A New Look into the Crisis of Epistemology - Untrustworthy - A Review

How do we know what we know? What criteria do we use to determine what is true? When sources of information conflict, how do we come to a resolution?

Epistemology––the way that we know things––is among greatest challenges of our day.

There is no question that humanity’s greatest need is the gospel, but epistemology is a significant barrier to communicating the gospel and for others to receive the gospel message.

The epistemological crisis is not an “out there” problem in the world, as we were told for years with postmodernism. We have an epistemology crisis in the church. And not just “those liberals” who deny the resurrection, affirm sexual revisionism, or whatever. The crisis provides different symptoms on the left, the right, and in the center (doctrinally speaking), but it is no less severe.

Bonnie Kristian is a journalist who writes for The Week, a news digest magazine that summarizes current events from around the world. She has also been a columnist for Christianity Today.

In her recent book, Untrustworthy, Kristian tackles the crisis on knowledge in US Christianity. She begins by outlining the problem, digs into its various instantiations, and concludes by proposing some basic steps to begin to iron out solutions. This is an introductory volume with plenty of illustrations to keep the reader engaged in a discussion about an important topic.

The first step to dealing with any problem is to recognize there is a problem. When epistemology is the issue, it is difficult for people to identify for themselves. As David Foster Wallace pointed out in his well-known commencement address, “This is Water,” we make a million assumptions about the world and usually cannot see our own weaknesses and failures.

For cultural progressives, who tend to congregate on the political left, the epistemological flaws may include basic assumptions about truth—that truth is dependent upon one’s experience and identity. (Chapter 7) It may include conspiracy theories that a cabal of old, rich, white men have rigged the economy against a whole host of oppressed minorities. It includes assumptions that anyone who does not affirm the appropriate culturally progressive theories of humanity––even ones that would have earned a horse laugh a decade ago––without question is somehow a knuckle-dragging neanderthal.

For those on the political right––I will not call them conservatives, because they usually are not––there are insidious conspiracy theories about the “deep state,” child trafficking rings, and pending arrest of specific political figures. Even those that have not fallen into the deep well of QAnon nonsense have probably seen, heard, or been impacted by adjacent conspiracy theories. The mantra “Do your own research” has been used to invalidate any perspective that does not accord with the starting opinions of the “independent thinking” individual who is generally getting his or her research threaded together by a Reddit poster or a YouTuber. (Chapter 5)

The epistemological crisis is not a problem that was caused by people minding their own business.  It hasn’t even really been caused by social media or the traditional media, per se. (Chapter 2) Twenty-four-hour cable news has certainly accelerated the problem. Ideological isolation of many individuals—especially journalists and experts—has contributed to the epistemological crisis. Decades of intentional erosion of a belief in an external, objective truth (even if we can’t perfectly describe it) has added fuel to the fire. This is a whole culture problem that has many contributors. Anyone who tries to blame just one group or medium of communication is probably selling something.

Kristian’s analysis does not cover every possible contributing factor to the epistemological crisis. She tends to focus on non-academic elements of epistemology. This is understandable, because there is a lot of navel gazing that goes on among philosophers about what it takes to form justified true beliefs (see Alvin Plantinga’s book, Knowledge and Christian Belief for a reasonably accessible intro). She also does not propose simple solutions, which is good, because there are no simple solutions. However, Kristian’s Untrustworthy does provide a reasonable introduction to the philosophy of knowledge for someone for whom “epistemology” might as well be a term for a vestigial gland in New Zealand marsupials.

One potential weakness of Untrustworthy is that it seems to punch right more than it punches left. This makes sense, for a least two reasons. First, Kristian has joined an Anabaptist sect (she says because of their pacifism), which tend to be more doctrinally conservative. Therefore, Kristian is more concerned about the problems on the “Right” side of the Christian spectrum. Second, the epistemological crisis among evangelicals and fundamentalists comes to the cocktail party in overalls, while the progressives bring their epistemological distortions in tuxedos laced with hallucinogens. Twisted metaphor aside, it is often much easier to identify the problems of QAnon and adjacent theories than it is the slippery arguments for progressive relativism. (The fact that many can’t seem to differentiate between trying to not be overtly racist and actual Critical Race Theory tends to support that fact.)

What Kristian makes clear is that the epistemological crisis of our day is not just due to “liberals” or “progressives” that can’t tell the difference between a biological male and female. The world has become liquid for those that identify as conservatives and progressives. Some of the people who have ardently argued against postmodern epistemology have fallen into the snare of it. Kristian’s book helps to show the reader immersed in the river of Western culture what water is. Perhaps by recognizing the problem we can begin to take steps to shore up the foundations of knowledge and rebuild a stronger society.

NOTE: I was provided an advanced reader copy of this volume by the publisher with no expectation of a positive review.