Paul ( 1Cor. 81-2)
I who do not know anything, do not think I do either
Socrates (Apology 21d)
Not-knowing is true knowledge
Daodejing 71
The semester started late this year and classes began only last week. It's a quirk of the calendar, but it gave faculty a week extra over the break. I love teaching, but the longer stretch between semesters allowed a little more time for writing, for which I am grateful.
In the first week of classes my task is a small one. To help students realize that philosophy is not about gathering more knowledge, but rather through reading, thinking, arguing, and writing to discover that what they thought they knew they really don't. It's a disconcerting process. Most of a student's education to date, and many courses they take at college, has been about taking in "stuff" and building a knowledge base of "stuff." The stuff is real. The stuff (at least some of it) is usable. The stuff will get them a job. I tell them that the stuff they have is not really stuff.
It's a little subversive. Some students get very confused and want the certainty of stuff. Many students, after the initial shock really enjoy the freedom that the exploration gives them. I've heard many times from senior students, who take a philosophy class as an elective, that they wished they had discovered philosophy earlier in their education.
After that initial shock, when students begin to realize that they don't now what they think they know, I pull back to a more nuanced stance. It is not knowledge (after all I know how to drive a car, I know that 2+2=4, I know that it's snowing outside right now as I look out of the window) but it is the certainty of knowledge that is a problem. The ancient sages, East and West, had worked out that the certainty of knowledge is not available to our limited minds, that realizing the limits of our knowledge is true wisdom. In recent times, quantum physics called into question even the certainties of many scientific ideas that had been held to be true. Philosophers in the twentieth century joined in the fun and suggested that everything devolves around interpretation—hermeneutics—and interpretation is affected by multiple variables, standpoints, and assumptions. Certainty is off the table.
It seems to me that this is profoundly important as the greatest danger we face in the world today is the certainty of fundamentalism. A number of scholars have pointed out that the fundamentalisms that sprouted around the world from the mid-1970s onward were in part a reaction to the realization of uncertainty. We humans have a need for safety. According to Maslow, safety needs are second only to physiological needs—in other words pretty basic. Uncertainty is a threat to safety, and so people have a strong desire to find something solid, something certain. Fundamentalism meets the need, for fundamentalism knows for certain. It doesn't matter which fundamentalism you fall into (Muslim, Christian, Jewish, Secular, even Buddhist) for once you "buy in" you know for sure, and your psychological angst is lessened.
Mostly this is benign and remains so if your certain knowledge enables you to feel better about life. Who am I, or any one else, to tell you otherwise? The problem is that in its current incarnation fundamentalism (certain knowledge) has been politicized and the many fundamentalists want to make everyone agree with their certainties. Religious certainty with politics is a dangerous mix and the world suffers. Take a look at Zionist certainties about the territory of Israel, Muslim certainties about blasphemy and Jews, Christian certainties about contraception, abortion, gay marriage and Islam. I'm not saying, of course, that all Jews are militant Zionists, or all Muslims potential terrorists, or all Christians bigoted imperialists. But sufficient numbers are, and that makes the world a more dangerous place.
The root of fundamentalism is the certainty of knowledge. Hence we need a good dose of ancient wisdom: "anyone who claims to know doesn't know," "not-knowing is true knowledge." Who's going to persecute, murder, or terrorize for an ambiguity?
Paul juxtaposed the certainty of knowledge to love. It always gets back to love. Un-selfing for the sake of the Other. Movement away from my own preoccupations for your well-being. Knowledge puffs up, love builds up.
+Ab. Andy