“God and the Garden”One particularly intriguing attempt to address the epistemic question of God’s existence or non existence is found in Wisdom’s parable of the garden. (John Wisdom, “God,” Essays in Logic and Language, ed. Anthony Flew, Oxford: Basil Blackwell & Mott, 1951, p. 71)
After being absent two individuals return to their long neglected garden only to discover that there area few rather stubborn plants which have refused to relinquish their ground to the onslaught of ever increasing weeds, which as weeds will do, are flourishing in the garden. The two begin talking between themselves about the phenomenon taking place in the garden.
One proposes that a gardener has been working the garden and “doing something” about the plants. After asking however they are told that no one has seen anyone at work in their garden. Each raises her eyebrows and glances once again at the garden. Tis a puzzlement.
One proposes that a “mystery gardener” must have worked while the neighbors slept. Her partner responds that surely someone would have heard him and argues further that anyone who genuinely cared about the plants would have at least controlled the presence of the weeds in the garden. Each scratches her head. Tis a puzzlement.
Not to be out done by her partner’s contraindications, she tries again. She proposes that surely the way the garden is arranged reveals a purpose and beauty in the garden. She contends that an “invisible someone” must be keeping the garden. She then proceeds to investigate for further evidence of the “invisible gardener” only to find that there is evidence both for and against such a possibility. Tis still a puzzlement.
Refusing to give up, the two gardeners decide that they will investigate what happens to other gardens which are left without attention by any gardener. Upon investigation there is still no conclusive evidence. Tis still a puzzlement.
The short of it all is that in the end one concludes there must be a gardener who cares for the garden while the other determines that there must not be such a caretaker. There is no difference in what they have seen, no difference in what they have heard. Based on the same evidence, both arrive at radically different conclusions.
Such is the issue of knowledge of God. Different individuals will have divergent interpretations and radically opposing conclusions.
Objections:
Which is the best argument in favor of the “Gardener’s” existence?
Which is the best argument against the “Gardener’s” existence?
What do the insights and conclusions tell us about epistemologic conclusions in general?
What do the insights and conclusions tell us about epistemologic conclusions regarding one’s own ontological conclusions based on religious presuppositions?
