable to avoid the "sin" they decry. In spite of their theoretical commitments, they make all sorts of judgments on the views of others and can become quite agitated when others misrepresent what they are saying!

But while there are major problems and inconsistencies with extreme subjectivity, there are also problems with extreme objectivity. Russell is right to some degree. Many times it seems that fools and fanatics are certain of themselves, whereas wiser people are full of doubts. There is a unjustifiable confidence that is frequently attached to ignorance for the simple reason that people do not know any better. But Russell goes too far when he equates certainty with fools and fanatics, and doubt with wisdom, in an absolute way. Much better is Chesterton's statement that certainty is not bigotry provided we understand the limits of our knowledge and the fact that we are ultimately dependent upon God for what we know. Problems arise when human beings think they are a law unto themselves and everyone does what is right in their own eyes. Or when they think that they are in a position to make sense of the universe without divine revelation.

Personally, I have always liked the idea of a "chastened certainty". This concept flows out of the idea that we know, but only because God has revealed himself to us and made us in such a way that we can reliably receive his revelation. This strikes a needed balance between extreme objectivity (modernism) and extreme subjectivity (postmodernism) and it does justice to what God tells us in his word, when that word is properly interpreted with the help of the Holy Spirit. Something to ponder as we prepare to gather on the Lord's Day to worship God by listening to his word and responding to it in faith, love and obedience.