 |
| Michael Polanyi |
“So we see that both
Kepler and Einstein approached nature with intellectual passions and with
beliefs inherent in these passions, which led them to their triumphs and
misguided them to their errors. These passions and beliefs were theirs,
personally, even though they held them in conviction that they were valid,
universally. I believe that they were competent to follow these impulses, even
though they risked being misled by them. And again, what I accept of their work
as true today, I accept personally, guided by my passions and beliefs similar
to theirs, holding in my turn that my impulses are valid, universally, even
though I must admit the possibility that I might be mistaken.” (Michael
Polanyi, Personal Knowledge, Kindle 3177.)
Kepler and Einstein had hunches, beliefs, and passions that
guided their scientific exploration. Some of these hunches turned out to be
true and some didn’t, but what made them good scientists was their ability to
come up with good hunches and pursue them even though they couldn’t prove them.
Are we able to do the same with theology? Are we able to
have convictions about universal truth and yet maintain the possibility that we
could be wrong? Does epistemological humility demand dispassion, or can we
balance conviction with a post-critical worldview?
No comments:
Post a Comment