Theory of Knowledge - Course Companion for Students Marija Uzunova Dang Arvin Singh Uzunov Dang
religious experience, as far back as we can takeAllnone of it is pure, authentic, unadulterated. Theit,practised in the year 100 is radically unlikeChristianitypractice now. Christians don’t always like toChristianthat, but it’s so. Same thing is true of Judaism.admitthing is true of all the great religious traditions.SameHinduism, various schools of thought have dierentInfor what constitutes valid knowledge (pramā)criteriainvalid knowledge (apramā); and what areandsources of knowledge.legitimatethe diversity of religious intellectual traditions,Giventhe distinct ways each of them approachesandabout where knowledge comes from, andquestionsknowledge is valid, does it make sense to speakwhatreligious knowledge as one thing? Are the variousofmore similar than they are dierent? Somereligionsthose who suggest the answer is “yes” start fromofassumption of a fundamental truth underlying allansentiment drove the Mughal Emperor Abū al-FathThisal-Di Muh ammad Akbar to convene interreligiousJalālamong adherents of Islam, Hinduism,dialoguesJudaism, Jainism and ZoroastrianismChristianity,his court in the second half of the 16th century. Atatthe same time, Jean Bodin imagined a similararoundbetween seven sages, including a Romanconversationa Lutheran, a Calvinist, a Jew, a Muslim, as wellCatholic,a natural philosopher and a sceptic in ColloquiumasSeven about Secrets of the Sublime.ofthewere early attempts to discern a commonTheseamid all the religious dierence. Echoes of thiscoreappear in the eld of comparative religion,sentimentin eorts to promote religious tolerance throughanddialogue and education. The claim is that ifinterfaithreligions share a common core of true beliefs, thenallsearch for and nd this would be promising in termstopromoting mutual understanding and overcomingofconict. And, not insignicantly, adherentsreligiousdierent religious faiths would have less reason toofthe truthfulness of other faiths. In light of this,doubtthe role of truth in religious knowledge—is truthexaminethat religions disagree about or is it a unifyingsomethingof religious knowledge?factorthe coloration of their time and temperament andonthe local color, as much as anything can. So anyofof a one—of a true, authentic faith alwaysnotionus backwards towards fundamentalism. Andleadsis a betrayal of the varieties of religiousfundamentalismnot an assertion of them.experience,II. PerspectivesII. Perspectivesreligious dierence.A religious assembly of dierent faiths at the courtFigure 6.3of Mughal Emperor Akbar (1556–1605), miniature painting byNar Singh circa 1605)II.2 Multiple perspectivesThey have changed within themselves, have taken(Gopnik quoted in Tippett 2017)147
religious knowledge lose something, orDoessomething, if it changes over time? How hasgainunderstanding and perception of religiousourchanged over time?knowledgestudies scholar Reza Aslan hasReligiouswhat it means for religion to change,consideredin Islam. Islam’s prophets, heparticularlyare “intimately connected to the worldssays,of which they arise”, and the transitionoutone world, or era, to another has beenfroma “reformation”. Aslan’s assertions arecalledand invite us to think carefullyprovocative,the relationship between religiousaboutand the past, and the role andknowledgeof individuals in the development ofinfluenceknowledge. Aslan expresses some of hisreligiousespecially Aslan’s final point above,Considerthe tension between the influence ofregardingversus the influence of individualsinstitutionshow a religion is defined. The historyonreligion is rich with stories about howofand institutions gain and lose theindividualsand authority to make claims aboutlegitimacyknowledge. What gives legitimacy toreligiouslose authority? How has this varied overandand across contexts?timewe encountered the view of StephenEarlier,who talks about Buddhism withoutBatchelor,What does it mean for individuals tobelief.religion in whatever manner they wantinterpretTo what extent is this a religious, politicalto?moral freedom, and how does it variouslyoraround the world? Because stewardsmanifestreligious systems can wield significant power,ofproblem of competing interpretations cantheto power struggles and violence—betweenleadbetween institutions, and betweenindividuals,and individuals.institutionsto Aslan, this process of reformation,According“passing of institutional authority intothehands”, has been ongoing inindividualsince the end of the colonial era. ForIslamprior to that, the religious authorities14centuriesmaintained a firm grip on the meaninghadteaching of Islam, for example becauseanda few people could actually read theonlyAs the authority of different religiousQur’an.has weakened, across the world,institutionsto factors including better education,duecommunication between communitiesliteracy,democratic governance systems, moreandhave asserted themselves. Nowinterpretationsaround the world are living “their faithMuslimsenormous diversity and eclecticism” (Aslaninin Tippett 2014) against a backdrop ofquotedthat are still trying to understandnation-statesreligion fits alongside a constitution, a legalhowand human rights.systemmultiplicity of interpretations has theThisto promote tolerance and pluralism,potentialit can also lead to strife. In the absence of abutreligious authority, such as a Muslimcentralizedor Vatican to mediate over 1.6 billion people,Popedebate can become a cacophony of voicestheone another. As a result of all this,outshoutingspeaks of multiple Islams and disputes theAslanof a monolithic Islamic World, a notionexistencehas become a “fact” of religion, history andthatinterchangeably used with anothergeography,invented term—“the Arabworld”.recently6II. Perspectivesviews as follows.There’s this misunderstanding, amongst most peopleof faith that prophets sort of grow up in some kindof cultural or religious vacuum. That a prophet issomebody that just plopped down to earth fromheaven, and with a ready-made message, in whichthey found a brand new religion. But prophets don’tinvent religions. Prophets are reformers of thereligions that they themselves grow up in.Jesus did not invent Christianity. Jesus was a Jew. Hewas reforming Judaism.The Buddha did not invent Buddhism. The Buddhawas a Hindu. He was reforming Hinduism.When we use the term reformation, what we mean isthe fundamental conict that is inherent in all religioustraditions, as I say, between who gets to dene thefaith. Is it the institution? Or is it the individuals?(Aslan quoted in Tippett 2014)religious claims? How do claims-makers gain148
- Page 103 and 104: no longr spokn, this knowldg may ar
- Page 105 and 106: II. PerspectivesEmpir and postwar A
- Page 107 and 108: II. Perspectivesin th pross. At th
- Page 109 and 110: origin of languag—how did w as hu
- Page 111 and 112: Garia Marquz appars oftn onGarillis
- Page 113 and 114: plants, insts and animals ommuniatD
- Page 115 and 116: III. Methods and toolstrms: Tahing
- Page 117 and 118: IV. Ethicsontain parls of wisdom, s
- Page 119 and 120: I. Scopesocieties have diverse idea
- Page 121 and 122: only since 2019, their claims to be
- Page 123 and 124: I. ScopeII. Perspectivesthe contour
- Page 125 and 126: became clear only decadespreservati
- Page 127 and 128: does it mean to think of land as a
- Page 129 and 130: II. Perspectivesof the original nat
- Page 131 and 132: Wilson, who is Opaskwayak Cree,Shaw
- Page 133 and 134: I ranted in my head. ‘There is no
- Page 135 and 136: we consider the contributions of TE
- Page 137 and 138: an authority and belief system that
- Page 139 and 140: III. Methods and toolsand mutual ai
- Page 141 and 142: IV. Ethicsthe only thing one can do
- Page 143 and 144: IV. Ethicsintellectual property has
- Page 145 and 146: 6andKnowledgereligionworld’s reli
- Page 147 and 148: I. Scopejudicial, economic, and pol
- Page 149 and 150: I. Scopein his view, involves this
- Page 151 and 152: I. Scopekinds of questions altogeth
- Page 153: II. Perspectivespractices of the cu
- Page 157 and 158: what extent can we comprehend the w
- Page 159 and 160: II. Perspectivesone, it allows stra
- Page 161 and 162: the context of perspectives, it is
- Page 163 and 164: view has been criticized for being
- Page 165 and 166: David Thoreau was a naturalist, wri
- Page 167 and 168: III. Methods and toolsdisasters are
- Page 169 and 170: IV. Ethicswe have an ethical respon
- Page 171 and 172: IV. EthicsSinger described conseque
- Page 173 and 174: IV. Ethics1962, generals seized pow
- Page 175 and 176: recent human activity called scienc
- Page 177 and 178: II. Perspectivessection explores th
- Page 179 and 180: II. Perspectivessaid to be in crisi
- Page 181 and 182: II. PerspectivesNewton’s theory?
- Page 183 and 184: II. Perspectives19th century reveal
- Page 185 and 186: II. PerspectivesWhat are some scien
- Page 187 and 188: II. Perspectivesof Duesberg’s pap
- Page 189 and 190: II. Perspectivesis a highly simplif
- Page 191 and 192: II. Perspectivesterms: Symphony ofS
- Page 193 and 194: II. Perspectivesorigin story of gen
- Page 195 and 196: II. Perspectivestechnical debates i
- Page 197 and 198: II. Perspectivesfar this section ha
- Page 199 and 200: II. Perspectivesthe kind of problem
- Page 201 and 202: III. Methods and toolsthe scientifi
- Page 203 and 204: III. Methods and toolsunrecognized
religious experience, as far back as we can take
All
none of it is pure, authentic, unadulterated. The
it,
practised in the year 100 is radically unlike
Christianity
practice now. Christians don’t always like to
Christian
that, but it’s so. Same thing is true of Judaism.
admit
thing is true of all the great religious traditions.
Same
Hinduism, various schools of thought have dierent
In
for what constitutes valid knowledge (pramā)
criteria
invalid knowledge (apramā); and what are
and
sources of knowledge.
legitimate
the diversity of religious intellectual traditions,
Given
the distinct ways each of them approaches
and
about where knowledge comes from, and
questions
knowledge is valid, does it make sense to speak
what
religious knowledge as one thing? Are the various
of
more similar than they are dierent? Some
religions
those who suggest the answer is “yes” start from
of
assumption of a fundamental truth underlying all
an
sentiment drove the Mughal Emperor Abū al-Fath
This
al-Di Muh ammad Akbar to convene interreligious
Jalāl
among adherents of Islam, Hinduism,
dialogues
Judaism, Jainism and Zoroastrianism
Christianity,
his court in the second half of the 16th century. At
at
the same time, Jean Bodin imagined a similar
around
between seven sages, including a Roman
conversation
a Lutheran, a Calvinist, a Jew, a Muslim, as well
Catholic,
a natural philosopher and a sceptic in Colloquium
as
Seven about Secrets of the Sublime.
ofthe
were early attempts to discern a common
These
amid all the religious dierence. Echoes of this
core
appear in the eld of comparative religion,
sentiment
in eorts to promote religious tolerance through
and
dialogue and education. The claim is that if
interfaith
religions share a common core of true beliefs, then
all
search for and nd this would be promising in terms
to
promoting mutual understanding and overcoming
of
conict. And, not insignicantly, adherents
religious
dierent religious faiths would have less reason to
of
the truthfulness of other faiths. In light of this,
doubt
the role of truth in religious knowledge—is truth
examine
that religions disagree about or is it a unifying
something
of religious knowledge?
factor
the coloration of their time and temperament and
on
the local color, as much as anything can. So any
of
of a one—of a true, authentic faith always
notion
us backwards towards fundamentalism. And
leads
is a betrayal of the varieties of religious
fundamentalism
not an assertion of them.
experience,
II. Perspectives
II. Perspectives
religious dierence.
A religious assembly of dierent faiths at the court
Figure 6.3
of Mughal Emperor Akbar (1556–1605), miniature painting by
Nar Singh circa 1605)
II.2 Multiple perspectives
They have changed within themselves, have taken
(Gopnik quoted in Tippett 2017)
147