1
RUNNING HEAD: FOUNDATIONS ESSAY
Epistemology
Epistemology can be defined as the pursuit knowledge as well as its foundations and
origins. It is the beginning of all beginnings when attempting to understand the world we live in
and what created it. David Entwistle, a Christin counselor and author describes epistemology as a
category of philosophy that studies both the nature of knowledge as well as the grounds from
which knowledge is based (Integrative Approaches to Psychology and Christianity, Ch. 5).
Epistemology is what creates the barrier between fact and fiction. When one better
understands how to interpret fact, they can then begin to filter their entire worldview through
the lens of the model they have created from the foundations of this knowledge.
There are three major categories for the perceptions humans hold on truth, and how close
they believe them to mirror reality. Those who hold the first viewpoint are known as native
realists. These people are at one extreme, believing that perception and reality are exactly as they
seem, with nothing undiscoverable. At the other end of the perception extremes are the
antirealists. These people are almost the exact opposites of native realists, believing that there is
no connection between reality and perception. Social settings, individual assumptions and biases
create what our minds want us to see. The third viewpoint is the happy middle ground between
the other two. Critical realists acknowledge, like antirealists, that biases and personal beliefs can
affect perception, but reality itself limits the interpretation (Entwistle, p.93). In summary, critical
realists believe that simply because assumptions of reality are blurred, the conclusions they come
to are not fundamentally untrue. Instead, there is direct correlation with how one perceives
reality (simply and observationally) and how reality truly is, complex and not entirely knowable.
I believe myself, as a Christian, to be a critical realist. This allows me to take heart in the
fact that I can be confident in my uncertainty. While I may not be sure of my reality and how I
FOUNDATIONS ESSAY 2
perceive it, I am sure of my ability to do so. It makes me think of the famous saying by Socrates.
He knew undoubtedly, that what he knew, was nothing. Therefore, I too can be sure of doubt and
my skewed perception of reality. From there, I can begin to use critical thinking to discover the
things I can be absolutely certain of, such as Christ’s unwavering love for me. Once I, and others,
regardless of category, acknowledge perception, then and only then, can we begin to arrive at
knowledge.
There are different methods of knowing. By learning and putting them to use, it prevents
embarrassing conversation and simplistic, shallow thought process. The first method is the
appeal to authority. This method believes that there is value in the knowledge authoritative
parties have passed down from generation to generation. However, when considering the
accuracy of the knowledge gained from these authorities, three variables must be recognized.
The authority passing down knowledge evaluated the situation correctly, communicated
information in a way that is understandable and has a character that is standing and just
(Entwistle, p.104). If the authority passing down information meets all three criteria, then the
benefit of the knowledge they possess is unmatched. However, if the authority in question does
not meet the standards set, the quality and value of knowledge is lost.
The second method of knowledge is logic. Logic is used when considering what
information is truth and what is false in the form of fact. This method is very useful when in fact-
based conversation with others. Problems can arise however, when a person begins an entire
conversation with logic based on incorrect assumptions. Logic is best used when both parties of a
conversation are open to the possibility that some of the beliefs they hold could be incorrect and
are willing to listen and learn from the other.
FOUNDATIONS ESSAY 3
The third method of knowledge is empiricism. This method relies greatly on the use of
experience to help define knowledge. Empiricism uses knowledge from the past to draw
conclusions about the present and even the future. This method is useful when trying to find
falsities, especially in scientific testing (Entwistle, p.107). Empiricism and the scientific method
are quite close in relation. Unfortunately, empiricism has a limitation, those who practice it. Due
to the conceptions and biases individuals hold, empiricism is affected by the degree it is
considered effective. A second limitation can be found in the simple reality of what is testable in
our physical reality. Though there are limitations to this method of knowledge, it does not take
away the usefulness empiricism holds and the contributions it has provided the human race.
Lastly, revelation and interpretation are a final way of finding knowledge. Revelation
suggests that God reveals knowledge to His people through two possible ways. The first way is
known as general revelation. This method claims God’s presence can be found in nature. The
evidence is in the flowers, constellations and even in daily interactions with others. The second
revelation is known as special revelation. This method references the special, unique miracles
and acts that God unveils Himself in (Entwistle, p.110). A limitation to revelation and
interpretation is the fact that man is imperfect and therefore cannot produce a perfected
interpretation of God’s word. This is where hermeneutics comes into play to find the most
accurate and meaningful interpretation of the Bible and the revelation God has left for us in it.
All methods of knowing are useful and appropriate to Christians. However, some are
better than others. Revelation and interpretation is, unsurprisingly, the best and most sound for
seeking Biblical knowledge. However, some Christians tend to neglect the other aspects and
methods of knowledge by simply relying on revelation for all. God created humans minds to
thirst for knowledge and by only using one method to gain it, it would limit the potential God
FOUNDATIONS ESSAY 4
allows us. Logic, empiricism and authority are all excellent ways to find knowledge, as long as it
is looked through by a Godly lens. By combining numerous methods alongside the
acknowledgement of God and His power, Christians can create a view of reality that is accurate.
Knowledge is given to us by God, but He has also given us the gift of discovering it on our own.
Philosophical Anthropology
Philosophical anthropology is best described as the study of what makes human beings
different from the other creatures on earth. It studies the individual characteristics, the qualities
and dispositions that each person possesses (Entwistle, p.145). The study of these items is
important in order to establish an individual’s assumptions and the origins from which they
came. That being said, there are two major, well known positions on the topic, psychological
understandings and theological understandings of philosophical anthropology.
The psychological view and the assumptions it stands on varies from the theological view
greatly. The assumptions discuss naturalistic explanations for the main source of knowledge and
the answers to knowledgeable questions. The world, it claims, is predictable and thus, must rely
on worldly reasoning. Through this lens of the world, empiricism is used; this also includes the
scientific method. This is a huge contribution to and for the psychological perspective. Other
benefits of the psychological view include biological, behavioral and cognitive exploration.
Though beneficial to science, this can actually be seen as a flaw to this viewpoint due to
potentially associating all human action and reason as an outcome of one of those three areas.
Other extents of psychological study contain psycho-social and evolutionary perspective
theories. Applying the scientific methods has helped further both of these branches. Though the
psychological view of understanding philosophical anthropology has its benefits, it only shows a
FOUNDATIONS ESSAY 5
world focused influence. It leaves no room for God and His existence. The assumptions made
under this view are only answered by science alone.
The second perspective of philosophical anthropology is the theological view. This
perspective, unlike the psychological perspective, looks to the nature of God to answer questions
regarding humankind’s purpose and worth (Entwistle, p.149). The assumptions included in the
theological perspective differ significantly from psychological perspective. Human origin is a
perfect example of this. Theology states man is created from God, excluding evolution through
progression of natural process. The nature of man and his purpose are found in the Holy
scriptures and state that man is sinful, therefore in dire need of God and His forgiveness. Sin
nature has flawed reality and even the understanding of it. Perfect knowledge cannot exist in
man’s mind because of the sinful nature we are living in.
The theological understanding of philosophical anthropology offers contributions not
included in the scientific viewpoint of the psychological perspective. It puts a fundamental value
on the love of God and the purpose He holds for each of our lives. Due to this, I believe this
makes theological understanding the greater of two views. God has given us each a role to play
in His creation, all for the purpose of glorifying Him. Humility before God is essential if we are
to understand our purpose and God’s purpose for us. We are His creations and should act as
such. By finding value in Christ and in the security that we are all made with specific intention,
it can add unspeakable worth to our lives, something science alone cannot do.
The psychological view on philosophical anthropology is very different from the
theological perspective, but that does not mean they cannot work together to provide answers to
big questions. Empiricism and the scientific method is essential in answering questions the Bible
does not answer. That is why psychology is indispensable. It has revealed aspects of human
FOUNDATIONS ESSAY 6
nature that scriptures do not address. It is common misconception that knowledge outside of the
Bible is worthless, as it was not found with biblical background to guide it. However, God
created us with brains capable to hold knowledge greater than our wildest dreams. It would be
wasteful to discard some of man’s greatest discoveries simply because God was not at the
center. I personally take this knowledge and find a way to apply it to both a biblical and
psychological worldview. By keeping God, His creation, His intentions and His nature at the
center of my assumptions, I can use both theological and psychological perceptions in my
pursuit of knowledge while still glorifying God every step of the way.
FOUNDATIONS ESSAY 7
References
Entwistle, D. N. (2015). Integrative approaches to psychology and Christianity: An introduction
to worldview issues, philosophical foundations, and models of integration. Eugene, OR:
Cascade Books.
