“It is the certainty that they possess the truth that makes men cruel.”  (Anatole France, Nobel Laureate in Literature, 1921) 

Please indulge my oversimplification about this:  Doubt is good.  Certainty is bad.  I am certain of this, I think. 

I am certain about only a few things.  Only a few.  Other people may enjoy more frequent moments of self-proclaimed certainty, although I wonder how.  I doubt the “certain ones” among us are somehow privy to more or better information.  ”I listen to Fox News (substitute NPR) which means my information is fair and unbiased.”  I guess there’s a difference between feeling certain and being certain.  I feel certain about this.  

It seems to me for example that mathematicians enjoy a greater share of the world’s gross total certainty¹ .  Numbers are specific and clearly defined.  Two is two yesterday, today, and tomorrow.  I feel certain about this, too.  Not so with many other life categories, like the existence or nature of God, why I don’t like to ask for directions when I’m lost, human interactions and what they mean, how to raise a teenager, religion, politics, values, the future.  

Even the meaning of some words is unclear.  What is a “double-entendre” and who invented such uncertainty?  For those of us who are not numbers-oriented, we have much to doubt.  We have much to wonder about.  We are less certain about things.  Or we should be.  I wonder if an overabundance of perceived certainty creates problems in our conversations.

Why Do We Argue so Much?

Let’s talk about arguments, for example.  Ever wonder why we argue?  Or why does a gentle conversation sometimes turn into an argument?  I think it’s because we are certain of too much.  I think certitude should be rare.  We should be certain of very few things, and the rest we should at least genuinely wonder about, or even doubt.  

John Wesley, the founder of what we call Methodism, is often tagged with such a sentiment because of the attitude he seemingly projected in the course of his theological debates with his contemporaries.  Wesley is given credit for a famous tidbit of open-mindedness: “…as to all opinions which do not strike at the root of Christianity, we think and let think.”  But upon closer examination we find that Wesley’s “root of Christianity” included a few things some folks might be less certain about (in a mathematical way), or held only in faith.² I am not sure what Mr. Wesley intended, exactly, but I wonder:  If I do not agree with your entire “root” am I then released from my obligation to ”let [you] think”? 

Faith Or Certainty?

Perhaps there is a difference between my faith and my certainty.  Perhaps there is a difference between my faith and your certainty (or your faith and my certainty, etc.).

Do you and I argue because I too often forget that what I claim as certain is simply an expression of my faith?  We might ask, can one have a strong faith when the object of that faith cannot be determined with certainty?  As I see it, this is the essence of faith — to trust in what cannot be determined with certainty.

So, why do we argue so often?  Here’s what I think:  We argue because we do not have enough doubt in our conversations.  I began an uncertain journey into doubt when reading David Dark’s The Sacredness Of Questioning Everything³ .  I am becoming convinced that doubt is good and certainty is bad, but I am not yet certain of this.  Can one have doubt and faith?  I think so.

To fan into flame my smoldering thoughts about doubt, I am delving into a new book by two sociologists Peter Berger and Anton Zijderveld, In Praise Of Doubt:  How To Have Convictions Without Becoming A Fanatic((Berger, Peter and Anton Zijderveld (2009).  In Praise Of Doubt:  How To Have Convictions Without Becoming A Fanatic, New York: HarperCollins Publishers.)) .  They devote a considerable portion of their book comparing relativism and fundamentalism⁴ , whether religious or secular in form.  Both extremes, they suggest, are the result of an unhealthy reaction to doubt.  They make the striking assertion, for example, that “Fundamentalists, in particular, can’t tolerate doubt; they seek to prevent it at all costs” (p. 84).  I am curious about this.  How far might one go to prevent doubt “at all costs”?  Argue about it?  Worse?

Another Idea

The flip side is more encouraging.  When confronted by doubt in a conversation — either my own doubt or someone else’s — I could, instead of seeking to prevent it, welcome the doubt and explore its basis.  When I permit myself to welcome, even embrace doubt, I open the door of my mind to different or additional ideas.  I think it was Emile’ Chartier who said, “Nothing is more dangerous than an idea when it’s the only one you have.” 

If my willingness to doubt permits me to welcome additional, even oppositional ideas, then at the very least my original idea has an opportunity to be compared, tested and perhaps strengthened.  At the very most, my idea grows creatively into much more than I considered possible or available before. 

So, as far as I know, here’s what I think.  A conversation with lots of doubt is a good conversation, I think.

[For a follow up to this article see Doubt Is Good, Certainty Is Bad, I Think (Part II) .] 

© Copyright by Jeffrey Y. Harlow, Ph.D (2009).

1. Mathemeticians would disagree, I expect.  From their perspective much is uncertain. I guess “everything is relative.”
2. Here is Wesley’s more complete quotation: “We believe indeed, that all Scripture is given by the inspiration of God, and herein we are distinguished from Jews, Turks, and Infidels.  We believe the written word of God to be the only and sufficient rule, both of Christian faith and practice; and herein we are fundamentally distinguished from those of the Romish church.  We believe Christ to be the eternal, supreme God; and herein we are distinguished from the Socinians and Arians. But as to all opinions which do not strike at the root of Christianity, we think and let think.  So that whatsoever they are, whether right or wrong, they are no distinguishing marks of a Methodist.” From “The Character of a Methodist”, 1739. In The Works of the Rev. John Wesley in Ten Volumes, 1826, Volume IV, p. 407.
3. Dark, James David (2009). The Sacredness Of Questioning Everything. Grand Rapids: Zondervan Press.  We talked about this book in two other articles As Far As I Know and Doubt, Dancing, And A Good Conversation. 
4. In the interest of saving space I will not define these terms here and assume the reader understands or can look elsewhere to learn what they mean.  Or, buy the book.