From my perspective, however, the library is more than a passive information repository. Questions about the nature of knowledge are philosophical questions. In this sense, knowledge lives in a vacuum and is arbitrarily segmented into knowledge domains or disciplines. Libraries are a microcosm of the aggregated knowledge possessed by a society’s individuals (Shera, 1968), whether they be physical or virtual. In other words, libraries are a locus of the social phenomena that contribute to knowledge (Budd, 2004). Budd further elucidates that the academic library, in particular, exists to make manifest and tangible the products of social processes aimed at putting us on the path to knowledge.

Scholarship, as an activity, has been eloquently described by Theodore Hesburgh as a living dialogue (Hahnenberg, 2017). Ultimately, these scholarly activities and the accompanying dialogue build on the foundation of social practices within various disciplines that lead to a body of knowledge. The credibility of this knowledge is determined through the production of and access to this knowledge because, in part, someone must be aware of a producer’s work in order to test and learn from it (Fuller, 1996). Social epistemology is built on the merits of individual epistemology. From a social epistemology perspective, social practices show the need to rely on the perspectives of others and offer the possibility of the existence of true beliefs (Goldman, 1999). These true beliefs count as knowledge if and only if they are justified by a reliable process (Goldman & Beddor, 2008).

The classical (or traditional) notion of knowledge in modern philosophy equates knowledge with ‘justified, true belief.’ Various strains of postmodernism would seek to deconstruct the reliable processes leading to this justified, true belief by turning them, instead, into a power play, a form of discourse in which one version of truth seeks to be dominant over the other. In this perspective, there can be no direct perception of reality without interpretation, and all interpretation is tainted in some way by the interpreter’s cultural and personal prejudices (Grassie, 1997). Christian scholarship, while a participant in the postmodern world, is not subservient to the growing postmodern cynicism about the ability to know truth but, instead, has the potential to spring up like a well (cf., John 7:38) and flow out to a world in need of liberation from sin.

For Christians, truth is deeply personal as that which corresponds to the mind of God. Since we see through a glass darkly (1 Cor 13:12), our access to knowledge is limited and mediated by our cultural milieu. A culturally mediated epistemology, for example, encompasses the ways in which people define, seek, and validate knowledge, leading to distinct ways of knowing and understanding the world. Therefore, a culturally mediated belief system encompasses the cultural beliefs and values that influence what knowledge is accepted or rejected. The Gospels provide numerous examples of Jesus culturally mediating knowledge through his teaching methods, his use of culturally relevant references, and how he engaged with the religious and social context of his time. Jesus challenges his audience to attain knowledge beyond these limitations while participating in the cultural milieu of his audience (see Matthew 8:5-13; 15:21-28; Luke 4:16-30). 

To conclude, when it comes to working with students, my goal is to come meaningfully alongside them on their doctoral journey. Their dissertation topic is the conversation starter that can initiate an awareness of how faith contributes to their research. Sorenson (1997) refers to this as ‘sojourning’ and a ‘relational style’ of integrating faith and scholarship. Whether expressed explicitly or implicitly, our Christian core, by grace, is the essence of all we say and do. Sites et al. (2009) describe this essence as an ontological foundation from which one’s faith flows out naturally into the ‘pedagogical, relational, and community contexts of academic life (cf. Jn 7:38).’ This grace gives each interaction the opportunity to become a collaborative exercise in the critical appraisal of information and in the construction of new knowledge.

References

Budd, J. M. (2004). Academic libraries and knowledge: A social epistemology framework. Journal of Academic Librarianship, 30(5), 361-367.
Fuller, S. (1996). Recent work in social epistemology. American Philosophical Quarterly, 33(2), 149-166.
Goldman, A. I. (1999). Knowledge in a social world. Oxford University Press.
Goldman, A., & Beddor, B. (2008). Reliabilist epistemology.
Grassie, W. (1997). Postmodernism: What one needs to know. Zygon: Journal of Religion & Science, 32(1), 83. https://10.1111/0591-2385.721997072
Hahnenberg, E. P. (2017). Theodore M. Hesburgh, Theologian: Revisiting Land O’Lakes Fifty Years Later. Theological Studies, 78(4), 930-959.
Jensen, S. (2023). Re-considering Scholarship Again: Knowledge, Community, and the Work of Christian Scholarship. Christian Scholar’s Review, 52(3), 61-77.
Shera, J. (1968). An Epistemological Foundation for Library Science. In The Foundations of Access to Knowledge: A Symposium, edited by Edward B. Montgomery. (Syracuse: Syracuse University).
Sites, E. C., Garzon, F. L., Milacci, F. A., & Boothe, B. (2009). A phenomenology of the integration of faith and learning. Journal of Psychology and Theology, 37(1), 28-38.
Sorenson, R. L. (1997). Doctoral students’ integration of psychology and Christianity: Perspectives via attachment theory and multidimensional scaling. Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion, 36, 530-548.