Table Of Content

KNOWING AS AN INTRA-EXPERIENTIAL AFFAIR: TOWARD AN EPISTEMOLOGY OF RELIGIOUS FORMATION A Dissertation Presented to the Faculty of the School of Theology at Claremont In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree Doctor of Philosophy by Sharon Ruth Warner May 1993 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. © 1993 Sharon Ruth Warner ALL RIGHTS RESERVED Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. This dissertation, written by _____ wa/Ltfi£Ay/______________________ under the direction of--------Faculty Committee, and approved by its members, has been presented to and accepted by the Faculty of the School of Theology at Claremont in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY Faculty Committee / CChhaaiirnman Date- Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. ABSTRACT Knowing as an Intra-Experiential Affair: Toward an Epistemology of Religious Formation Sharon R. Warner This study explores the nature of religious knowing. More specifically, it is an analysis of faith knowing as the knowing of "deep truth." Deep truth constitutes that knowledge which forms the identity and self understanding of the knower. How one comes to know faith as the internal core of one’s being is the central thrust of the study. Deep knowing of faith emerges through experience. Thus, this study is an analysis of the patterns of experience which function to engender and sustain faith knowing of deep truth. After defining the fundamental concepts of knowledge, experience, deep truth, and faith, the study examines the mitigating effects of Cartesian epistemology for faith knowing. Chapter 2 explores Descartes's concept of the knowing experience, especially his dualistic categories of experience: subject-object, mind-body, and reason-affeet. The Cartesian paradigm presents a fundamental problem to faith knowing of deep truth by its denial of epistemic validity to quality, ambiguity, interrelationships, and wholeness. In light of the Cartesian epistemological dualisms and their reductionistic concept of knowing, this study turns to Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. two theorists for a more wholistic explication of knowing. Chapters 3 and 4 explore the epistemological paradigms of Alfred North Whitehead and Michael Polanyi. The analysis of the patterns of experience in these two paradigms focuses upon the contributions of each toward undercutting the Cartesian dualisms and toward establishing a paradigm for faith knowing of deep truth. Drawing upon the work of Whitehead and Polanyi, Chapter 5 presents an epistemological paradigm for faith knowing of deep truth. The paradigm is analyzed in its three forms: its process, its categories of knowledge, and its fundamental characteristics. The ontological nature of deep knowing of faith depends upon a knowing experience which fosters the interpenetration of subject and object and the act of reliance upon. The categories of deep knowledge are: perception, conception, non-sensuous, and action. Deep faith knowing is characterized by: embodiment, concreteness, passion, intention, personalness, wholeness, and meaning. In Chapter 6 the study concludes with a pedagogy, which explores the implications of this epistemology for the teaching of faith knowing of deep truth. Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. TABLE OF CONTENTS Page Chapter 1. Introduction ....................................... 1 Purpose ......................................... 1 Definitions ..................................... 7 Thesis and Procedure...............................19 2. Historical Context: Descartes ...................... 30 Characteristics of the Paradigm . . . . . . . . . 35 Implications for Knowing ........................ 85 The Need for an Alternative............... . . . . 1 0 1 3. Alfred N. Whitehead ................................ 123 M e t h o d .............................................125 Characteristics of the Paradigm ............... 128 Response to Dualisms ............................ 146 Conclusion........................................ 203 4. Michael Polanyi.......................................227 Critique of Positivistic Epistemology ......... 230 Components of the Paradigm....................... 236 Response to Dualisms ............................ 269 Epistemological Implications ................... 313 iii Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. Conclusion........................................ 329 5. Epistemology of Deep T r u t h ........................361 Process of Knowing................................363 Intra-Experience .............................. 364 Subject-Object Interrelationship ............. 369 Being.............................................390 Reliance........................................ 394 Categories of Knowledge .......................... 405 Characteristics of the Paradigm...................416 Embodiment...................................... 416 Concreteness ................................... 423 Passion...........................................433 Intention........................................ 435 Personal ........... . . . . . . . . . . . . . 438 Wholeness......................... 441 Meaning...........................................447 The Knowing of Mystery........................... 454 6. Pedagogy of Deep T r u t h ..............................477 Teaching as Connoisseurship ...................... 479 Pedagogical Practices ............................ 481 Conclusion.........................................517 Bibliography .................................................. 525 iv Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS A work such as this never emerges in a vacuum. While I accept the responsibility for it, I do not claim to be its creator. The creation of this work on knowing faith has coalesced through the gifts to me from many persons. While some can be named, many others lie tacit within me. I hope that in making some explicit, the recognition of those tacit influences may be intuited. I owe more than can ever be acknowledged to Green School in Roseburg, Oregon, and especially to Leone Dickinson, who was my supervisor during my first year of teaching, and my mentor for many years to come. Leone embodied what I have learned to call the teaching of connoisseurship. Her love for the teaching-learning interaction and her imaginative teaching practices continue to shape my own vision of the art of teaching. She awoke in me a passion for teaching; twenty-five years later, I am still nourished by its intensity. In all probability this dissertation would not have been accomplished without the nurture of Northwest Christian College, Eugene, Oregon, where I taught for many years, and v Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. specifically, of Herbert Works, a faculty colleague. Herb saw in me what I did not see myself, a gift for the teaching ministry. His affirmation and continual encouragement gave me the confidence and courage to embrace that gift. For Herb, and Northwest Christian College, I am deeply grateful; their recognition and nurturing of my call to ministry continues to empower me. The discernment into the spiritual dimensions of teaching and living, which informs both the content of this dissertation and my energy for "keeping at it," is a gift from Monza Naff, a colleague and a companion on the journey. Monza's gift for cultivating the depths of transcendence within her teaching has taught me much about the art of spiritual teaching. Further, her personal striving for excellence and her loving nudge to me to also risk for that excellence continues to nurture my work and my being. My doctoral work, including this dissertation, has been profoundly shaped by The School of Theology at Claremont, and specifically by Allen Moore and Mary Elizabeth Moore. I am deeply grateful for Allen's belief in me. The influence of his support and encouragement during these years is unmeasurable. I am also deeply grateful for Mary Elizabeth's discerning vision for process and feminist teaching. Through her courses, her teaching ministry, her presence, (as well as her detailed reading of this dissertation,) I have caught a vi Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. vision of what the implementation of this dissertation might look like. The acknowledgments which precede this dissertation would not be complete without expressing my gratitude to Lexington Theological Seminary, its faculty and staff. Their support of me over these years, expressed both verbally and in shifted works loads, is a gift I can only humbly receive and say "Thank you." My thank you is expressed specifically to Barbara Miller who has patiently given countless hours to the typing and retyping of this manuscript. Finally, the work of this dissertation, both the vision which calls it into being and my commitment to undertake it, has been deeply shaped by my parents, H. Glenn and Phyllis Warner. From them I learned faith as deep truth, that truth which forms my very being. Their knowing of faith, which they lived in my presence, nurtured in me a sensitivity to a kind of knowing which resides at the depths of a person's way of living. Further, in their unconditional support and encouragement of me in all that I have undertaken, I have received a gift which I hope I can acknowledge by passing it on. Although Dad is not here to see the end of this undertaking, I gratefully acknowledge the presence of both these people of deep faith in this work. vii Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.