In Paul G. Hiebert's quest to understand his context better and in order to integrate his training both in theology and anthropology, the first "ism" that he has to evaluate critically is positivism.
In his mind, under the surface of all the pressing issues that we face today lies diverse theories of knowing. As a missiologist confronted with these issues, he considers understanding these underlying theories of knowledge as a necessary prerequisite prior to giving his "biblical critique and response in these confusing times" (p. 1).
What I find interesting as I read the section on "Positivism and Modern Science," is the confirmation of ideas presented by Andy Hartropp in his article on secularization about the close relationship between Christianity and modernism. Or considering the date of the publication of their studies, it is more appropriate to say that both Guinness and Hartropp built on the earlier insight laid down by Hiebert in the affirmation that Christianity provided the foundation of modern science.
Hiebert, after mentioning how Greek philosophy replaced the realism of Hebraic worldview, identified that at the bottom of modern science is the positivist theory of knowledge. Before we enumerate the various characteristics of positivism, this theory of knowledge has been generally described as "widely used as a label for the general epistemological foundations underlying much of modern scientific thought" (p. 2).
Characteristics of Positivism
You know philosophy is not easy but inescapable. Reading that positivism is the underlying epistemology of modern science and at the same time labeling it as "naive realism", I cannot avoid but shake my head in disbelief. But it is what it is. This is how Hiebert describes positivism. I am now wondering how would Hiebert describe the epistemology of the Hebraic worldview that he mentioned earlier that has been replaced by Greek philosophy. Would he classify it also as naive? Or would he categorize it as preparatory to his newly found epistemology, which is critical realism? Anyhow, that is not our concern for now.
As for the characteristics of positivism, Hiebert identified three:
The existence of objective reality outside of the knowing subject.
Representational symbols and algorithmic logic, and
Photographic views of knowledge and ground unifying theories
Existence of Objective Reality Outside of the Knowing Subject
Here reality is not influenced by the human mind. It has an independent existence external of the knowing subject. Though the terms "idealism" and "realism" are not easy to understand, we are told that realism is on the side of science with its method of empirical exploration. On the other hand, those who insist on philosophical idealism about the existence of something in itself as the product of the human mind is considered nonsensical and meaningless.
The empirical approach works well in the field of physical sciences but it encounters obstacles in the field of social sciences. Extreme form of empiricism called scientism rejects all kinds of metaphysics. As such, this leads to the separation of science from its theological and philosophical basis followed by an increasing agnosticism that rejects trans-empirical realities. This materialistic character of positivism cannot accept the existence of religious transcendence and revelation. The materialistic character of modern science views nature as a machine that leaves no space for the idea of purpose.
According to Hiebert, the emphasis on the existence of objective knowledge by way of empirical approach has four consequences:
Sharp distinction between facts and feelings/values. Anything that cannot be empirically verified are considered subjective such as "metaphysics, moral theory, and supernatural realities" (p. 7) and thereby as far as objective knowledge is concerned, they are meaningless.
Individualism. During the Medieval Period, authority resides in tradition whereas in the modern era, the individual reigns supreme because he is "real".
Traditional knowledge is nothing but superstition. With this line of thinking, anything old and primitive is considered prelogical, pre-modern, and unscientific.
Objective knowledge is acultural and ahistorical. The idea of "freedom from context" and a "contextless world" is central to this acultural and ahistorical character of objective knowledge.
Representational Symbols and Algorithmic Knowledge
Under this characteristic of positivism, mathematics is the primary example. Numbers are not concerned with values. They are completely acultural and ahistorical. In fact, there are scientists who think "that the order in the universe is a mathematical order" (p. 9).
Nevertheless, the limitation of mathematics is recognized and thereby there is a need for an accurate language to describe the world. Consequently scientific words are accepted as mathematical representations of reality.
Furthermore, mathematical and accurate language are still insufficient. There is also a need for "an exact rationality based on axiomatic rules" (p. 10) These rules are further described as "based on some form of algorithm", which "are propositional in nature" and "mechanical in application" (ibid.).
Photographic Views of Knowledge and Grand Unifying Theories
Explaining this characteristic of positivism, I am not certain how shall I connect Hiebert's explanation about the idea of progress as central in positivist science, specialization, and the fragmentation of knowledge. Anyhow, I will just leave it like that for Hiebert concludes this section by mentioning positivism in its later development has been characterized by internal conflicts.
Positivism and Anthropology
Under this sub topic, Hiebert simply explains the overview of the impact of positivist approach to anthropology. After mentioning evolution as "the first Grand Unified Theory of anthropology", he identified "the concept of 'civilization' defined as modern life based on positive knowledge, science, and advance technology" (p. 14). Based on this perspective colonial ventures were interpreted as "not oppressive" but "benevolent" (p. 15).
Positivism and Modernity
Positivism and modernity are connected with four ties:
The first connection is that "modernity is built on positivism and the technological knowledge it generated" ibid.). "Modernity build factories . . . forms bureaucracies . . ." (ibid.). And the outcome "is the commodification and commercialization of much life . . . the rise of specialization as scientific knowledge and technology exploded"(ibid.).
Second connection is the separation of reality into two unrelated realms. In the language of Kant, between the noumena and the phenomena, the supernatural and the natural. Religion belongs to the supernatural realm together with God, the spirits, and private faith. The natural realm is the field of science and of public facts. The outcome of such division "was the secularization of the natural domain by the demystification and desacralization of knowledge. . ."(p. 16).
The third and fourth ties are individualism and faith in progress and development.
I think I will stop here and I will continue from here to my next topic, which is about Positivism and Christianity.
Reference:
Hiebert, Paul G. 1999. Missiological Implications of Epistemological Shifts: Affirming Truth in a Modern/Postmodern World. PA: Trinity Press International.