Webb Chapel Talk

April 14, 2005

Jeff Edmonds

 

Life? Knowledge? Honor?: Living Questions

Having been off at philosophy graduate school, I’ll indulge you by beginning with a philosophical question: “What is knowledge?” This sort of question generally produces varied reactions, depending on the temperament of the audience. Some of you mystically minded folk will lean forward in their chairs, eager for the opportunity to hear something true. The more practically minded of you will tune out from the beginning, roll your eyes, and get ready to endure a few wasted minutes of abstract talk before you can get back to work. Others of you will perhaps ready themselves for a debate—looking sharply for holes in argumentation, failures in logic, mistaken assumptions.

 

Strangely, though, however you react to the question “What is knowledge?” already suggests that you have an idea about how to answer this question. You mystics think that knowledge is knowledge of the truth found by immediate intuition of “what is.” You more practically minded folks believes that knowledge helps you get things done. And you debaters out there think that knowledge is found by logical, rational argumentation from clear, self-evident principles.

 

So, whether you want to or not, by your reaction to this question, “What is knowledge,” you are already giving a sort of answer to the question. Even not reacting—ignoring this worthless question that can’t be answered anyway—is a certain sort of reaction. So, you’ve been tricked, duped, and forced to deal with a question that you didn’t want to ask—perhaps your only option left to avoid the philosophical question is to walk out of the room. And then everyone would know exactly what you think about the question: “What is knowledge?”—that it’s not worth much. Maybe not.

 

I, myself, believe that the question is impossible to answer—how could we possibly know what knowledge is? In order to know that we know what it is, we would already have to know what knowing is, which begs the question again: What is knowledge? I can hear you practically minded folks fidgeting right now—there are copies to be made, tests to be taken—knowledge to be demonstrated and dispensed. Why are we wasting our time with impossible questions?

 

On the other hand Webb’s main concern as an institution of learning is with knowledge—but who here is certain they know what knowledge is? Perhaps Mr. Frere can give us some answers to this question: maybe he knows what knowledge is. He’s the head of the school, right? I’m sure he has some good ideas, but I haven’t come across his name on the reading lists at Vanderbilt as having answered this historically great philosophical question. Mine’s not there yet either.

 

Yet, despite all this uncertainty and resistance with respect to a question that lies at the heart of education, here we all are, getting ready to head off to class, presumably to learn some knowledge, or even to teach some knowledge. Maybe some of you even have tests today on which you will be required to demonstrate the knowledge you presumably know. But if you don’t know what counts as knowledge, how can you claim to know anything at all? Perhaps all of us students and teachers might as well just go jump in Wartrace Creek and spend the day swimming instead of going back to the classroom to engage in all this uncertainty…

 

Before we go swimming, I want to say that just because a question is impossible doesn’t mean we can’t learn from it. If you want to find out what someone thinks the meaning of life is, the last thing to do is ask them what they think. They’ll probably give you some sort of vague and unsatisfying answer. Instead, watch how they live—the question is unavoidable, unanswerable, but our actions betray our answers to it at every moment.

 

And, in the classroom, our actions answer this impossible philosophical question about knowledge every day. It’s actually only impossible theoretically or abstractly, practically it’s easy: to know in physics means to be able to predict the behavior of physical objects within a certain degree of accuracy. To know in history means to be able to put a date to a place and a story to an event. To know in Spanish means to be able to understand the question, “Como sabemos si sabemos algo?” You could say that what it means to know depends on what it is you’re doing. It’s not that there is no answer to the question. There are just many answers—as many answers as there are activities or ways of life. The answer is plural in form—that’s why the question “What is knowledge?” is impossible to answer ahead of time, before we know the context of the question. It’s because there are lots of things that count for knowledge in one area of life that are pretty useless in another area. Try writing a paper for your English class using algebraic equations and see how far you get. Or try getting a kiss from your girlfriend or boyfriend by reciting the quadratic formula…

 

So, I take the impossibility of the question “What is knowledge?” to indicate at least three things. First, no one can claim that they have exclusive rights to knowledge (which includes me—even these hypotheses are subject to change). Second, knowing a lot about something doesn’t necessarily mean you understand much about something else. And third, our ideas about what counts as knowledge are subject to the passing of time.

 

So, the impossibility of the question doesn’t mean that there is no such thing as knowledge—it just means that knowledge takes multiple forms, and that (unfortunately for us old folks) what counts for knowledge now might not be worth too much 10 or 20 years down the road. Knowledge is not an answer; it is a beginning that opens up a perspective on things that one perhaps never considered. All of the different disciplines you study at Webb are different ways of treating the world—they are different activities of thinking and seeing. Each does not merely describe the world, but instead creates a window on the world—this chapel seen from the perspective of a quantum physicist with its vibrating atoms and whizzing particles is very different from this chapel seen from the perspective of a political scientist, analyzing relations of power between a lecturer and his captive audience. To ask the question of which chapel we are actually sitting in is kind of strange…which chapel is it? It is 400 chapels; it’s different for each and every one of us sitting here.

 

So, fortunately, “What is knowledge?” cannot be answered in any final way—we’ll never be able to have final knowledge of what this chapel is. I prefer the idea that this space is 400 different experiential spaces, transforming and multiplying each moment that passes over the idea that it is just “the chapel.” How well do those words “the chapel” capture all that’s going on here—all the hearts beating, the common air being breathed, the wandering thoughts and dreams and emotions of folks sitting here? Education is a word like chapel—it’s not a single thing, but a word that covers different 400 purposes, 400 activities. What is Webb School? It is 400 entities each second. It is a wild and whirling jungle of interconnected experiences.

 

This is the world we live in today, whether we want to or not: we run up against people, cultures, things that we don’t understand. We don’t even understand ourselves. Knowledge in any ultimate sense seems impossible. I think it is. But life continues: and this means negotiation between differences. This means participation in ways of life that we don’t understand. This means uncertainty, risk, exposure, doubt, loss.

 

It seems to me that our only hope in the face of all this wild uncertainty is our willingness to be able to say: I don’t understand, to work humbly towards limited knowledge, to listen and to try to imagine how the world might appear to someone else. This means that good education is active exposure to many different forms of knowledge and many different ways of life. It should be clear by now that knowledge is not something outside of who we are or what we do—it makes us who we are and helps us with what we do. What you learn here at Webb and in all of the things you do outside of Webb is who you are—and the most dangerous thing would be to think that the process could be completed, that when we get our high school diploma, our college degree, our first job, etc. that we finally know something about the world. Life is activity, ceaseless, uncertain, strange, joyful,--and as soon as we say: aha! I know what life is: it’s this one thing! all we have to do is look around, to open our eyes and see that it is so much more than that, filled with things that we don’t understand.

 

All of this is to say: go out and learn. Acquiring knowledge is acquiring many different lives, many different ways to experience the world: through art, math, English, history, science, language, music. But if you look at what you know as something separate and disconnected from how you live, if you say there is only one kind of truth, and I know it; or—what amounts to the same thing—that there is no truth and no one knows it, then you risk cutting yourself off from the surprises and adventures and risks that form life as a moral, ethical, aesthetic activity. Life is not a fill in the blank test. Class isn’t over when you hand it in, and homework is just the work we do at home. We have this tendency to break our lives up into these small compartments, but we forget that life goes on when we walk through the door of the classroom or to our jobs—why don’t we hold that part of our life to the same standard of excellence as we hold on the athletic field, or on a high mountain trail or while performing a play?

 

The challenge of education today is thus the same as it has always been: to give ourselves tools to continue to learn in all areas of life, which means never to answer finally and certainly the answer to the question: “What is knowledge?” We have to think of our understanding as an opportunity for further learning—not as an end to be achieved. Our knowledge is always limited, perspectival, uncertain. The question becomes: how will I deal with this uncertainty? With fear and retreat to dogma and the opinions of those around me or with a courageous embrace and studied attention of the unknown? This is the ethical question, the question of honor today: not so much how can I act according to the principles that I know for sure: we already know all too well how to find excuses and ways around the old principles of lying, cheating, stealing. I’ll put the same question a different way. It is a question that lies at the heart of the golden rule: How will I act in the face of what I do not understand—with fear, violence, and rejection, or with curiosity, engagement, and love? The point of life today has changed and stayed the same—it’s not a quest for total knowledge or understanding. Instead, it is an encounter with things beyond the limits of our knowledge: with strangers, foreigners, Yankees, Mexicans, Iraqis, Frenchies, your next door neighbor—how will you negotiate that encounter—how will you articulate what it is that you don’t know?

 

This is a question that will never be answered by philosophers, teachers, scholars, or mathematicians. Pablo Neruda once wrote, “I did not come to solve anything. / I came here to sing / and for you to sing with me.” Life is sort like a question that never dies, that keeps singing itself in different and strange forms: What will I do when I encounter something or someone that I do not understand? How will I react?—as if I know the answer already? or as if I’m familiar with the notion of life as a question, as a song? It turns out that the golden rule is not a rule at all—it’s an activity, a search, a curiosity…a question. Who knows what will happen next?—the future is open and sings out as a question, and it’s up to us to live it.