Thoughts about locks... I mean, uhh, Locke

I’m really enjoying what Locke has to say about the edge of understanding. Should we as humans, who are bound by a finite amount of understanding likely by a greater being (God), continue in pursuit of infinite knowledge?  We could instead seek to discover where the edge of our understanding is. In doing so, attempt to fully grasp the things in our field of comprehension. We could just accept that we are limited, whether that be by a god or by the physiology and the capabilities of finite man's mind.

“...men so various, different, and wholly contradictory; and yet asserted somewhere or other with such assurance and confidence…”. So yes, I know what you’re thinking. This statement is exactly honors(or politics)! Two people, 100% certain they are both right, or at least that the other is wrong. The ability for humans to form such polarizing opinions, beliefs, and ideas is so cool! And I believe many times the truth can be that both parties are right. Maybe not fully right, but at least in some areas. As Locke says “mankind hath no sufficient means to attain a certain knowledge of it.” “It” being 
truth, seems like this is the kind of thinking that would lead a man to seek after the idea of a diety. A god, clearly shown in nature and in understand or lack of. Either way, I am nowhere fully understanding this article, but will do my best to have this material “on Locke”.

commented on Cade and Spencer

Comments

Anna Gay said…
We could never understand everything but that doesn't give us an excuse. We should still strive to work hard and honor God in everything. Giving Him our best and seeking to glorify Him. We could never comprehend all the things in this world but God has given us a brain for a reason. Great job Cody! Wonderful post!
Ezra Kennedy said…
I think ~Almost~ everyone says something in a debate that’s at least partially right haha. Even if someone is not completely wrong doesn’t make them completely right, I agree. We may not be able understand everything but engaging in dialogue with another person of differing opinions allows us to come to understand things how they understand them, maybe not agreeing with them, but still understand them
Spencer Wood said…
I think it all leads back to our sin nature. we, as humans, have disdain for evil. the problem is that we are the evil. also with the idea of if you're not for me then you're against me really puts a wrench in the hope for world peace. whether it's honors class or a football game there are so many polarizing views and polarizing people that it just gets crazy.