Faith and The Quadralateral

As I have been thinking along the lines of what values are most important to individuals, on what basis do individuals maintain or uphold their values? This "foundation" or "beginning" is what gives definition to values.

The four basis on which to base one's values are; Reason, Experience, Tradition and Text. Of course, without understanding that humans MUST approach any "foundation" through reason and experience, one is short-sighted.

Reason is basis of science. Science is produced by hypothesis, experiment, observation, verification, and conclusions. But, one's approach to any scientific endeavor is based on some understanding of 'universal laws" which guard the order in which man even begins to understand the "outcomes" of the experiment. But, does man understand the 'whole order' of the universe?

Experience is what the humanists base their understanding of "life" on. Experience is human existance. And human existance is understood by observation, and sense encounters. Are these observations and sense encounters different from other conscious entities?Wherein lies individual diversity? Is the human person uniquely distinct or innately similiar? Where does the elements of environment and physicality intersect? How do we know or understand consciousness? Is consciousness what makes one "human"? Is there a distinction of consciousness between the human and animal kingdom? If so, what is that difference? How did humans develop? Those who study the aspects of "man" use anthropology, psychology, sociology, linguistics, humanities, history, business, marketing, commerce/trade, international relations, political science, law, etc.

Tradition is narrowed as a sub-set of human experience. Tradition is understood by cultural studies, religion, religious studies, sociology, social psychology and historical texts but also crosses over into the experietial domains of commerce, trade, international relations, linguistics and history that impact that particular tradition.

Texts are those written forms of documentation of history that impact and/or form a culture.

The universals are reason and human experience, as other aspects of human existence are relative to cultural frame. And cultural frames are relative, while reason and experience are universal. What kind of faith do you have? Rational faith, existential faith, or a cultural faith?

The West allows for government that is accomadating to cultural diversity, while maintaining reasonable ways of negotiating conflict in our courts of law. The value of individuality in making the choice of cultural values is what makes for a flourishing human existence. Therefore, I have faith in liberal democracy to create the best environment for humans.

Justice, Moral Values, and Universals in Public Policy

Justice is maintaining equality under law. It is balanced and informed governing and government. Everyone is enriched, and blessed when government runs as it should, which is inclusive of the purpose of government.

Government is comprised of leaders who rule, make the rules, and determine direction. While our government is run by policy that is made by leaders, policy itself is fully informed (or should be) before determining which and what policy should be legislated. Legislation makes demands upon all of us, as policy is to better society. And better societies are for human flourishing.

Today, during an honor's college luncheon, a scholar whose discipline was political science gave a talk about the interface of Christian faith with the university, society, and public policy. The Christian traditionally had understood all of truth to be informative of "God's world". Thus, the disciplines were studied to further and undergird faith, not the other way around. But, what happens when science undermines a particular understanding of faith? This is where the Christian world is today, as each discipline has its own "story" or understanding of the "facts". What is the universalizing or whole understanding of truth? Postmodernity calls for there to be interdependence of the disciplines, which is responsibility and accountability of knowledge.

This scholar argued that the secularization of the university was the result of separating faith from "fact" (this was not her term, but mine). I also believe that all Truth is God's Truth. This means that there is no special revelation, but that all is revelation, as we learn and grow. But, I also believe that what we know is but "in part" therefore, there should be a real and honest humility in our policy making and listening to the various "experts".

One legal case study of a particular situation is not a valid argument to make for universiality, when it comes to moral universals, unless the Supreme Court so rules. But, it may influence courts in sucessive cases. So, it is important that the facts are all known. So I do not believe that a relgious authority, whether in Church or text, should be the universal determinant of the value of life. Science should be consulted in such cases, and not the Church alone. The Church should not be an oppressive ruling party, such as the Taliban, but a "voice" in our public square. And that voice should not be a shrill, unreasoned, irrational voice of fear and intimidation, but one of reasoned hope. A voice that appeals to reason and not filled with emotion. Reason is what postmodernity needs most.

"Universal" morality is defined in many ways. The arguments are always based on authorial sources, outside the "self". These sources in the Quadralateral are reason, scripture, tradition, and experience. Since postmodernity has undermined absolute reason, contextual texts, specific traditions, then the experience of the individual is all that is left, as a universal. Experience is only of value when one is appealing to a more unified way of arguing for moral value, which is "human experience". Human experience is based on a hierarchal "need" base, such as Maslow argued. But, even in arguing and agreeing on the universal of human experience and universal human needs, one does not validate a specific universal moral value. (Is poverty more important than education? It depends on the context. Is pastoring a Church more important than encouraging a young adult to pursue their dreams?)

Our country's values of life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness are of greatest moral value to our people. Without liberty, one does not have life, as life must be free to choose what is of ultimate value. Liberty is not freedom to do anything one wants, such as cheating, lying, or stealing, but it is for seeking what one desires to be of value in one's life to bring happiness, and benefit society at large.

Life is of universal value as all people have it, but not everyone has liberty. We must fight for freedom above all because dominating traditions, or different voices that want to universalize the insignificant are undermining to the individual in their pursuit of happiness and their value of life.

Moral Order or Individualism, Which Determines Social Ontology

The old question of nature versus nurture is being resurrected, of sorts, in coming to understand what makes for social ontology. Social ontology is the study of reality. This interests me and my husband immensely.

The division lies in how one understands how people come to develop, as well as how they come to think, and how they put it all together. The Quadralateral is sometimes useful for understanding different ways of approaching reality, but there are certainly other ways, as well.

The Quadralateral has four components; reason, experience, tradition, and text (texts are usually understood within a tradition's framework). All aspects of the Quadralateral can be viewed from an individual developmental view, or a social/contextual/cultural/traditional view.

The individual view is based on Enlightenment principles of reason and moral order, while the social view emphasizes social/cultural/tradition and political history view, which emphasizes the individual within context. Whether one believes in an innate nature or the importance and impact of nurture within the different social units of society, both are important aspects of "being" in the world and a development of understanding (hermenuetic) of "reality" in the world.

We cannot understand, or judge from our own perspectives, which apart from the difference of understanding the social contexts themselves, are also, individually understood, depending on one's personality, gifting, and "idiosyncresies".

I want to read and study further along this line of understanding, as it is interdisciplinary in nature and it would complement my husband's "coming to terms" with faith.

Science and Theology and the Human

Some have said that science and theology are separate entities that have different tasks and should not seek to be intergrated. I would disagree.

Although both science and theology have value to man's existence, one is useful for pragmatic reasons, while the other is not, necessarily.

Science is investigative, and is based on "real world" understandings of life, while theology is no less investigative, but is not usually based on the 'real world" but the transcendental world. There is no proof of God, as in his transcendetal existence cannot be observed or evaluated. All we can observe is the world of experience in the physical realm, which is about man and his environment.

Some would understand this endeavor as an important undertaking, as it connects the transcendental to the real, which would bring about a reasoned faith. Gnosticism has bee the bane of culture, as it disconnects faith from reason altogether. Faith alone distorts purpose, and hinders human flourishing, because it separates reality from faith. These faith understandings are not believable by those who value science and the "real world". How can the interface of science and theology "work" to bring about a 'better world"?

Man and his environment intersects many disciplines in psychology and sociology and anthropology and political theory. These are integrations of "sides" of the Quadralateral.

Culture contains the religion, traditions and political realms of understanding a man in his experience/environment. How does one understand all men (universal) within their context (particularity)? All men have reason, but not all men have the same experience(s) even within the same culture. The complexity of understanding man in "God's image" is a huge undertaking. And I'm not sure that man can never be understood completely, in universal terms, as there will always be the particularity of the individual and so many factors go into that mix that it is improbale that there will ever be consensus. But, then, this is what research is about, isn't it?

Therefore, science is mandantory in theological endeavor, as theology is about man, as much as it is about God. There is no absolute universal because each man as an individual cannot be understood from afar.

The Quadralateral and Faith

I have often used the Quadralateral in understanding or categorizing my thinking. Today, I was reflecting on my journey of faith and how it differed from my husband's, which led me to think abuot faith in general.

My husband came to Christian faith through understanding reason's limitation in religion and experiencing Christian commitment and character. I, on the other hand, came to faith through personal encounter with Christian character, and began to understand Christian understanding as a limited view through reason. We came to faith differently and now, understand faith differently (although, I may still be behind to my husband'ss development of faith).

I, then, started thinking that faith is understood differently depending on how we have been raised, understood and experienced our faith. Maybe this seems self-evident to most people, but to me it is a fascinating thought, that each person's faith is so uniquely defined. Of course, that does not negate certain universals of, say, a specified religious understanding, but nevertheless, faith is truely a unique and personal understanding.

Faith in these terms certainly will look different, depending on how one has understood what faith means. Personal faith comes to fruition in our lives through commitments, values and desires.

I think faith is a fascinating topic for understanding people.