This book isn’t perfect but it does exhibit all of Dr Clark’s strengths as a communicator My main problem with the book is the chapter lengths: they are excessively long. This isn’t too much of a problem, except Clark will spend 90% of the chapter debunking erroneous views, but he only gives a few pages to the biblical position, and even then it is only a summary.
Notwithstanding, there are a few areas where Clark shines, notably epistemology. Even then, though, it is limited. We get evaluations of empiricism, skepticism, and relativism, and Clark lists all the inadequacies of these views–but there is more to epistemology than a survey of three or four options. The book doesn’t have much on belief-formation, justification of knowledge, etc. Nonetheless, Clark hints towards a theistic summary (which would be later fine-tuned by Carl F Henry).
The Philosophy of Politics
What is the function of government? Clark examines numerous ethical theories (Bentham, Aristotle, Plato) and notes that the definition of good [for government] depends on one’s nature of man (113).
A problem with Rousseau: “He seems to be torn between an infallible general will that cannot express itself and an expressed majority vote that is not infallible…” (121).
Theistic view: state has limited power (136). God is the source of all rights.
Funny quote: “But if men are essentially good, how is it that when they pass from psychology or theology to politics only the poor remain good and the wealthy become evil? [The demand] for more government seems to imply that not only are poor people good, but politicians are even better” (139).
“The truths or propositions that may be known are the thoughts of God, the eternal thought of God. And insofar as man knows anything he is in contact with God’s mind. Since, further, God’s mind is God, we may legitimately borrow the figurative language, if not the precise meaning, of the mystics and say, we have a vision of God” (321).
This is good. And I think Clark was correct over Van Til on this point. This also nicely sidesteps the Eastern Orthodox critique that the West relies on created grace and avoids any direct contact with God. If Clark’s analysis holds, however, this isn’t true.