I don't want you to have a naive trust in human reason. Let us take a journey into modern mathematics to see that even the most rigorous accomplishments of reason may not quite be "the Truth."
"Twice two makes four is a pert coxcomb that stands with arms akimbo barring your path and spitting" — Big D.
Great post, and great publication. Though gotta say, I'm actually pretty inclined to a reading of Kierkegaard (esp. the postscript) on which he rejects the very idea of limits to logic. In doing so, he tries to get us to reject the idea (rhetorically, through irony) that getting in right relationship to one's religious life turns on acquiring a certain bit of difficult-to-obtain knowledge (gnosis).
There's an excellent essay on this reading by Jim Conant from U Chicago's philosophy department. He compares the view to his "resolute" reading of Wittgenstein. It's nicely written, would commend to anyone.
"Twice two makes four is a pert coxcomb that stands with arms akimbo barring your path and spitting" — Big D.
Great post, and great publication. Though gotta say, I'm actually pretty inclined to a reading of Kierkegaard (esp. the postscript) on which he rejects the very idea of limits to logic. In doing so, he tries to get us to reject the idea (rhetorically, through irony) that getting in right relationship to one's religious life turns on acquiring a certain bit of difficult-to-obtain knowledge (gnosis).
There's an excellent essay on this reading by Jim Conant from U Chicago's philosophy department. He compares the view to his "resolute" reading of Wittgenstein. It's nicely written, would commend to anyone.
https://static.hum.uchicago.edu//philosophy/conant/k%20w%20and%20nonsense.pdf