Customer Reviews

Longing to Know

5 star:		(8)
4 star:		(1)
3 star:		(0)
2 star:		(1)
1 star:		(1)

 

 

This text is written for people who want to begin thinking about how we know "stuff" with any level of assurance. Meek sets the stage by exploring the big questions and lays out an very comprehensible epistemology based on her vast knowledge of Michael Polanyi (if you don't know Polanyi, don't worry). I rated this 5-stars because she accomplishes all that she sets out to do in concise clear language.

She also introduces the reader to the idea of a biblical epistemology (how we can talk biblically about knowing reality and God). She rightly dissects modernism and post-modernism and gives a more realistic view of knowing things, people, and even how we can know God.

Meek is writing a entry-level text on what might be the most complex and abstract topic in humanity. She explains the topic systematically and historically. She gives plenty of "street level" examples. No advanced degrees are required.
For these reasons, I do not hestitate to recommend this book to people who are interested in the topic.

This is a delightful book on epistemology written by a college classmate of mine. Don't let the fact that the book is philosophical scare you. It is actually fun to read. Meek in developing her argument uses illustrations and word-pictures on almost every page. You will read about magic-eye 3-D pictures, copperhead snakes, throwing a Frisbee or playing golf, and movies like The Hunt For Red October. Part of why this book is so delightful to read is the imaginative ways she conveys her ideas. In one place she compares the act of knowing to a wedding ceremony and putting on leotards.

What is her basic argument? Meek makes a case that we know God the same way we come to know other people or things. Knowing God, she says, is like knowing your auto mechanic. She defines knowing as "the responsible human struggle to rely on clues to focus on a coherent pattern and submit to its reality." Meek also wants to replace the notion of certainty with the notion of confidence. She also emphasizes that knowing is an activity; it is not something that happens to us but something we seek to accomplish.

I think Meek accurately describes the "epistemic act." There is more to knowing than meets the eye. As I read through her book, my mind kept going back to Pascal. His insights affirm the viability of truth that transcend the limits of rationality while at the same time affirm the distinction between the longing and the reasons of our hearts. Meek also helped me understand that my body functions as an axis or bridge that makes knowledge possible.

Meek's book is a passionate handbook toward confident faith. Its conducive for group study with questions at the end of each chapter.

Who knew epistemology could be such fun?! Meek's down-to-earth approach and real life personal illustrations make for a delightful read. At the same time, her gracious but unapologetic applications to her Christian faith give the work an impressive weight.

In the face of modern despair and post-modern whateverism, Dr. Meek couragously seeks to answer the troubling fundamental question: How do you know? Amazingly, her answer rings true. Many stubborn conundrums, ones I had long considered insoluble, fell like so many Berlin Walls before her gentle, evocative words. To call LTK an eye-opener would be a huge understatement. It has given me more "Oh! I see it!" moments, as Meek colorfully calls them, than any other book aside from the Bible itself.

By offering a model for confident contact with the real, LTK has the potential to restore hope to those who have despaired for a lack of absolute certainty, humble those who thought they had absolute certainty, and aid understanding in every legitimate field of human endeavor I can think of. It even helped me understand my wife better! Boy, was that an "unexpected future manifestation"!

Oh, uh, if, perchance, you don't consider yourself an ordinary person, despair not. The Polanyi/Meek model is helpful for us eccentrics, too. :-)

A lack of proovable certainty does not mean that knowledge ceases to exist, it means instead that the relationship between a person and knowledge is more like a relationship between two people. Longing to Know suggests that what we view as "reason" (science, math) and what we view as "faith" or stuff outside the box (religion, and artistic talents) are really acts of coming to know with very similar major features. In other words, knowledge is a confidence (for example, that the floor will hold me when I walk on it; although I have confidence that the floor will hold me, the floor will not necessarily hold me) rather than a proovable certainty.

This is an excellent resource for those who think they know too much. We are given Scripture, revelation from above, in order that we might truly know God and ourselves. However, the same Scripture that gives to us "true truth" or true knowledge is the same Scripture that teaches us humility with regard to what we know. Why? Because we cannot fully know all things because our minds are tainted by sin. We rightfully interpret the world and ourselves when we look through the lens of Scripture, but we do not consistently interpret God, ourselves, or our world through the lens of Scripture. Every sin that we commit, every time we doubt or are skeptical, this is a misinterpretation of reality.

This book by a Polanyi scholar is helpful in addressing the 20th century church's, particularly the evangelical's temptation toward accepting a modern worldview, and interpreting God, the world and ourselves through this modern lens. It is ironic that many Christians today would argue adamantly against secular humanism and modernity in its self-centered, autonomous, rational manifestations, but then they would gladly welcome and receive the self-centered, autonomous, and rational methodology of knowing that was born in the Enlightment by self-centered, autonomous, and rational individuals.

This book if read carefully will remind us that all knowledge is ultimately "covenantal knowledge". Who God is, who we are, what world we live in is all revealed in Scripture so that we might understand reality from God's perspective and submit our knowledge and understand to his- - humbly. All of us interpret the world according to what we know, from whom we have learned it, and through the lens of our own biases and presuppositions.

In order to rightly interpret God, ourselves and the world around us faithfully and accurately, we must first be aware of this, then humbly seek to know through the Scriptures God has given to us, in the Church Jesus is building for us, and remind ourselves of the authorities and the loved ones who have taught us and continue to teach us.

If you are struggling with your knowledge of God, yourself, and the world, and if you are completely honest enough to humbly admit it, then read the Book of Ecclesiastes first, then read Esther Lightcap Meek's book on "Longing to Know"!

Many Christians today want absolute knowledge about God. What is frightening about this mindset is that it was born from a secular, autonomous, humanist way of thinking. It is not merely inquisitive, but rabidly proud. For many Christians I have known have left the Church and their faith because they thought that to question was a sin and therefore something was wrong with their faith. Those who want absolute "proof" and "evidence" should check to see where their faith is directed. At God in Christ by faith? Or in their ability to prove God in Christ by reason?

Christians need to repent of their pride in wanting too much evidence, and be confident in the Scriptures that God has given to us. As Jesus said himself, they have Moses and the prophets listen to them...for even if one rises from the dead they will not believe." What this means is that even if we have all the evidence in the world that demands a verdict, if we don't humble ourselves before Jesus and His Special Revelation, we will not believe and paradoxically we will not truly know.

Humility by God's grace in the Scriptures is the way toward true knowing, any other way is pride that goes before the fall.

You will be challenged in this book helpful and clear philosophical book. But even the strongest, most mature Christians doubt sometimes and find themselves being skeptical. Allow this book to remind you of what knowledge is all about. Allow this book to humble you and turn you toward the living God in Christ. Allow this book to help you engage those who are struggling with their knowledge of God, themselves and their world.

Don't Question Everything, but Question how we question everything!

I purchase the book for my epistimology paper. Information in Knowing from the book is very informative. i would reccomend to purchase if you are assigned to write a term paper about epistimology.

This book is about how we know, the struggle of knowing, pattern-making and the myth of certainty. Despite the unsupported claims of one critical reviewer, this book clearly falls within the field of epistemology. While written as an introduction, the book will cause even the more seasoned reader to think deeper about their "acts of knowing."

For those unfamiliar with Michael Polanyi and Leslie Newbigin, then get ready for a fascinating introduction into the way you think (including the authorities you follow, the focal points of your knowing and the variegated "knowings" that support the patterns you submit to and follow). For those already introduced, then consider this book as an offering to provide you with further insights and a plethora of outstanding illustrations from normal human experience.

The illustrations in this book are wonderful. They are simple and common to human experience, driving home the points of the author. The auto mechanic illustration recurs in each chapter and constantly forces us to consider a different perspective in the various aspects of our act of knowing. The lesser illustrations are just as significant. From Phil Long's artistic eye to the stereograms, the reader will have many "Oh I See It!" moments made easier due to successful illustration.

As a Christian, I'm thankful for this book, because it greatly makes sense of my experience. As I kept reading, I thought time and time again of the passage in Hebrews 12 calling us to "set our eyes on Jesus, the author and perfecter of our faith." I was pleased to see Michael make reference to the verse in the continuation of his story near the end of the book.

As in the illustration from the piano recital, when we stop to think about our fingers, the beautiful tapestry may suddenly become disjointed. We may struggle thinking about the subsidiaries, "What comes next? How do I do this? Am I certain that I place my fingers here? Are my hands even in the right position? Am I reading the music correctly?" Certainty? It's impossible and the whole idea diminishes the full meaning of knowledge. In the end, we may finish the recital and still receive applause, but instead of stopping to focus on the subsidiaries, we should have submitted to the overarching pattern of the performance that was embedded in us, experienced by us and drawing us toward it. In the Christian faith, there are times when we need to consider the particulars and even reassess the subsidiaries (and that's okay), yet let us not become bogged down. May we instead continuing the pursuit of following, seeking and longing to know Jesus Christ, the author and perfecter of our faith.

If you enjoyed this book, you may enjoy these other books that further describe this epistemological framework:

Personal Knowledge: Towards a Post-Critical Philosophy
Proper Confidence: Faith, Doubt, and Certainty in Christian Discipleship

With Longing to Know, Esther Meek has opened the windows of the stuffy philosophy classroom. More appropriately, she has taken the study of knowledge outside the classroom and into the world of human experience. Meek's thesis is that knowing involves more than premises and propositions; it is primarily a complex activity in which humans attempt to make sense of the world in which they live. She calls this process the epistemic act, to emphasize the way that human beings continually interpret and integrate the information they collect with their senses.

Above all, Meek, a Christian philosophy professor, wants to demonstrate that it is possible to know God. She does this by setting up the idea of knowledge as a natural human quest ("longing") for coherent patterns to guide everyday living. Her major assumption is that knowing God is basically the same as knowing anything else in the world. Throughout the book she uses two metaphors to illustrate her discussion of knowing. First, and most important, she claims that the dynamics of knowing God are very similar to those of knowing one's auto mechanic. There are clues, or bits of information, that lead us to certain beliefs about a person or state of affairs. When we begin to see beyond those individual clues to a coherent pattern--connecting the dots, so to speak--and when we begin to order our lives around that pattern of belief, we are engaged in the epistemic act of knowing.

Meek's second primary metaphor--the Magic Eye--also serves to elucidate the complex process of knowing. The goal of the Magic Eye puzzle is to see a three-dimensional image which is not readily apparent to the casual observer. When the viewer follows the instructions, focusing her eyes through and beyond the design on the paper, the new image appears. The viewer sees a pattern of which she was previously unaware. In a similar way, Meek argues, human knowing involves a process of seeing beyond subsidiary details to focus on a larger coherent pattern.

Meek's argument is compelling because at every step it is tied into the human experience. One of her most important contributions is in blurring the (imaginary) line between faith and reason. She shows us that a faith commitment is actually an integral part of being human; it is the only way that we can constantly engage with the world.
Meek attends to postmodern concerns in her book, embracing the uncertainty that characterizes our quest for knowledge. In doing so, she actually strengthens her thesis, driving us closer to the world instead of isolating us from it. For Meek, living with uncertainty is a way of life--part of being human. However, in her model, instead of producing despair, uncertainty genders hope and opens the door to life-giving possibilities.

As mentioned above, Meek's book depends heavily on the metaphors of the Magic Eye and the auto mechanic. Readers who have never experienced the "Aha!" moment of the Magic Eye might find themselves struggling to grasp this part of her argument. They will not be able to "engage" her conceptual world, to use her own term. I thought it curious that a book built around the idea of the Magic Eye would have no example of it! Maybe there is a question of copyright, or the fact that the activity might not work as well in a small black and white book format.
A similar critique could be applied to Meek's use of Jeff, her auto mechanic. Readers who have never experienced this type of relationship will have to substitute some other type of long-term interaction with a friend or business acquaintance. In Brazil, for example, where many people do not even own a car, the metaphor would lose at least some of its force.

Connections to evangelical theology. The first point of contact I see between Meek's book and evangelical theology is in the nature of Scripture. We could compare the words of Scripture to the subsidiary clues of the Magic Eye puzzle. Knowing God through his word is like the act of experiencing the three-dimensional image; it is focusing through the words themselves to the coherent pattern beyond. From Meek's perspective, seeing God in Scripture--what she calls an "act of integration"--is not an irrational process, but "transrational" (77). The Spirit helps us to see the words and propositions of Scripture in a new light, transforming our reason into something greater than itself, and leading us to fresh discoveries about ourselves and God. This view moves our primary focus from the words of Scripture themselves (and, in my estimation, from the question of their inerrancy, or certainty) to the larger coherent pattern of God's presence in the Word and the world.

Applying Meek's argument further, we could say that some people do not see God in Scripture, because they are not following the directions contained therein. They are not embodying the story, making it their own, "living the truth," as she says. Sometimes they are unable to see the clues in Scripture (their vision is truncated by sin; someone needs to guide them), other times they are unwilling to do so (they will not commit to the struggle of knowing, or the obstinate nature of belief hinders their vision).

Longing to Know also has direct application to Christian worship. Meek says that "worship is the epistemic act of making sense of the whole of our lives" (73). Since the epistemic act is a transrational process, involving more than verbal clues and assertions, then worship is something that we do with our bodies as a whole. This should not necessarily diminish the importance of the traditional sermon time during corporate worship (which normally involves only two of our five senses), but should challenge us to explore the possibility of more interactive ways to transmit and "live in" the truth of God's word.

This shipped out quickly. I was glad to get it before my husbands bday since i didn't think i ordered fast enough. Seems like a great book. He was excited.

In this book, Meek seeks to discuss the act of knowing. As per the subtitle of this book, Meek utilizes simple words and metaphors in an attempt to bring this topic of epistemology (the philosophy of knowing) to the ordinary person on the street. More specifically, Meek writes for a few classes of people: 1) people who wrestle with questions concerning truth and the possibility of knowledge, 2) people who had presumed someone else's answers for questions which they now have to decide for themselves, and 3) people who are considering questions about truth and how we as Christians know the truth. (Foreword, pp. 7-8). Through discussing the act of knowing, Meek seeks to show us how we can truly know something to be true in this postmodern times.

Unfortunately, when Meek's book was perused, it has been found out that Meek embraces the postmodern Michael Polanyi's epistemology and passes it off as Christian. Like Polanyi, Meek seeks to build a communitarian focused non-absolutist objective epistemology in which the locus of truth is found in the believing community.

As an example of such postmodern non-absolutism, Meek on page 60 states:

It [the act of Knowing] is not subjectivistic; it is human,... (p. 60)

Elsewhere, Meek constantly reminds us that knowing is something which humans do, an assertion which is however vacuous. Of course humans are the ones doing the knowing, not machines! The contrast has never been between subjectivistic and human, but subjectivist and objectivist, and between non-absolutist and absolutist. Truth is either outside of us in the sense that we don't determine truth but God does (absolutist objectivist), within the believing community (non-absolutist objectivist) or determined by the individual (subjectivist). By creating a false dichotomy between subjectivism and being human, Meek skews the issue towards the communitarian focus as opposed to the theocentric focus of traditional Christianity.

Meek further confuses learning with knowing, thinking that the two events are the same. In her own words, "What the modern model of knowing refused to admit was the existence and necessity of knowing that can't be put into words." (p 65). With this, Meek criticizes modernist epistemologies for reducing knowledge to cognition, thus ignoring other aspects of learning.

In this however, Meek fails to understand what epistemology is. Epistemology does not cover how people learn things, but how people know things. We learn how to play the piano, but we don't know how to play the piano. We can know THE TECHNIQUE of playing the piano, but we don't know playing the piano per se. So while epistemology does cover skills, it covers learning of skills as techniques (which can be expressed cognitively) not as the action itself per se.

Meek subsequently denigrates deduction. In its place she extols what she calls "integration", which is "The human effort that links clues to focus and beyond" (p. 75). The problem with this of course is a basic epistemic question: Upon what basis are such clues chosen to be integrated into whatever system of knowing that Meek desires to create?

When we look at the Polanyian edifice that Meek finally creates, a most glaring problem arises. Since the system is non-absolutist objectivist, then what apologetic can be mustered for saying that others are wrong as long as these other systems fulfill the criteria of "confidence in their system as having contact with the world"? If the locus of truth is the believing community, does this mean that outside the community, these "truths" will not apply? Do the truth values of whatever truths in this system change when the values of the believing community similarly change?

It must be said that Meek's book as a purely descriptive book on the human process of knowing and struggling to understand truths is frank and helpful. However, if one were to use it for epistemology proper, Meek's theory fails tremendously. It is not even Scriptural but based upon the theories of Michael Polanyi. Meek does not seem to understand the main issue of epistemology, which is not the process of knowing (although that is important), but also how we can know what we know to be true. The Christian answer has always been to appeal to Scripture as the final authority, NOT some "believing community" and certainly not some mystical "knowing" of God. God is the one who determines truth, not the Church. God speaks and we respond to that revelation as truth.

It is sad that this book was written from supposedly Reformed academic circles. Coming from the tradition which prioritizes the authority of God's Word over the thoughts of Man, one would have expected the final authority of Scripture to be taught and emphasized in any epistemology Meek advocated.

Instead of this unbiblical book, why not read this book by Robery Reymond who more than adequately creates a biblical edifice -- one that is presuppositional and founded upon the Scriptures rather than Michael Polanyi?
Faith's Reasons for Believing: An Apologetic Antidote to Mindless Christianity (Focus on the Bible)