As I am reading Locke's essay on human understanding, I cannot help but to think about a class I previously had two semesters ago, Faith and Doubt. One big topic that was brought up in the class was human knowledge, which also seems to be a topic in Locke's essay. But, a small section really stuck out to me.
"We should not then perhaps be so forward, out of an affection of an universal knowledge, to raise questions, and perplex ourselves and others with disputes about things to which our understandings are not suited; and of which we cannot frame in our minds any clear or distinct perceptions, or whereof (as it has perhaps too often happened) we have not any notions at all. If we can find out how far the understanding can extend its views; how far it has faculties to attain certainty; and in what case it can only judge and guess, we may learn to content ourselves with what is attainable by us in this state."
Humans cannot begin to comprehend a universal knowledge. Our minds are purposely not suited to do that. God did not intend for us have the same knowledge as He does. Sure it is okay to ask questions, but we are never guaranteed an answer. We should just accept that by now and be content ourselves with what we can get. In Faith and Doubt, we watched a movie (sorry guys I forgot the name of it) that had this very issue in it. It even gave an example. In the movie, God spoke to a man in a voice that was familiar to him because humans do not have the capacity to see and hear Him as He is. He provided us with what we absolutely need to know, but all other things are just out of reach. Although we are limited in what we know, we still know enough to see the beauty that our God has created and given us.
Also, I do not approve of/like Locke's use of EXTREMELY long sentences. I almost begin to forget what the sentence says by the time I make it to the end. But, I enjoy reading what he has to say.
I commented on Kayla's and Hannah's post.
I commented on Kayla's and Hannah's post.
Comments