Questo articolo è disponibile anche in: Italian English

Dear Father Angelo,

I have been following your site for years, from which I have often drawn great spiritual benefit.

I apologize in advance for the length of my question.

I am writing to you because I find myself facing an insidious thought that has flowed like a karst river throughout my life, but which now emerges in a disruptive way; the theme is that of knowledge and its subjectivity.

The knowledge of reality necessarily passes through our senses, which however can be deceived: Plato already describes this in the myth of the cave, and later Descartes also raises the suspicion of an “evil genius” that could make us perceive what in reality is not, that is, generate an unverifiable illusion.

Even in the times we live in, there is a philosophical current (the most famous exponent is an Oxford professor, Nick Bostrom) that supports the “simulation hypothesis”, that is, the idea that, since our physical feeling is linked to the stimulation of various areas of the brain, it would be possible with the advancement of technology to “artificially” produce sensations indistinguishable from real ones; moreover, it maintains that this could have already happened and that we could already be inside a simulation and we may not know it.

The problem with this hypothesis is that it is not demonstrable (nor falsifiable and therefore Popper would not even consider it scientific) but it is not impossible. This does not call into question my existence (the famous “Cogito ergo sum” is the way in which Descartes somehow gets out of it) but everything else does, including my neighbor. Well, man lives in history and God meets him in history: if I must and/or can doubt history, the whole building collapses and I am lost, I am alone in nothingness.

What can you tell me about all this? Idle talk of those who read too much and do not have

enough faith in the Lord God of History? A subtle and very dangerous temptation to think that life is just an absurdity. I want to persist in continuing to believe in Jesus Christ, the meaning and center of my life, but I clearly feel the risk that my faith (and consequently my whole life) will falter and risk falling into nonsense.

I await your response and in the meantime I remember you in my prayers during these days that lead us to the approaching Easter.

Andrea

Priest’s answer

Dear Andrea,

1. It is true that sometimes our senses deceive us.

But this is not the rule.

2. Questioning the certainty of our sensory knowledge is not only idle talk, it is delirium.

The entire social organization is based on certain knowledge: from the construction of our houses to the organization of rail or air traffic. No one would set out on a journey if there was no certainty that everything had been prepared with the utmost diligence.

And if an accident happens, the person responsible is immediately put on trial demanding that he pay every last cent.

3. You yourself, when writing me an email, have taken care that there are no errors, that you have not written one word for another or that one word came out in place of another in dictation.

4. Likewise, if you go to buy some product of any kind, take care that everything is perfect, that there are no defects because otherwise you would not buy it or pay for it.

And whoever supplies you with the products demands the same punctuality, indeed the same meticulousness in demanding payment.

5. Even in the judicial field, we start from sensory testimonies.

If these are not there, it would be useless to judge and prosecute.

6. When St. Thomas Aquinas begins his demonstration of the existence of God, he always starts with these words: certum est et sensu constat, it is certain that it is known to the senses. Sensory certainty is the first of all certainties. Even that of Descartes when he says: Cogito ergo sum, I think therefore I exist.

7. Our faith in Christ has nothing to do with this.

These are sensory data that belong to the order of nature and are even a prerequisite for our faith.

Believing does not mean adhering blindly.

You believe a person if that person is credible.

Jesus Christ himself, precisely in today’s Gospel, refers to facts that were before everyone’s eyes.

He says in fact: “If I do not perform my Father’s works, do not believe me; but if I perform them, even if you do not believe me, believe the works, so that you may realize (and understand) that the Father is in me and I am in the Father.” (John 10:37-38).

8. With this we even arrive at the paradox of having to affirm that at least by faith we must be certain that our senses do not ordinarily deceive us.

9. Sofia Vanni Rovighi, who was one of the most illustrious professors of philosophy in the twentieth century, writes in this regard: “The fundamental objection to these doctrines (which deny the cognitive capacity of our senses, ed.) is that they presuppose an erroneous conception of man, and the error of such a conception is evident not only from what we have said about man in the preceding pages, but also from the fact that the supporters of such doctrines are unlikely to be coherent: it is enough that they are losers in the struggle for life to see their exaltation of strength forgotten and to hear, against their victorious adversaries, their appeals to justice and humanity (and therefore to a natural right)” (Elements of Philosophy, third volume, p. 240). T-N

10. The French playwright Molière, speaking of those who denied our ability to know reality, said to use the stick argument, that is, to beat well those who make such assertions , trying to convince them that what they are suffering is not reality, but is only a deception of their senses.

I thank you for the promised prayers and for the Easter greetings that I reciprocate with all my heart.

I bless you,

Father Angelo