Reviewed by Thomas Scarborough

I had not expected to review this book for a Christian website. It is authored by one of the best known contemporary philosophers, Simon Blackburn — originator of the Oxford Dictionary of Philosophy. The subject of the book is epistemology — “How do we know?”

Yet hardly has Blackburn got through the preliminaries of Chapter One when he launches into a broadside against postliberal theology (postliberalism). In fact, he fires one or two cannons at onto-theology, too. However, by far the greater part of his scorn is reserved for the postliberal camp. I was surprised by his intimate knowledge of the field. It might take a student of theology years to cotton on to the issues which Blackburn summarises so succinctly.

Blackburn writes about theological “interpretations [which] avoid the idea of describing or representing a part of reality at all”. These propose “satisfying fictions”, or mere metaphors “through which to gain some understanding of the human condition”, or “the illusion of a foundation for their morals”, and so on. Such thinking, notes Blackburn, “is more or less orthodox in much theology”. However, whether the “everyday practitioner” would like what is “hidden from the ordinary man or woman in the pew . . . is another matter”. In fact, many would consider such theologians to be “atheists in disguise”. He muses: “It is a pity that they chose a story told so like a recital of plain truth, in apparently descriptive, factual language, in order to do whatever it is they are doing instead.” Blackburn’s passion borders on the humorous. Nonetheless, he does guide one through some of the philosophical roots of such theology.

As for the rest of the book, it is the question of fact and value that lies at its heart — the question of “is” and “ought”. David Hume famously said that it is impossible to derive an “ought” from an “is”. This is called Hume’s Law. For instance, one may say that you ARE reading this review — yet on what rational basis should anyone say that you SHOULD read this review? Perhaps you should be walking in the mountains instead. In fact, on what basis should you do anything at all? To push this yet further, on what basis should courts of law choose to make their decisions — or indeed the governments of the world? How does one make the giant leap across the divide, from fact to value? It is a crucial problem, and Blackburn considers it from various angles — many of them historical.

In the final analysis, Blackburn is still something of a traditionalist as far as philosophers go, and he notes with disdain how “allegedly sober” philosophers follow some of the modern trends. Yet returning to theology — in a curious way, he would finally seem to adopt the very position (philosophically) that he so derides in the postliberal camp. He concludes his book with the observation that “truth, reason, objectivity, and confidence” are still very much alive, in spite of some “bewildering” problems. On what basis may we believe this? He states: “Once we have an issue to decide, it comes with its own norms”. We produce “well mannered animation by whatever is shown to work”. This would seem to me not unlike the Polanyian “universal intent” — that is, the scientific method applied to human action. And that is pretty much at the heart of much postliberal theology.

CITATION OF REFERENCE

Blackburn, Simon. Truth: A Guide For The Perplexed. London: Penguin Books, 2005.