Table Of ContentKNOWING 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.
