Sin As an Epistemic Category: Taking Westphal Seriously (original) (raw)

1995, Society of Christian Philosophers Central Division Meeting, Minneapolis

This is my first conference presentation from 1995. I defend Merold Westphal, my mentor at Fordham University, who has developed a hermeneutics of suspicion the purpose of which was to try to bring the noetic effect of the fall to bear on our epistemology (knowing abilities). "In a 1991 article, Alvin Plantinga mentioned that the effect of sin upon the cognitive faculties is a curious but important question for epistemology. Coincidentally, that same year, Merold Westphal's essay, "Taking St. Paul Seriously: Sin as an Epistemic Category" appeared. Westphal's article dealt with the noetic effects of sin upon our cognitive faculties, just what Plantinga had ordered. Since then, Westphal has written other pieces, including his book, Suspicion and Faith, trying to demonstrate the similarities between Marx, Nietzsche and Freud's hermeneutics of suspicion and Paul's suspicion of sin. However, Westphal's work has received little notice from the Reformed Epistemology camp, and William Hasker rejected Westphal's project as fiedeistic and destructive. Westphal's project deserves a better hearing than it has received. His work provides helpful bridges of thought between Christian and atheist philosophers, social and epistemological philosophers, and analytic and continental, (even postmodern) philosophers. The purpose of this essay is to promote Westphal's central claim in the above-mentioned articles, namely, that "for the Christian philosopher, sin should be an essential epistemological category..." First, I will lay out Westphal's project. Second, I will respond to William Hasker's objections (which I take to be typical objections) to Westphal's project. And Third, I will conclude with a few comments about skepticism and the doing of epistemology.